Deletion of Kleargear (2nd nomination)

Comment: and '''rename'''.  The company is not notable, but the case is.  It's had substantial coverage beyond the  threshold in http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-12-18/a-company-is-sued-over-its-no-bad-reviews-clause Business week, http://techcrunch.com/2013/11/18/kleargear-goes-into-social-media-lockdown-after-it-charges-customers-for-posting-bad-reviews/ Techdirt, and non-local news providers (for example, http://www.khou.com/news/KlearGear-fines-Texas-couple-35K-for-posting-negative-review-232421601.html Houston and http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/12/18/retailer-that-fined-couple-3500-for-negative-review-hit-with-lawsuit US News and World Report), as well as the source cited by SBaker43, above. Move to :Palmer v. Kleargear.com to make the article name conform to the topic and content
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: The Company is not notable fails   and  why should it be kept ? Further William Franklin Bermender  has nothing to do with Kleargear controversy  why has his NAME  been put up he quit in 2007 .MOST OF THEM VOTING KEEP ARE NOT SAYING THE COMPANY IS NOTABLE ONLY THE CASE IS PLEASE DELETE AND REWRITE AN ARTICLE ON THE CASE.Special:Contributions/5.104.108.125|5.104.108.125
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ORG||WP:GNG)