alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 524.1200b Kanamycin ophthalmic solution. ( a ) *Specifications.* Each milliliter of solution contains 10 milligrams kanamycin activity as kanamycin sulfate.
( b ) *Sponsor.* See No. 054771 in § 510.600(c) of this chapter.
( c ) *Conditions of use in dogs* — ( 1 ) *Amount.* Instill a few drops into the affected eye every 3 hours or more frequently if deemed advisable. Administer as frequently as possible for the first 48 hours, after which the frequency of applications may be decreased. Treatment should be continued for at least 48 hours after the eye appears normal.
( 2 ) *Indications for use.* For the treatment of various eye infections (conjunctivitis, blepharitis, dacryocystitis, keratitis, and corneal ulcerations) due to bacteria sensitive to kanamycin. For prophylaxis in traumatic conditions, removal of foreign bodies, and intraocular surgery.
( 3 ) *Limitations.* Federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian.
[79 FR 10970, Feb. 27, 2014]
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                           UT

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-2000
<BOOK-VALUE>                                   PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                          100,894
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                      3,857,467
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                             272,460
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                            21,123
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                      61,131
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   4,313,075
<COMMON>                                               100
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                          789,608
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                                291,323
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                   1,081,031
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                        509,200
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                             1,315,995
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                       0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                                0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                           0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                      203,559
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                                0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                              0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                         0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                   1,203,290
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                    4,313,075
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                          379,620
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                                12,898
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                         264,704
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                         277,602
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                            114,138
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                   1,449
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                     115,587
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            71,569
<NET-INCOME>                                        31,898
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                         12,504
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                       19,394
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                                 0
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                                0
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                              19,394
<EPS-BASIC>                                              0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0



</TABLE>
MOJAQMD RULE 1303 REQUIREMENTS

LAST REVISED 03/25/96

RULE 1303

REQUIREMENTS

(Adopted: 07/21/80; Rescinded: 10/27/93; Adopted: 03/25/96)

(A) Best Available Control Technology

1. Any new Permit Unit which emits, or has the Potential to Emit, 25 pounds per day or more of any 

Nonattainment Air Pollutant shall be equipped with BACT. 

2. Any modified Permit Unit which emits, or has the Potential to Emit, 25 pounds per day or more of 

any Nonattainment Air Pollutant shall be equipped with BACT. 

3. Any new or modified Facility which emits, or has the Potential to Emit, 25 tons per year or more 

of any Nonattainment Air Pollutant shall be equipped with BACT for each new Permit Unit. 

(B) Offsets Required

1. Any new or modified Facility which emits or has the Potential to Emit a Regulated Air Pollutant 

in an amount greater than or equal to the following offset threshold amounts of Nonattainment Air 

Pollutants and their Precursors, as calculated pursuant to District Rule 1304, shall obtain Offsets. 

OFFSET THRESHOLD AMOUNTS

2. Any Facility which is not a Major Facility but where the Modification is in itself a Major 

Modification shall obtain Offsets. 

3. Any Facility which becomes a Major Facility due to a relaxation of a Federally Enforceable 

requirement shall obtain Offsets. 

4. The amount, type, and eligibility of such offsets shall be determined pursuant to the provisions of 

District Rules 1304(C), 1305 and District Regulation XIV. 

POLLUTANT OFFSET THRESHOLD

Carbon Monoxide (CO) 100 tpy

Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S) 10 tpy

Lead (Pb) 0.6 tpy

PM10 15 tpy

Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) 25 tpy

Oxides of Sulfur (SOx) 25 tpy

Reactive Organic Compounds 

(ROC)

25 tpy

MOJAQMD 1303 REQUIREMENTS Page 1 of 2

https://yosemite.epa.gov/r9/r9sips.nsf/AgencyProvision/D1EFAAB879593750882569CE00... 6/6/2016
(C) De Minimis Modifications at Major Facilities

1. Notwithstanding the provisions of section (B) above, the modification of an existing Major 

Facility shall not require offsets when: 

(a) The increase in net emissions of any precursor to ozone does not exceed 25 tons when 

aggregated with all other increases in emissions from the Facility over any period of five (5) 

consecutive calendar years including the calendar year in which such increase occurs. 

