alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Guidance for containment evaluation of plant pathogens and noxious weeds permit applications when

containment is required.

Movement Type Evaluation

Importation 1. Pure cultures and/or on host

material of unknown and/or

unidentified organisms.

Full 

2. Field‐collected organisms:

includes spore collections and/or

“mixed infections” on plant

material.

Full

3. Pure cultures of identified

exotic but not established

organisms

Full/CAFE/none (depending on

organism)

4. Pure laboratory or commercial

cultures of indigenous

organisms.

CAFE/none (depending on

organism)

5. Importation from or of an

organism whose distribution is

contiguous with populations that

occur naturally in the area into

which the movement is

proposed.

CAFE/none (depending on

organism)

Interstate 6. Subsequent movement of

organisms that were brought

into the State under a Federal

permit and organism/intended

use would still trigger the need

for a CF evaluation.

Full/ CAFE/none (depending on

organism)

7. Movement of a quarantine

significant organism under

official control from a regulated

to a no regulated area.

Full

8. Movement of an organism

(not previously approved for

environmental release) to an

area where it does not presently

occur (and where intended use

determines the extent of

research activities).

Full/CAFE
9. Movement of a pure culture

of an identified FOREIGN

organism.

CAFE to none

(depending on the organism

);evaluated on a case‐by –case

basis

10. Movement of unidentified

field “mixed infections”

CAFE: (fungi/bacteria)

None:(bacteria/viruses ) T.B.D.

11. Movement of an organism to

an area where the organism and

its host do not occur due to

environmental constraints.

Evaluated on a case‐by‐case

basis

12. Lab and/or growth chamber

grown obligate parasites (with or

without soil or plant growth

media) moving into an area

where they already occur.

None

13. Purified viruses from known

repositories

None

14. Pure cultures of fungi into a

state where it is reported or

contiguous state where it is

reported.

None

15. Microbial biocontrol agents

with ‐E.P.A. registration.

None: Importation or

Canada/Mexico contiguous

population

Importation or interstate 16. Isolates returning to/ from

reputable repositories.

None

17. Movement directly for

extraction of DNA

None

Intrastate 18. Movement of organisms that

were brought into the State

under a Federal permit and the

organism/intended use would

still trigger the need for a CF  

evaluation.

CAFE/Full
IV 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 496 

Recognizing the 50th anniversary of the Department of Computer Science 

at Carnegie Mellon University. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 27, 2015 

Mr. MICHAEL F. DOYLE of Pennsylvania submitted the following resolution; 

which was referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing the 50th anniversary of the Department of 

Computer Science at Carnegie Mellon University. 

Whereas Computer Science is vital to the economy and quality of life in the United States, making pivotal contributions to job creation and innovation in manufacturing, 

health care, energy, education, and finance and contributing to the effectiveness of the national defense of the 

United States; 

Whereas the Department of Computer Science at Carnegie 

Mellon University was among the first such departments 

founded in the Nation, created through the leadership of 

Nobel laureate Herbert Simon and Turing Award winners Allen Newell and Alan Perlis; 

Whereas the Department of Computer Science at Carnegie 

Mellon University has distinguished itself in the fields of 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 496 IH 

algorithms, programming languages, software engineering, parallel processing, computer systems, and software 

systems; 

Whereas graduates of the Department of Computer Science 

at Carnegie Mellon University have made significant contributions to academic research at institutions across the 

United States and the world, as well as in the growth 

and success of virtually all of the major information technology companies of the United States; and 

Whereas the Department of Computer Science at Carnegie 

Mellon University has applied advances in Computer 

Science to challenges ranging from improving learning to 

enhancing the safety of the Nation’s air traffic control 

system, led the development of the Nation’s first wired 

campus, contributed to the economic revitalization of 

Pittsburgh through the creation and attraction of new 

businesses, been home to 12 Turing Award winners, and 

established nationally recognized initiatives for improving 

diversity through its Women in Computer Science program: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) recognizes the contributions of the Depart3 ment of Computer Science at Carnegie Mellon Uni4 versity to the educational excellence, quality of life, 

