alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 13, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 04-10737

Summary Calendar

 

BOBBY RAY HAILEY,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

COLUMBIA NAVARRO REGIONAL HOSPITAL;

GILBERT SIMMONS; BRAD GANNON,

Defendants-Appellees.

--------------------

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:04-CV-518

--------------------

Before DAVIS, SMITH and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Bobby Ray Hailey moves for leave to proceed in forma

pauperis (IFP) on appeal, following the district court’s

certification that his appeal was taken in bad faith. The

district court dismissed Hailey’s civil rights action as barred

by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994). 

Hailey does not argue that the district court erred in

determining that his appeal was taken in bad faith, and he does

not argue that the district court erred by dismissing his action
No. 04-10737

-2-

as barred by Heck. As Hailey has failed to brief the sole

dispositive issue for appeal, his IFP motion is denied and the

appeal is dismissed as frivolous. Brinkmann v. Dallas County

Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987); 5TH CIR.

R. 42.2. 

IFP DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED.
§ 582.1804 Sodium potassium tartrate. ( a ) *Product.* Sodium potassium tartrate.
( b ) *Conditions of use.* This substance is generally recognized as safe when used in accordance with good manufacturing or feeding practice.
J~~~~DSTqT~S

?~ A YJ

- - 4N .Wv LLI

e 2 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONAGENCY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 

# OCT - 3 2007 OFFICE OF AIRAND RADIATION MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: New

Source Review(NSR) Aspects of the Decision ofthe U .S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on the Phase 1 Rule to Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) FROM : Robert J. Meyqrs

Principal Depu TO : Regional Administrators

Regions I-X On June 8, 2007, the U .S. Court ofAppeals for the District of Columbia Circuit responded to our petition for a rehearing of the court's December 22, 2006, decision on the Phase 1 Rule to implement the 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) . The purpose ofthis memorandum is to provide a briefsummary of the implications ofthe court's opinion for the NSRprogram in ozone non-attainment areas. The court reaffirmed its decision stating that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) improperly determined that areas designated as non-attainment under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS would no longer be subject to 1-hour New Source Review requirements. Anumber ofareas that were designated as non-attainment for the 1-hour standard have lower classifications (and thus less-stringent NSRprovisions) under the 8- hour standard. In the Phase 1 rule published in the Federal Register on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23951), EPAmade NSRapplicability thresholds and emission offsets dependent upon the 8-hour attainment status ofan air quality region. The effect of the court's ruling is to restore NSRapplicability thresholds and emission offsets pursuant to classifications previously in effect for areas designated non-attainment for the 1-hour ozone standards. We intend to undertake rulemaking to conform our NSRregulations to the court's decision. Planned NSR-related actions will occur in two distinct phases. First, we will issue an immediately-effective final rule under authority of the Good Cause Provision of the Administrative Procedures Act to restore the NSRapplicability thresholds and emission offsets associated with designated 1-hour ozone nonattainment areas. Second,

Internet Address (URL) 0 http //www .epa gov Recycled/Recyclable 9 Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 1001 Postconsumer, Process Chlorine Free Recycled Paperwe plan to undertake a separate notice and comment rulemaking to address longer-term

applicability of 1-hour NSRrequirements. In particular, we will determine the conditions and mechanisms under which the requirements for the I -hour standard might cease to apply for NSRpurposes. While we proceed with rulemaking to address the NSR-related components of the court decision, we strongly encourage you to have States comply with the court decision as quickly as possible. If you or your staffhave any questions on specific programelements, please refer to the attached list of EPAstaffto contact. 

### Attachment cc: Air Division Directors, Regions I-XList of OARContacts

New Source Review -- David Painter (919) 541-5515 -- Lynn Hutchinson (919) 541-5795 Ozone Implementation -- John Silvasi (919) 541-5666 -- Denise Gerth (919) 541-5550
§ 530.20 Conditions for permitted extralabel animal and human drug use in food-producing animals. ( a ) The following conditions must be met for a permitted extralabel use in food-producing animals of approved new animal and human drugs: ( 1 ) There is no approved new animal drug that is labeled for such use and that contains the same active ingredient which is in the required dosage form and concentration, except where a veterinarian finds, within the context of a valid veterinarian-client-patient relationship, that the approved new animal drug is clinically ineffective for its intended use.
( 2 ) Prior to prescribing or dispensing an approved new animal or human drug for an extralabel use in food animals, the veterinarian must: ( i ) Make a careful diagnosis and evaluation of the conditions for which the drug is to be used;
( ii ) Establish a substantially extended withdrawal period prior to marketing of milk, meat, eggs, or other edible products supported by appropriate scientific information, if applicable;
( iii ) Institute procedures to assure that the identity of the treated animal or animals is carefully maintained; and
( iv ) Take appropriate measures to assure that assigned timeframes for withdrawal are met and no illegal drug residues occur in any food-producing animal subjected to extralabel treatment.
( b ) The following additional conditions must be met for a permitted extralabel use of in food-producing animals an approved human drug, or of an animal drug approved only for use in animals not intended for human consumption: ( 1 ) Such use must be accomplished in accordance with an appropriate medical rationale; and
( 2 ) If scientific information on the human food safety aspect of the use of the drug in food-producing animals is not available, the veterinarian must take appropriate measures to assure that the animal and its food products will not enter the human food supply.
( c ) Extralabel use of an approved human drug in a food-producing animal is not permitted under this part if an animal drug approved for use in food-producing animals can be used in an extralabel manner for the particular use.
§ 582.5470 Mannitol. ( a ) *Product.* Mannitol.
( b ) *Conditions of use.* This substance is generally recognized as safe when used in accordance with good manufacturing or feeding practice.
Editorial Note on Part 73
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 73 appear at 66 FR 66742, Dec. 27, 2001.

