alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsThe Transition from Thick to Thin Plate Wake Physics: Whither Vortex Shedding?The near and very near wake of a flat plate with a circular trailing edge is investigated with data from direct numerical simulations. Computations were performed for six different combinations of the Reynolds numbers based on plate thickness (D) and boundary layer momentum thickness upstream of the trailing edge (theta). Unlike the case of the cylinder, these Reynolds numbers are independent parameters for the flat plate. The separating boundary layers are turbulent in all the cases investigated. One objective of the study is to understand the changes in the wake vortex shedding process as the plate thickness is reduced (increasing theta/D). The value of D varies by a factor of 16 and that of theta by approximately 5 in the computations. Vortex shedding is vigorous in the low theta/D cases with a substantial decrease in shedding intensity in the large theta/D cases. Other shedding characteristics are also significantly altered with increasing theta/D. A visualization of the shedding process in the different cases is provided and discussed. The basic shedding mechanism is explored in depth. The effect of changing theta/D on the time-averaged, near-wake velocity statistics is also discussed. A functional relationship between the shedding frequency and the Reynolds numbers mentioned above is obtained.Document ID20160003577Acquisition SourceAmes Research CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsRai, Man Mohan*(NASA Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA United States)*Date AcquiredMarch 22, 2016Publication DateMarch 1, 2016Subject CategoryAerodynamicsFluid Mechanics And ThermodynamicsReport/Patent NumberARC-E-DAA-TN30622NASA/TM-2016-218878Funding Number(s)WBS: WBS 106148.03.01.03Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.KeywordsCFDTurbulenceWakesAvailable DownloadsNameType20160003577.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
Exhibit 23.1




Consent of Sidley Austin LLP (included as part of Exhibit 5.1).
exhibit101.htm












January 3, 2013







CRC Associates, Inc.


300 Maple Avenue, Suite 101


South Plainfield, NJ 07080


Attn:           Manisha Patel












Dear Ms. Patel:







Reference is made to that certain Share Purchase Agreement dated December 20, 2012 (the “Agreement”) by and among Shelter Express Corp. (the “Seller”) and Manisha Patel (the “Buyer”).  On December 20, 2012, and in accordance with the terms of Section 12.1(b) of the Agreement, the Seller notified the Buyer of the extension of the Closing Date (as defined in the Agreement) by fifteen (15) days to January 15, 2013.  This letter shall serve to further extend the Closing Date to and including the close of business on February 28, 2013, and the terms of the Agreement are hereby deemed to be amended accordingly.  Please acknowledge your agreement and acceptance of the foregoing where indicated below.



















	  	  	 
	  	
Very truly yours,

	 
	  	  	 
	  	  	 
	  	
SHELTER EXPRESS CORP.

	 
	  	  	 
	  	  	 
	  	
By: /s/ Paul Cooper             

	 
	  	
Name: Paul Cooper

	 
	  	
Title: Vice President

	 







 









Agreed and Accepted:












MANISHA PATEL


 



	
/s/ Manisha Patel

	 








cc: David G. Polazzi, Esq.
REPELLENCY AWARENESS

GRAPHIC

Rose Kyprianou, Field and External Affairs Division

Kelly Sherman, Immediate Office

Office of Pesticide Programs

Informational Presentation for 

EPA’s Human Studies Review Board 

April 9, 2014
What is the Repellency Awareness Graphic?

A voluntary EPA effort to: 

• encourage standardized 

product labeling of skinapplied insect repellents 

through use of a graphic, 

and

• clearly communicate to 

consumers the estimated 

number of hours 

mosquitoes and/or ticks 

are repelled by a product 

when used as directed

2
Graphic

3

• Three versions of the graphic will be available to 

voluntarily use on a product label

• A graphic with mosquito and tick information 

together

• Or graphics with only mosquito information or 

only tick information
How Will It Work?