5 and economic competitiveness of the United States; 

6 and 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HRES 496 IH 

1 (2) congratulates the students, faculty, and 

2 alumni of the Department on the occasion of the 

3 50th anniversary of its establishment. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 23.01 - CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-3 (File Nos. 333-96647, 333-10060, and 333-102657) and S-8
(File Nos. 033-63701, 333-42727, 333-94075, 333-41116, 333-62876, 333-69518,
333-109435, 333-128180, and 333-128182) of Interland, Inc. of our report dated
November 7, 2005 relating to the financial statements, management's assessment
of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting and the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in
this Form 10-K.

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Atlanta, Georgia
November 7, 2005
May 3, 2000

13770

#### While v. Dedomenico

Affirmed
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM MAGAININ
PHARMACEUTICALS INC'S FORM 10Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                             169
<SECURITIES>                                     9,267
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 9,613
<PP&E>                                           6,254
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,214
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  11,825
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,785
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            46
<OTHER-SE>                                       5,002
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    11,825
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,925
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  47
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,743)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,743)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.12)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.12)


</TABLE>
#### Stale v. Frietas

20954

10/23/98

Affirmed in part, Vacated in part & Remanded
March 10, 2015

Mr. Ronald J. Strah Digital Wave Videos, LLC

7403 Father Frascati Drive Cleveland, OH 44102

Dear Mr. Strah:

This letter is to inform you that we are unabl e to process your request for an exemption. It explains why we cannot proce ss your request and what you s hould do in the next 30 days.

Why We Cannot Process Your Request

We entered your February 17, 2015, exemption re quest on behalf of Digital Wave Videos LLC into the public docket (No. FAA-2015-0375), but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the reque st any further, you mu st send us all of the following:

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR fr om which you seek relief and the extent of the relief you seek.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adve rsely affect safety or how the exemption would provide a level of safety at least equa l to that provided by the rule from which you seek an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or ar guments available to support your request.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any fu rther, you must send the information described earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requi res you to send your petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days , we will close the docket without notifying you further. If you have any questions or require additiona l time, you may call (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

/s/

Nia Daniels Program Analyst, Airmen and Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
Document Number: Revision: 

Previous Number:

Section/Area:

 Date:

Notes:

Preparing Product Licensing Plans

CVB-SOP-0059 02

PEL Reviewer Manual Ch. 1.5

CVB-SOP-PEL-REV

06 Jan 2021

CVB-Released
* 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 10, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-10780

Conference Calendar

 

RORY CORNILUS PARKER,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

S. MEYERS,

Defendant-Appellee.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:03-CV-802-M

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

Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Rory Cornilus Parker, Texas prisoner # 652714, has moved

this court for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) in an

appeal from the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C.

§ 1983 suit. In denying Parker’s motion to proceed IFP on

appeal, the district court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3)

and FED. R. APP. P. 24(a) that the appeal is not taken in good

faith because it presents no legal points of arguable merit. By

moving to appeal IFP, Parker has challenged the district court’s
No. 03-10780

-2-

certification. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir.

1997). 

The district court adopted the reason for dismissing

Parker’s suit when it certified that the appeal was not taken in

good faith. Parker argues that (1) the district court

erroneously denied him IFP because the unit law library clerk did

not enclose his IFP application, (2) the district court failed to

take notice of the fact that he was convicted of a lesser

included offense, (3) he is being punished cruelly and unusually,

and (4) the district court denied him IFP because he is pro se

while “the defendant is a public servant.” By failing to direct

his motion solely to the district court’s reason for the

certification decision, however, Parker has effectively abandoned

the only issue that is properly before this court. See Baugh,

117 F.3d at 202; Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir.

1993). Accordingly, his motion to proceed IFP is DENIED, and his

appeal is DISMISSED as frivolous. See Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202 &

n.24; 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. 