[SIP: Submited as amended 03/25/96 on _________; Submitted recision of 10/27/93 on 03/29/94; Conditional Approval 47 

FR 25013, 06/09/82]

MOJAQMD 1303 REQUIREMENTS Page 2 of 2

https://yosemite.epa.gov/r9/r9sips.nsf/AgencyProvision/D1EFAAB879593750882569CE00... 6/6/2016
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2
                                                                    NEWS RELEASE

                        [CELERIS CORPORATION LETTERHEAD]



CONTACT: PAUL R. JOHNSON
         CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
         (615) 341-0223


              COURT ORDERS FINAL APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT OF CELERIS
                CORPORATION'S OUTSTANDING SECURITIES LITIGATION


NASHVILLE, Tennessee (January 18, 2001) -- Celeris Corporation (Nasdaq/NM:CRSC)
today announced that the United States District Court ordered the final approval
of the previously announced settlement of the Company's outstanding securities
litigation, including both In Re Summit Medical Systems, Inc. Securities
Litigation and Teachers' Retirement System of Louisiana v. Summit Medical
Systems, Inc. et al. The settlement includes $750,000 cash, 100,000 shares of
common stock, and warrants to purchase 500,000 shares of common stock at $4.00
per share over the next five years.

         In commenting on the Court's decision, Barbara Cannon, president and
chief executive officer of Celeris, said, "The final resolution of these
lawsuits, which we inherited from Summit Medical Systems nearly four years ago,
ends the related distraction and expense of litigation and is indeed a
significant milestone for the Company. The settlement does not significantly
affect the financial viability of the Company going forward, and we can now
focus entirely on enhancing shareholder value."

         Celeris Corporation is a provider of specialty clinical research
services and information technology services that expedite and streamline the
clinical trial and regulatory submission process for pharmaceutical, medical
device, and biotechnology manufacturers.

         This press release may contain "forward-looking" statements within the
meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section
21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. These forward-looking
statements include statements of intent, belief or current expectations of
Celeris Corporation and its management. Such forward-looking statements are not
guarantees of future results and involve risks and uncertainties that may cause
actual results to differ materially from the results discussed in the
forward-looking statements. Risks and uncertainties that may cause such
differences include but are not limited to the possibility that the Securities
and Exchange Commission's investigation, which is not included in the settlement
described herein, will have a material adverse impact on the Company and its
financial position and other factors that could impact operating results
including the risk factors detailed in the Company's Securities and Exchange
Commission filings.

                                      -END-
#### § 610.10 Potency.

Tests for potency shall consist of either in vitro or in vivo tests, or both, which have been specifically designed for each product so as to indicate its potency in a manner adequate to satisfy the interpretation of potency given by the definition in § 600.3(s) of this chapter.
§ 520.928 Firocoxib tablets. ( a ) *Specifications.* ( 1 ) Each chewable tablet contains 57 or 227 milligrams (mg) firocoxib.
( 2 ) Each tablet contains 57 mg firocoxib.
( b ) *Sponsors.* See sponsors in § 510.600(c) of this chapter as follows: ( 1 ) Nos. 000010, 013744, 055246, 055529, and 086101 for use of products described in paragraph (a)(1) as in paragraph (c)(1) of this section; and
( 2 ) Nos. 000010 and 055246 for use of the product described in paragraph (a)(2) as in paragraph (c)(2) of this section.
( c ) *Conditions of use* — ( 1 ) *Dogs* — ( i ) *Amount.* 5 mg/kg (2.27 mg/lb) body weight. Administer once daily as needed for osteoarthritis and for 3 days as needed for postoperative pain and inflammation associated with soft-tissue and orthopedic surgery. Administer approximately 2 hours before soft tissue or orthopedic surgery.
( ii ) *Indications for use.* For the control of pain and inflammation associated with osteoarthritis; and for the control of postoperative pain and inflammation associated with soft-tissue and orthopedic surgery.
( iii ) *Limitations.* Federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian.
( 2 ) *Horses* — ( i ) *Amount.* Administer one 57-mg tablet to horses weighing 800 to 1,300 lb once daily for up to 14 days.
( ii ) *Indications for use.* For the control of pain and inflammation associated with osteoarthritis.
( iii ) *Limitations.* Do not use in horses intended for human consumption. Federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian.
[69 FR 51171, Aug. 18, 2004, as amended at 73 FR 2808, Jan. 16, 2008; 73 FR 64885, Oct. 31, 2008; 81 FR 67151, Sept. 30, 2016; 87 FR 58961, Sept. 29, 2022; 88 FR 14897, Mar. 10, 2023; 88 FR 55563, Aug. 16, 2023; 88 FR 84700, Dec. 6, 2023; 89 FR 42357, May 15, 2024]
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JOSE CONTRERAS-RAMIREZ, AKA

Jose Ramirez-Lopez,

Petitioner,

 v.

JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney

General,

Respondent.

No. 15-71078

Agency No. A092-215-926

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted January 8, 2018** 

San Francisco, California

Before: WALLACE, RAWLINSON, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.

1. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) properly held that the

immigration judge (IJ) did not have an obligation to inquire into Jose ContrerasRamirez’s mental competency. Because “an alien is presumed to be competent to

FILED

JAN 10 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

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

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Page 2 of 3

participate in removal proceedings,” the IJ was not required to analyze ContrerasRamirez’s mental faculties unless he exhibited “indicia of mental incompetency.”

Matter of M-A-M-, 25 I. & N. Dec. 474, 477 (BIA 2011); see Mejia v. Sessions,

868 F.3d 1118, 1121 (9th Cir. 2017). He did not exhibit any such indicia. In

response to the IJ’s questions about how he was feeling, Contreras-Ramirez

answered that he was feeling “good,” that he was fine to proceed with the hearing,

that he was thinking clearly, and that he understood that he was in immigration

court. Cf. Mejia, 868 F.3d at 1121–22. In response to the IJ’s questions about his

health, Contreras-Ramirez responded that he was “strong enough to work” and said

nothing about any past or present mental illness, abnormality, or incompetency. 

He coherently explained why he wanted to represent himself and admitted the

details of his conviction for domestic violence. Cf. id. at 1122. In short, nothing in

the record suggests that the IJ had reason to doubt Contreras-Ramirez’s mental

competency, or that the IJ was obligated to inquire further into ContrerasRamirez’s competency.

2. The BIA correctly held that the IJ had no obligation to advise ContrerasRamirez of the availability of Convention Against Torture (CAT) protection or to

further develop the record regarding a possible CAT claim. Since ContrerasRamirez did not express a fear of harm upon returning to Mexico, he had no due
Page 3 of 3

process right to be informed of the possibility of CAT protection. See Valencia v.

Mukasey, 548 F.3d 1261, 1262–63 (9th Cir. 2008); cf. 8 C.F.R. § 1240.11(c)(1). 

The harm he suffered at the hands of the Mexican police was tied to his conviction

for homicide. After his release from prison, he stayed in Mexico for two months

before returning to the United States. This action is consistent with his statement

that he did not fear returning to Mexico. Without a “plausible basis” for CAT

relief, Contreras-Ramirez had “no blanket right” to be advised of his ability to

apply for such relief. Valencia, 548 F.3d at 1262–63. 

PETITION DENIED.
# C_2016402EN.01003701.xml

| 31.10.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 402/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.10.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 402/37

---

Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2016 — FIH Holding and FIH Erhvervsbank v Commission

(Case T-386/14) (1)

1

((State aid - Banking sector - Aid granted to Danish bank FIH in the form of a transfer of its impaired assets to a new subsidiary and the subsequent purchase thereof by the Danish Financial Stability Company - State aid for banks during the crisis - Decision declaring the aid compatible with the internal market - Definition of aid - Private investor test - Private creditor test - Calculation of the amount of the aid - Obligation to state reasons))

(2016/C 402/40)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicants: FIH Holding A/S (Copenhagen, Denmark), FIH Erhvervsbank A/S (Copenhagen) (represented by: O. Koktvedgaard, lawyer)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Flynn and P.-J. Loewenthal, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action on the basis of Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision 2014/884/EU of 11 March 2014 on State aid SA.34445 (12/C) implemented by Denmark for the transfer of property-related assets from FIH to the FSC (OJ 2014 L 357, p. 89).