§ 73.1646 Bronze powder. ( a ) *Identity.* ( 1 ) The color additive bronze powder is a very fine metallic powder prepared from alloys consisting principally of virgin electrolytic copper and zinc with small amounts of the virgin metals aluminum and tin. It contains small amounts of stearic or oleic acid as lubricants.
( 2 ) Color additive mixtures for drug use made with bronze powder may contain only those diluents listed in this subpart as safe and suitable for use in color additive mixtures for coloring externally applied drugs.
( b ) *Specifications.* Bronze powder shall conform to the following specifications and shall be free from impurities other than those named to the extent that such impurities may be avoided by good manufacturing practice: Stearic or oleic acid, not more than 5 percent. Cadmium (as Cd), not more than 15 parts per million. Lead (as Pb), not more than 20 parts per million. Arsenic (as As), not more than 3 parts per million. Mercury (as Hg), not more than 1 part per million Aluminum (as Al), not more than 0.5 percent. Tin (as Sn), not more than 0.5 percent. Copper (as Cu), not more than 95 percent and not less than 70 percent. Zinc (as Zn), not more than 30 percent. Maximum particle size 45μ (95 percent minimum).
Aluminum, zinc, tin, and copper content shall be based on the weight of the dried powder after being thoroughly washed with ether.
( c ) *Uses and restrictions.* Bronze powder may be safely used in color externally applied drugs, including those intended for use in the area of the eye, in amounts consistent with good manufacturing practice.
( d ) *Labeling.* The color additive and any mixture prepared therefrom intended solely or in part for coloring purposes shall conform to the requirements of § 70.25 of this chapter.
( e ) *Exemption from certification.* Certification of the color additive is not necessary for the protection of the public health, and therefore batches thereof are exempt from the certification requirements of section 721(c) of the act.
[42 FR 33723, July 1, 1977]
§ 520.2475 Toceranib. ( a ) *Specifications.* Each tablet contains 10, 15, or 50 milligrams (mg) toceranib as toceranib phosphate.
( b ) *Sponsor.* See No. 054771 in § 510.600 of this chapter.
( c ) *Conditions of use* — ( 1 ) *Dogs* — ( i ) *Amount.* Administer an initial dose of 3.25 mg per kilogram (1.48 mg per pound) body weight, orally every other day.
( ii ) *Indications for use.* For the treatment of Patnaik grade II or III, recurrent, cutaneous mast cell tumors with or without regional lymph node involvement.
( iii ) *Limitations.* Federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian.
( 2 ) [Reserved]
[74 FR 28875, June 18, 2009, as amended at 79 FR 28832, May 20, 2014]
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 40 (Tuesday, March 2, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 9455]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-4375]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[File No. 500-1]


U.S. Biomedical Corp., (f/k/a United Textiles & Toys, Inc.), U.S. 
Environmental Solutions, Inc. (n/k/a EnviroResolutions, Inc.), USA 
Bridge Construction of N.Y., Inc., USA Broadband, Inc., USA Uranium 
Corp., and Utopia Marketing, Inc. (n/k/a Daytonabrands, Inc.); Order of 
Suspension of Trading

February 26, 2010.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is 
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of 
U.S. Biomedical Corp. (f/k/a United Textiles & Toys, Inc.) because it 
has not filed any periodic reports since the period ended December 31, 
2002.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is 
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of 
U.S. Environmental Solutions, Inc. (n/k/a EnviroResolutions, Inc.) 
because it has not filed any periodic reports since the period ended 
March 31, 1996.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is 
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of 
USA Bridge Construction of N.Y., Inc. because it has not filed any 
periodic reports since the period ended September 30, 1998.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is 
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of 
USA Broadband, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports since 
the period ended December 31, 2003.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is 
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of 
USA Uranium Corp. because it has not filed any periodic reports since 
the period ended February 29, 2008.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is 
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of 
Utopia Marketing, Inc. (n/k/a Daytonabrands, Inc.) because it has not 
filed any periodic reports since the period ended September 30, 2000.
    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the 
protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the 
securities of the above-listed companies.
    Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the 
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the securities of the 
above-listed companies is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EST 
on February 26, 2010, through 11:59 p.m. EST on March 11, 2010.