• For skin-applied insect repellents only

• Graphical claim will be part of the product’s approved 

registration and labeling

• Companies must voluntarily apply – through new or 

amended registration application

4

Typical length of time 

product repels ticks

Shows that mosquitoes 

are repelled

Shows that ticks 

are repelled

Typical length of time 

product repels mosquitoes
• Producers submit/cite data with the following qualities: 

• Following current test guidelines or using an equivalent standard

• Using multiple studies to inform the label claim for the pest group

• Ticks: specific representative test species 

• Mosquitoes: two field studies

• Data will undergo consistent analysis:

• Median will be used to calculate Complete Protection Time (CPT)

• EPA will develop criteria for determining the number(s) shown in the 

repellency awareness graphic

• E.g., how to deal with multiple data sets, how to round a number, 

minimum CPT needed to use the graphic

5

How Will It Work?
Why Is This Effort Important?

6

• Assists public health protection

• Improves consumers’ knowledge about how to protect 

themselves against vector borne disease, like West 

Nile virus and Lyme disease

• Represents a more rigorous standard of data 

generation and analysis

• Increases EPA’s and consumers’ confidence in the 

efficacy claims on labels

• Provides consistency

• Enhances public health information and improves the 

clarity of pesticide product labeling
Relevance to the HSRB

• Current guidelines for testing the efficacy of skin-applied 

repellents recommend intentional exposure studies with 

human subjects, which are subject to HSRB review

• EPA published guidance regarding the repellency 

awareness graphic and invited public comment last 

November

• If companies want to use the graphic, they may need to 

conduct new repellent efficacy studies

• Possibility of a fairly large work load for EPA and HSRB

• Some public comments expressed interest in exploring 

ways to streamline the HSRB review process

7
Next Steps

• Public comment period ended on March 6, 2014

• EPA is reviewing comments and encouraging 

companies interested in the graphic to contact us

• We could hear later this year from companies 

wanting to move forward to conduct research to 

obtain the repellency awareness graphic

8
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                         3,115
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               21,145
<PP&E>                                         160,071
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 184,331
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          221,394
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       12,430
<OTHER-SE>                                     (49,493)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   184,331
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               8,660
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (8,660)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (8,660)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (8,660)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.00)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.00)



</TABLE>
Exhibit 10.103
   
 Re: Separation Agreement
  VaxGen Company Agreemen
 1. Separation
Date. Separation Date
 2. Accrued Salary and Paid Time Off. PTO
 3. Severance Benefits. Employment Agreement Severance Benefits
 (a) Severance Payment. Severance Payment




---



##### 



(b) Health Insurance. COBRA earlier
 (c) Acceleration of Equity Awards. Options
 (d) No Severance Benefits Under Companys Severance Benefit Plan. Severance Plan
 4. No Other Compensation or Benefits.
 5. Expense Reimbursements.




---



##### 



6. Return
of Company Property. Your timely compliance
with this Section 6 is a condition precedent to your eligibility for and receipt of the Severance
Benefits.
 7. Proprietary Information Obligations. Exhibit A Proprietary Information
Agreement
 8. Disclosure.
 9. Nondisparagement.
 10. No Voluntary Adverse Action.




---



##### 



11. Cooperation.
 12. No Admissions.
 13. Release of Claims. Released Parties Released Claims ADEA Excluded Claims Exhibit B




---



##### 



14. ADEA
Waiver. Effective Date
 15. Section 1542 Waiver. A general release does not
extend to claims which the creditor does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the
time of executing the release, which if known by him or her must have materially affected his or
her settlement with the debtor.
 16. Disclosure Under ADEA, 29 U.S.C. § 626(f)(1) (H). Exhibit C
 17. Representations.




---



##### 



18. Dispute Resolution. The
parties each acknowledge that by agreeing to this arbitration procedure, they waive the right to
resolve any such dispute, claim or demand through a trial by jury or judge or by administrative
proceeding.
 19. Miscellaneous. Exhibit A Exhibit B




---



##### 



Sincerely,VaxGen, Inc.By:
    /s/ James P. PanekJames P. PanekPresident and Chief Executive Officer Exhibit A  Employees Proprietary Information and Inventions Agreement
Exhibit B  Indemnity Agreement
Exhibit C  ADEA Disclosure Under Title 29 U.S. Code § 626(f)(1)(H)
 Understood and Agreed:
 /s/ Matthew J. PfefferMatthew J. PfefferApril 7, 2008Date
No. 449, Misc.