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls Commission Decision 2014/884/EU of 11 March 2014 on State aid SA.34445 (12/C) implemented by Denmark for the transfer of property-related assets from FIH to the FSC. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls Commission Decision 2014/884/EU of 11 March 2014 on State aid SA.34445 (12/C) implemented by Denmark for the transfer of property-related assets from FIH to the FSC.

| 2. | Orders the European Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the European Commission to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 253, 4.8.2014.

1

---
From: Robert Anderson/DC/USEPA/US

To: "Frey, Nathan J." <Nathan_J._Frey@omb.eop.gov> Cc: Karl Simon/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Nancy Ketcham - Colwill/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Lori

Stewart/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Mary Manners/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Karen Thundiyil/DC/USEPA/US@EPA Date: 05/19/2011 03:47 PM Subject: Re: EO 12866 Interagency Comments - E15 misfueling rule 

### Nathan, Attached please find EPA's responses to the interagency comments under EO 12866. Please note that we've attached both a clean and redline version of the rule i n addition to specific responses to the summary

comments. Also, we have included an expanded write- up on the E10/E0 availability petition in addition to an expanded discussion on federalism issues. Please let me know if you have any questions.

Robe rt K. Anderson Office of Transportation and Air Quality U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Phone: (202) 343.9718 Anderson.Robert@epa.gov

From: Lori Stewart/DC/USEPA/US To: Nancy Ketcham -Colwill/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Robert Anderson/DC/USEPA/US@EPA Cc: Karl Simon/DC/USEPA/US@EPA Date: 05/10/2011 02:26 PM Subject: Fw: EO 12866 Interagency Comments - E15 misfueling rule 

### just in case Karl is tied up, wanted to get these to you

----- Forwarded by Lori Stewart/DC/USEPA/US on 05/10/2011 02:26 PM ----- From: "F rey, Nathan J." <Nathan_J._Frey@omb.eop.gov> To: Lori Stewart/DC/USEPA/US@EPA Cc: Karl Simon/DC/USEPA/US@EPA Date: 05/10/2011 02:23 PM Subject: EO 12866 Interagency Comments - E15 misfueling rule 

### Attached please find interagency comments under EO 12866 for the E15 misfueling rule ( 2060-AQ17 ). Please let me know if you have any questions.[ attachment "E15 summary of interagency comments.doc" deleted by Robert Anderson/DC/USEPA/US] [attachment "Interagency Comments_on_E15_misfueling_rule.docx" deleted by Robert Anderson/DC/USEPA/US]
# L_2018316EN.01000101.xml

| 13.12.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 316/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.12.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 316/1

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2018/1963

of 6 December 2018

conferring protection under Article 99 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the name ‘Monzinger Niederberg’ (PDO)

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (1), and in particular Article 99 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | In accordance with Article 97(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, the Commission has examined the application to register the name ‘Monzinger Niederberg’ sent by Germany and has published it in the Official Journal of the European Union (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

In accordance with Article 97(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, the Commission has examined the application to register the name ‘Monzinger Niederberg’ sent by Germany and has published it in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

| (2) | No statement of objection has been received by the Commission under Article 98 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

No statement of objection has been received by the Commission under Article 98 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013.

| (3) | In accordance with Article 99 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, the name ‘Monzinger Niederberg’ should be protected and entered in the register referred to in Article 104 of that Regulation. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

In accordance with Article 99 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, the name ‘Monzinger Niederberg’ should be protected and entered in the register referred to in Article 104 of that Regulation.

| (4) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for the Common Organisation of the Agricultural Markets, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for the Common Organisation of the Agricultural Markets,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The name ‘Monzinger Niederberg’ (PDO) is hereby protected.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels 6 December 2018.

For the Commission,

On behalf of the President,

Phil HOGAN

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671.

1

(2)  
  OJ C 302, 28.8.2018, p. 6.

2

---
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**




**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 Quarterly Report of Central Wireless, Inc. (the “Company”)
      on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the
      undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby
      certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
      906
      of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:




1.
      The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




2.
      The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.




Date:
              January 23, 2007
            By:
            /s/ Kenneth
              W. BrandKenneth
                W. Brand
              Acting
                Principal Financial Officer




A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
      authentications, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
      in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
      by Section 906, has been provided to Central Wireless, Inc. and will be retained
      by Central Wireless, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
      Commission or its staff upon request.