alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

In the Matter of

EDWARD HARRINGTON HEYBURN :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 2964 Disciplinary Docket No. 3

No. 35 DB 2023

(Supreme Court of New Jersey, D

- 111 September Term 2021)

Attorney Registration No. 80472

(Out of State)

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 3 rd day of May , 2023

, having failed to respond to a Notice and Order

directing him to provide reasons against the imposition of reciprocal discipline, Edward

Harrington Heyburn is suspended from the practice of law in the Commonwealth of

Pennsylvania for a period of 2 years, co nsecutive to the 18

- month term of suspension

ordered by this Court on October 5, 2022. He shall comply with the provisions of Pa.R.D.E.

217.
#### FRED BRINKMANN, APPELLANT, v. DORSEY MOTORS, INC., RESPONDENT.

Argued February 7, 1939

Decided April 21, 1939.

For the appellant, *Harry Unger.*

For the respondent, *John E. Toolan.*

Per Curiam.

The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by Mr. Justice Trenchard in the Supreme Court.

*For affirmance*— The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Case, Bodine, Donges, Heher, Porter, Hetfield, Dear, Wells, WolfsKeil, Rafferty, JJ. 12.

*For reversal*— None.
Editorial Note on Part 316
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 316 appear at 69 FR 13717, Mar. 24, 2004.

§ 316.14 Refusal to provide written recommendations. ( a ) FDA may refuse to provide written recommendations concerning the nonclinical laboratory studies and clinical investigations necessary for approval of a marketing application for any of the following reasons: ( 1 ) The information required to be submitted by § 316.10(b) has not been submitted, or the information submitted is incomplete.
( 2 ) There is insufficient information about: ( i ) The drug to identify the active moiety and its physical and chemical properties, if these characteristics can be determined; or
( ii ) The disease or condition to determine that the disease or condition is rare in the United States; or
( iii ) The reasons for believing that the drug may be useful for treating the rare disease or condition with that drug; or
( iv ) The regulatory and marketing history of the drug to determine the scope and type of investigations that have already been conducted on the drug for the rare disease or condition; or
( v ) The plan of study for establishing the safety and effectiveness of the drug for treatment of the rare disease or condition.
( 3 ) The specific questions for which the sponsor seeks the advice of the agency are unclear or are not sufficiently specific.
( 4 ) On the basis of the information submitted and on other information available to the agency, FDA determines that the disease or condition for which the drug is intended is not rare in the United States.
( 5 ) On the basis of the information submitted and on other information available to the agency, FDA determines that there is an inadequate basis for permitting investigational use of the drug under part 312 of this chapter for the rare disease or condition.
( 6 ) The request for information contains an untrue statement of material fact.
( b ) A refusal to provide written recommendations will be in writing and will include a statement of the reason for FDA's refusal. Where practicable, FDA will describe the information or material it requires or the conditions the sponsor must meet for FDA to provide recommendations.
( c ) Within 90 days after the date of a letter from FDA requesting additional information or material or setting forth the conditions that the sponsor is asked to meet, the sponsor shall either: ( 1 ) Provide the information or material or amend the request for written recommendations to meet the conditions sought by FDA; or
( 2 ) Withdraw the request for written recommendations. FDA will consider a sponsor's failure to respond within 90 days to an FDA letter requesting information or material or setting forth conditions to be met to be a withdrawal of the request for written recommendations.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Forms S-8 No. 33-04295, No. 33-43898 and No. 333-11039) pertaining to the
Incentive Stock Option Plan of WFS Financial Inc and in the related prospectus
of our report dated January 18, 2000, except for Notes 7 and 17, as to which the
date is March 15, 2000 with respect to the consolidated financial statements of
WFS Financial Inc and Subsidiaries included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for
the year ended December 31, 1999.

                                          ERNST & YOUNG

Los Angeles, California
March 23, 2000
#### § 211.86 Use of approved components, drug product containers, and closures.

Components, drug product containers, and closures approved for use shall be rotated so that the oldest approved stock is used first. Deviation from this requirement is permitted if such deviation is temporary and appropriate.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7352 

To prohibit States from prohibiting or otherwise deterring the usage of 

any merchant category code established by the International Organization 

for Standardization, including codes that identify firearm merchants and 

ammunition merchants. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 14, 2024 

Mr. FROST (for himself, Mr. HORSFORD, Ms. KELLY of Illinois, and Mr. 