#### Kirk *v.*Sheriff of Los Angeles County.

Petitioner *pro se.*

*Stanley Mosk,*Attorney General of California, and *William E. James,*Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

Motion for leave to file petition for writ of habeas corpus denied. Treating the papers submitted as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.
No. 63292.

protest 58/19629 (New York).

#### Miller Bros. Hat Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

*320Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with, stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of straw hats similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Pollak Industrial Corp. et al.*v. *United States*(40 Cust. Ct. 251, C.D. 1991), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
From: henryhuie@atmc.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:48:00 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

HENRY HUIE

Ocean Isle Beach, NC 28469
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM 3RD
QUARTER 2000 FORM 10-Q UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND UNAUDITED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FORM 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                          11,255
<SECURITIES>                                     6,460
<RECEIVABLES>                                   20,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                40,261
<PP&E>                                          39,479
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  80,470
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           15,464
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            81
<OTHER-SE>                                      53,106
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    80,470
<SALES>                                         41,601
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                41,601
<CGS>                                           27,475
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   27,475
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                12,534
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 664
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,428
<INCOME-TAX>                                       602
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                826
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       826
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .10


</TABLE>
No. 69796.

protests 63/12923(B) and 64/4506(B) (New York).

#### Goodman & Weinberg *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Pao, C.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of waterproof cotton cloth similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Amity*Fabrics, *Inc.*v. *United States*(51 Cust. Ct. 97, C.D. 2416), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 1488 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                    September 24, 2008.
    Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to take 
from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 2638) making appropriations for the 
Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, 
and for other purposes, with the Senate amendment thereto, and to consider in 
the House, without intervention of any point of order except those arising under 
clause 10 of rule XXI, a motion offered by the chairman of the Committee on 
Appropriations or his designee that the House concur in the Senate amendment 
with the amendment printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying 
this resolution. The Senate amendment and the motion shall be considered as 
read. The motion shall be debatable for one hour equally divided and controlled 
by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. 
The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the motion to final 
adoption without intervening motion.
    Sec. 2.  During consideration of the motion to concur pursuant to this 
resolution, notwithstanding the operation of the previous question, the Chair 
may postpone further consideration of such motion to such time as may be 
designated by the Speaker.
    Sec. 3.  The chairman of the Committee on Appropriations shall insert in the 
daily issue of the Congressional Record dated September 24, 2008, such material 
as he may deem explanatory of the motion.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
From: cperry@amig.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:08:14 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Chris Perry

Batavia, OH 45103
No. 172, Misc.

No. 175, Misc.

No. 212, Misc.

No. 234, Misc.

No. 246, Misc.

No. 256, Misc.

No. 262, Misc.

No. 287, Misc.

No. 332, Misc.

No. 347, Misc.

No. 355, Misc.

No. 373, Misc.

No. 391, Misc.

No. 396, Misc.

No. 397, Misc.

No. 422, Misc.

No. 427, Misc.

No. 450, Misc.

#### Weinfurtner *v.*California et al.; Kelley *v.*Royster, State Farm Superintendent, et al.; Donaldson *v.*Florida et al.; Schneider-Jimenez *v.*Heritage, Warden; Tomkalski *v.*Maxwell, Warden, et al.; Ex parte Schlette; Melendez *v.*Heritage, Warden; Browning *v.*Kansas et al.; Castro *v.*Klinger, Prison Superintendent; Ortiz *v.*Heritage, Warden; White *v.*Conboy, Warden, et al.; Reyes *v.*Heritage, Warden; Scarano *v.*Reincke, Warden; McCall *v.*McDonald, Sheriff; Creagh *v.*United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio et al.; Bray *v.*United States; Stiltner *v.*Rhay, Penitentiary Superintendent, et al.; and Muza *v.*California et al.

Motions for leave to file petitions for writs of habeas corpus denied.
From: msalfano@juno.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:01:48 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Salvatore Alfano

Monument, CO 80132