    By the Commission.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-4375 Filed 2-26-10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
#### § 710.3 How and where to register.

Form FD-2511 (“Registration of Cosmetic Product Establishment”) is obtainable on request from the Food and Drug Administration, 5001 Campus Dr., College Park, MD 20740, or at any Food and Drug Administration district office. The completed form should be mailed to Cosmetic Product Establishment Registration, Food and Drug Administration, 5001 Campus Dr., College Park, MD 20740.

[39 FR 10059, Mar. 15, 1974, as amended at 68 FR 15355, Mar. 31, 2003; 81 FR 49897, July 29, 2016]
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 38 (Friday, February 26, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 9004]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-4106]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

OVERSEAS PRIVATE INVESTMENT CORPORATION


Sunshine Act; Notice of Meeting

TIME AND DATE:  3 p.m., Wednesday, March 17, 2010.

PLACE: Offices of the Corporation, Twelfth Floor Board Room, 1100 New 
York Avenue, NW., Washington, DC.

STATUS: Hearing open to the Public at 3 p.m.

PURPOSE: Public Hearing in conjunction with each meeting of OPIC's 
Board of Directors, to afford an opportunity for any person to present 
views regarding the activities of the Corporation.

PROCEDURES:
    Individuals wishing to address the hearing orally must provide 
advance notice to OPIC's Corporate Secretary no later than 5 p.m. 
Wednesday, March 10, 2010. The notice must include the individual's 
name, title, organization, address, and telephone number, and a concise 
summary of the subject matter to be presented.
    Oral presentations may not exceed ten (10) minutes. The time for 
individual presentations may be reduced proportionately, if necessary, 
to afford all participants who have submitted a timely request an 
opportunity to be heard.
    Participants wishing to submit a written statement for the record 
must submit a copy of such statement to OPIC's Corporate Secretary no 
later than 5 p.m. Wednesday, March 10, 2010. Such statement must be 
typewritten, double-spaced, and may not exceed twenty-five (25) pages.
    Upon receipt of the required notice, OPIC will prepare an agenda, 
which will be available at the hearing, that identifies speakers, the 
subject on which each participant will speak, and the time allotted for 
each presentation.
    A written summary of the hearing will be compiled, and such summary 
will be made available, upon written request to OPIC's Corporate 
Secretary, at the cost of reproduction.
    Written summaries of the projects to be presented at the March 31, 
2010 Board meeting will be posted on OPIC's web site on or about 
Wednesday, February 24, 2010.

CONTACT PERSON FOR INFORMATION: Information on the hearing may be 
obtained from Connie M. Downs at (202) 336-8438, via facsimile at (202) 
218-0136, or via e-mail at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#95f6fafbfbfcf0bbf1fae2fbe6d5fae5fcf6bbf2fae3"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="8eede1e0e0e7eba0eae1f9e0fdcee1fee7eda0e9e1f8">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: February 24, 2010.
Connie M. Downs,
OPIC Corporate Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-4106 Filed 2-24-10; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 3210-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
§ 556.308 Halofuginone. ( a ) *Acceptable daily intake (ADI).* The ADI for total residue of halofuginone hydrobromide is 0.7 μg/kg of body weight per day.
( b ) *Tolerances.* The tolerances for halofuginone (marker residue) are: ( 1 ) *Chickens.* Liver (target tissue): 0.16 ppm.
( 2 ) *Turkeys.* Liver (target tissue): 0.13 ppm.
( c ) *Related conditions of use.* See § 558.265 of this chapter.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 41 (Wednesday, March 3, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 9613]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-4434]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Office of Justice Programs

[OJP (NIJ) Docket No. 1512]


Draft NIJ Restraints Standard for Criminal Justice

AGENCY: National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, DOJ.