MOSKOWITZ) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To prohibit States from prohibiting or otherwise deterring 

the usage of any merchant category code established 

by the International Organization for Standardization, 

including codes that identify firearm merchants and ammunition merchants. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Identify Gun Stores 

5 Act’’. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 7352 IH

1 SEC. 2. PREEMPTION RELATING TO MERCHANT CATEGORY 

2 CODES. 

3 Section 5313 of title 31, United States Code, is 

4 amended by inserting after subsection (g) the following: 

5 ‘‘(h) MERCHANT CATEGORY CODE USAGE.— 

6 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—No State may prohibit or 

7 otherwise deter the usage of any merchant category 

8 code established by the International Organization 

9 for Standardization, including codes that identify 

10 firearm merchants and ammunition merchants. 

11 ‘‘(2) ENFORCEMENT.—The Attorney General 

12 may bring a civil action in the appropriate district 

13 court to enforce this subsection.’’. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
^ 

DFPTOn-'i'i^PORWK 

]^)3c\LeT •x>oi:''Osr-^t>('-(^^^6 

U.S. Department of . , . 1200 New jersey Avenue, SE 

Transportation ' ': !. i Woshinglon, DC 20590 

Office Of the Secrefary 

of Transportation 

April 8, 2010 

VIA FACSIMILE 

The Honorable Mayor Melvin Mack 

Mayor 

City of Laurel 

P.O. Box 647 

Laurel, Mississippi 39441 

Dear Mayor Mack: 

I would like to update you on the essential air service situation at Laurel/Hattiesburg and give 

you an opportunity to submit comments, if you wish. 

As you know, in anticipation of the end of the current contract on June 30, 2010, by 

Order 2010-2-29, issued February 26,2010, the Department solicited proposals from air 

carriers interested in providing essential air service at Laurel/Hattiesburg. In response to that 

order, we received proposals from Mesaba Aviation, Inc. (the incumbent), and Sovereign Air, 

Inc. 

In addition to our brief description below, the proposals, as well as Order 2010-2-29, can be 

viewed online at www.regulations.gov. by doing a search on Docket DOT-OST-2001-10685. 

Mesaba proposes to continue operating its current level of service, i.e., 14 nonstop round trips 

per week to Memphis International Airport, operating as Delta Connection, with 34-seat 

Saab 340 aircraft, at the annual subsidy rate of $1,398,798. 

Sovereign Air proposes to provide four nonstop round trips per day to Louis Armstrong New 

Orleans International Airport with 19-seat Jetstream 32 aircraft at the annual subsidy rate of 

$999,248. We note that Sovereign does not currently have the requisite operating authority 

from either the Department or the Federal Aviation Administration to operate the sei-vice it 

proposes, although it has applied for such authority. 

Please note that proposed schedules are illustrative and the carriers may make schedule 

changes to reflect changing conditions.. The Department expects subsidized air carriers to 

maintain well-timed and well-spaced flights to ensure full compensation. 
My purpose in writing to you at this time is to give you an opportunity to submit any final 

comments you might have on the proposed service. We request that you review this 

information as expeditiously as possible and submit any comments you may have as soon as 

possible, but in any case no later than May 7, 2010. We will carefully consider your 

comments before we submit a recommendation to the Assistant Secretary for a final decision. 

If you have questions, or if you find that you need additional time to draft your comments, 

please let us know. 

Please submit your comments to me at: EAS@dot.gov 

In addition, we would appreciate if you would email your comments to both 

dennis.devany@dot.gov and renee.williams@dot.gov. You should also send a copy of your 

comments to both applicants. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or 

Rende Williams of my staff at 202-366-1058. 

An identical letter has been sent to the Mayor of Hattiesburg, MS, as well as the Executive 

Director of the Hattiesburg-Laurel Regional Airport Authority. 

Sincerely, 

Dennis J. DeV&hy, Chief ^ 

EAS & Domestic Analysis Division 

Office of Aviation Analysis
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

IN RE: SHAVAR L. THOMPSON; A PRO SE

CRIMINAL

, ON BEHALF OF HIMSELF AND

SIMULARLY SITUATED CRIMINAL

DEFENDANTS :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 87 MM 2023

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 6 th day of November , 2023, the Application for the Exercise of

King’s Bench Power or Extraordinary Relief, the “Motion for Extraordinary Relief in the

Form of Writ of Mandamus,” the “Application for Leave to File an Amended Brief

, ” and the

“Application for the Supreme Court to Order Immediate Disclosure” are DENIED.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7347 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7347

   To amend title 38, United States Code, to direct the Secretary of 
   Veterans Affairs to report on whether the Secretary will include 
    certain psychedelic drugs in the formulary of the Department of 
                           Veterans Affairs.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 14, 2024

Mr. Van Orden introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend title 38, United States Code, to direct the Secretary of 
   Veterans Affairs to report on whether the Secretary will include 
    certain psychedelic drugs in the formulary of the Department of 
                           Veterans Affairs.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. REPORTING OF DETERMINATION OF THE SECRETARY OF VETERANS 
              AFFAIRS WHETHER TO INCLUDE NEWLY APPROVED OR LICENSED 
              PSYCHEDELIC DRUGS IN THE FORMULARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF 
              VETERANS AFFAIRS.