ACTION: Notice of Draft NIJ Restraints Standard for Criminal Justice 
and Certification Program Requirements.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In an effort to obtain comments from interested parties, the 
U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National 
Institute of Justice will make available to the general public two 
draft documents: (1) A draft standard entitled, ``NIJ Restraints 
Standard for Criminal Justice'' and (2) a draft companion document 
entitled, ``NIJ Restraints Certification Program Requirements''. The 
opportunity to provide comments on these two documents is open to 
industry technical representatives, criminal justice agencies and 
organizations, research, development and scientific communities, and 
all other stakeholders and interested parties. Those individuals 
wishing to obtain and provide comments on the draft documents under 
consideration are directed to the following Web site: http://www.justnet.org.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 19, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Casandra Robinson, by telephone at 
202-305-2596 [Note: this is not a tollfree telephone number], or by e-
mail at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#86e5e7f5e7e8e2f4e7a8f4e9e4efe8f5e9e8c6f3f5e2e9eca8e1e9f0"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="462527352728223427683429242f2835292806333522292c68212930">[email protected]</span></a>.

Kristina Rose,
Acting Director, National Institute of Justice.
[FR Doc. 2010-4434 Filed 3-2-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-18-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
§ 582.5622 Potassium chloride. ( a ) *Product.* Potassium chloride.
( b ) *Conditions of use.* This substance is generally recognized as safe when used in accordance with good manufacturing or feeding practice.
# m8735.docx

EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 24.4.2018 C(2018) 2618 final To the notifying party: Subject : Case M. 8735 - GEELY / SAXO BANK Commission decision pursuant to Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 1 and Article 57 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area 2 Dear Sir or Madam, 1. On 28 March 2018 , the European Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of the Merger Regulation by which Geely Financials Denmark A/S (" Geely ", Denmark), belonging to Zhejiang Geely Holding Group Co., Ltd (" Zhejiang Geely Holding Group ", China), acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of Saxo Bank A/S (" Saxo Bank", Denmark) by way of purchase of shares . 3 2. The business activities of the undertakings concerned are: - Geely : part of Zhejiang Geely Holding Group , a Chinese multinational automotive manufacturing company . It sells passenger cars under the Geely and Volvo brands and taxis under the London Taxi brand. - Saxo Bank: an online Danish investment bank offering online trading and investment services worldwide and banking services in Denmark. 3. After examination of the notification, the European Commission has concluded that the notified operation falls within the scope of the Merger Regulation and of paragraph 5 ( c ) of the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 . 4 4. For the reasons set out in the Notice on a simplified procedure, the European Commission has decided not to oppose the notified operation and to declare it compatible with the internal market and with the EEA Agreement. This decision is adopted in application of Article 6(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation and Article 57 of the EEA Agreement . For the Commission
( S igned)
Johannes LAITENBERGER Director - General
(1)
OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 ( the ' Merger Regulation ' ). With effect from 1 December 2009, the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union ( ' TFEU ' ) has introduced certain changes, such as the replacement of ' Community ' by ' Union ' and ' common market ' by ' internal market ' . The terminology of the TFEU will be used throughout this decision.
(2) OJ L 1, 3.1.1994, p. 3 ( the ' EEA Agreement ' ).
(3) Publication in the Official Journal of the European Union No C 130 , 12.4.2018 , p. 5 .
(4)
OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5 .
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JOSE WILLIAM HERRERA-GRANDE,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 09-73113

Agency No. A098-122-575

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted March 8, 2011** 

Before: FARRIS, LEAVY and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

Petitioner Jose William Herrera-Grande, a native and citizen of El Salvador,

petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals order dismissing his appeal

from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum,

withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture

FILED

MAR 28 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 09-73113

(CAT). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny the petition for

review.

Substantial evidence supports the Board’s denial of asylum and withholding

of removal because Herrera-Grande failed to show he was or will be subject to

conduct rising to the level of persecution. See Hoxha v. Ashcroft, 319 F.3d 1179,

1182 (9th Cir. 2003) (holding that unfulfilled threats and an incident of physical

violence did not establish past persecution).

Substantial evidence also supports the Board’s denial of asylum and

withholding of removal because Herrera-Grande failed to show that gang members

threatened him on account of a protected ground. His fear of future persecution

based on an actual or imputed anti-gang or anti-crime opinion is not on account of

the protected ground of either membership in a particular social group or political

opinion. Ramos Barrios v. Holder, 581 F.3d 849, 854-56 (9th Cir. 2009); SantosLemus v. Mukasey, 542 F.3d 738, 745-46 (9th Cir. 2008). Moreover, being a

witness to a murder does not establish the required nexus to a protected ground. 

See Ochave v. INS, 254 F.3d 859, 865 (9th Cir. 2001) (“Asylum generally is not

available to victims of civil strife, unless they are singled out on account of a

protected ground.”)
3 09-73113

Substantial evidence also supports the Board’s denial of CAT relief based on

the Board’s finding that Herrera-Grande did not establish a likelihood of torture by,

at the instigation of, or with the consent or acquiescence of the El Salvadoran

government. See Arteaga v. Mukasey, 511 F.3d 940, 948-49 (9th Cir. 2007).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.