    Chapter 81 of title 38, United States Code, is amended by 
inserting, after section 8125, the following new section (and 
conforming the table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
accordingly):
``Sec. 8125A. Reporting of determination whether to include newly 
              approved or licensed psychedelic drugs in the formulary 
              of the Department
    ``Not later than 180 days after a psychedelic drug is approved 
under section 505 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 
U.S.C. 355) or licensed under section 351 of the Public Health Service 
Act (42 U.S.C. 262), the Secretary shall submit to the Committees on 
Veterans' Affairs of the Senate and House of Representatives a report 
regarding such drug, that includes--
            ``(1) the determination of the Secretary whether to include 
        such drug in the formulary of the Department; and
            ``(2) the justification of the Secretary for such 
        determination.''.
                                 <all>
```
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

September 29, 2021

No. 04-21-00391-CR

IN RE Trermaurya POWELL,

Relator

Original Proceeding1

ORDER

On September 16, 2021, Relator filed an “Application for Leave to File Petition for Writ 

of Mandamus” and a petition for writ of mandamus. Having considered the petition, this court 

concludes Relator is not entitled to the relief sought. Accordingly, the petition for writ of 

mandamus is DENIED.

Further, because the appellate rules do not require an application for leave to file a petition 

for writ of mandamus, Relator’s application is DENIED AS MOOT.

It is so ORDERED on September 29, 2021.

_____________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 29th day of September, 2021.

_____________________________

Michael A. Cruz, Clerk of Court

1

This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2019-CR-2393, styled State of Texas v. Tremaurya Powell, pending in the 

227th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Kevin M. O’Connell presiding.
<PAGE>
                                                                     EXHIBIT 8.1



         Protherics PLC acts as the holding company of a group consisting of its
directly and indirectly held subsidiaries. Protherics PLC has the following
principal subsidiaries:


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
   DIRECT HOLDINGS                               % HELD    STATUS     COUNTRY OF INCORPORATION
   ---------------                               ------    ------     ------------------------
<S>                                              <C>       <C>         <C>
  Protherics Molecular Design Limited              100     trading     England and Wales
  Protherics Inc.                                  100     trading     USA (Delaware)
  Enact Pharma PLC                                 100     trading     England and Wales
  Proteus Biotechnology Limited                    100     dormant     England and Wales
  Genethics Limited                                 76     dormant     England and Wales
  Protherics Utah Inc.                             100     trading     USA (Delaware)

  INDIRECT HOLDINGS
  Protherics UK Limited                            100     trading     England and Wales
  Protherics Australasia pty Limited               100     trading     Australia
  Kymed GB Limited                                 100     trading     England and Wales
  Enzacta R&D Limited                               99.8   trading     England and Wales
  DeMontford Biopharma Limited                     100     trading     England and Wales
  Enzacta Limited                                   99.8   dormant     England and Wales
  TAb (Wales) Limited                              100     dormant     England and Wales
  TAb (London) Limited                             100     dormant     England and Wales
  Polyclonal Antibodies Limited                    100     dormant     England and Wales
</TABLE>
NUMBER 13-16-00656-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

JOSEPH L. FARAH III, Appellant,

v.

FAT CAT BOATWORKS, L.L.C., Appellee. 

____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3

of Nueces County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Rodriguez, Contreras1, and Longoria

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, Joseph L. Farah III, filed an appeal from a judgment entered by the 

County Court at Law No. 3 of Nueces County, Texas, in cause number 2015-CCV-61603-

3. Appellant has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal and requests that this Court 

 

1 Justice Dori Contreras, formerly Dori Contreras Garza. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 45.101 et 

seq. (West, Westlaw through 2015 R.S.).
2

withdraw appellant’s notice of appeal and dismiss the appeal. More than ten days has 

passed since the filing of the motion and no response has been filed by appellee. 

The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant’s motion to 

dismiss the appeal, is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 42.1(a). Appellant’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED, and the appeal is hereby 

DISMISSED. Costs will be taxed against appellant. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(d) 

("Absent agreement of the parties, the court will tax costs against the appellant."). 

Having dismissed the appeal at appellant’s request, no motion for rehearing will be 

entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith.

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the 

12th day of January, 2017.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-7378

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

WAYNE P. THOMAS, a/k/a Eugene Gregory,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CR91-212-S, CA-96-2587-S)

Submitted: December 9, 1997 Decided: January 6, 1998

Before ERVIN, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Wayne P. Thomas, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen S. Zimmermann, OFFICE

OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying

his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997).

We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district

court. United States v. Thomas, Nos. CR-91-212-S; CA-96-2587-S (D.

Md. Aug. 22, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because the

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

DISMISSED
Editorial Note on Part 509
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part appear at 88 FR 45066, July 14, 2023.

§ 509.3 Definitions and interpretations. ( a ) *Act* means the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
( b ) The definitions of terms contained in section 201 of the act are applicable to such terms when used in this part unless modified in this section.
( c ) A *naturally occurring poisonous or deleterious substance* is a poisonous or deleterious substance that is an inherent natural constituent of a food and is not the result of environmental, agricultural, industrial, or other contamination.
( d ) An *added poisonous or deleterious substance* is a poisonous or deleterious substance that is not a naturally occurring poisonous or deleterious substance. When a naturally occurring poisonous or deleterious substance is increased to abnormal levels through mishandling or other intervening acts, it is an added poisonous or deleterious substance to the extent of such increase.
( e ) *Food* includes pet food, animal feed, and substances migrating to food from food-contact articles.
§ 146.148 Reduced acid frozen concentrated orange juice. ( a ) Reduced acid frozen concentrated orange juice is the food that complies with the requirements for composition and label declaration of ingredients prescribed for frozen concentrated orange juice by § 146.146, except that it may not contain any added sweetening ingredient. A process involving the use of anionic ion-exchange resins permitted by § 173.25 of this chapter is used to reduce the acidity of the food so that the ratio of the Brix reading to the grams of acid, expressed as anhydrous citric acid, per 100 grams of juice is not less than 21 to 1 or more than 26 to 1.
( b ) The name of the food is “Reduced acid frozen concentrated orange juice”.
[45 FR 12414, Feb. 26, 1980, as amended at 58 FR 2881, Jan. 6, 1993]
---

EXHIBIT 32.1

|CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO                           
|----------------------------------------------------
|18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT
      TO
|SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002       

In connection with the Annual Report of IAS ENERGY,
  Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending April 30, 2007 as
  filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
  I, John G. Robertson, President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
  ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
  that:

| | 1. | I have reviewed the Report;                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             
| | 2. | based on my knowledge, the Report does
        not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a
        material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances
        under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to
        the period covered by the Report; and
| |    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             
| | 3. | based on my knowledge, the financial
        statements, and other financial information included in the Report, fairly
        present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations,
        and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented
        in the Report.                      

|August 9, 2007                | 
|----------------------------- | 
|                              | 
|/s/
      John G. Robertson   | 
|John G. Robertson, President  | 
|(Principal Executive Officer) | 

---