 The dismissal of this appeal counts as a strike under 28

U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Patton v. Jefferson Correctional Center,

136 F.3d 458, 461, 463-64 (5th Cir. 1998). Parker has a strike

already. Parker v. Moreno, 3:01-CV-072 (N.D. Tex. 2002); see

Patton, 136 F.3d at 463-64. Parker is warned that, if he

accumulates three strikes pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), he may

not proceed IFP in any civil action or appeal filed while he is
No. 03-10780

-3-

incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under

imminent danger of serious physical injury. See 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915(g). 

IFP DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS; SANCTION WARNING

ISSUED.
May 14, 2002

23903

#### State v. Inoue

Affirmed
EXHIBIT 21.1



SUBSIDIARIES



OF



INTEGRATED SILICON SOLUTION, INC.



|Name                                                 |  | Place of Incorporation
|---------------------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------
|Integrated Silicon Solution Inc. (Hong Kong) Limited |  | Hong Kong             
|                                                     | 
|Integrated Silicon Solution (Shanghai) Inc.          |  | China                 
|                                                     | 
|Integrated Silicon Solution (Taiwan) Inc.            |  | Taiwan                
|                                                     | 
|D2Code Co. Inc.                                      |  | South Korea           
|                                                     | 
|Sofwin, Inc.                                         |  | California            
|                                                     | 
|Winston, Inc.                                        |  | California
# C_2019035EN.01000901.xml

| 28.1.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 35/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.1.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 35/9

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Instrucción de Badalona (Spain) lodged on 22 October 2018 — Criminal proceedings against VW

(Case C-659/18)

(2019/C 35/11)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de Instrucción de Badalona

Party to the main proceedings

VW

Question referred

Must Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and, in particular, Article 3(2) of Directive 2013/48/EU (1) be interpreted as meaning that the right of access to a lawyer may justifiably be delayed where the suspect or accused fails to appear when first summoned by the court and a national, European or international arrest warrant is issued, and that the assistance of a lawyer and the entering of an appearance by the lawyer in the proceedings may be delayed until the warrant is executed and the suspect is brought to court by the police?

---

(1)  Directive 2013/48/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and in European arrest warrant proceedings, and on the right to have a third party informed upon deprivation of liberty and to communicate with third persons and with consular authorities while deprived of liberty (OJ 2013 L 294 p. 1).

---
# C_2019139EN.01005401.xml

| 15.4.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 139/54 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.4.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 139/54

---

Order of the General Court of 27 February 2019 — PAN Europe v Commission

(Case T-25/18) (1)

(Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 - Documents relating to endocrine-disrupting substances - Withdrawal of the decision refusing access - Disclosure after the action had been brought - Action which has become devoid of purpose - No need to adjudicate)

(2019/C 139/55)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Pesticide Action Network Europe (PAN Europe) (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: B. Kloostra, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Buchet, I. Naglis and G. Gattinara, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision C(2017) 7604 final of 9 November 2017, in so far as it refuses access to documents relating to endocrine-disrupting substances.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the present action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the present action.

| 2. | The European Commission shall pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The European Commission shall pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 104, 19.3.2018.

---
#### State v. Pa

18895

4/29/97

Affirmed
#### State v. Domingo

17181

3/15/95

Affirmed
STARR

CAMERON

HIDALGO

ZAPATA

WEBB

MAVERICK

KINNEY

VAL VERDE

M e x i c o

T e x a s

. 80 40 0 80 Miles

Permanent Quarantine "Buffer" Zone

USDA-ARS Knipling-Bushland

U. S. Livestock Insects

Research Laboratory

Kerrville, Texas
# C_2023045EN.01003505.xml

| 6.2.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 45/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.2.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 45/35

---

Order of the General Court of 28 November 2022 — Caprice Schuhproduktion v Commission

(Case T-157/18) (1)

(2023/C 45/56)

Language of the case: Dutch

The President of the Sixth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 142, 23.4.2018.

---
#### State v. Ronquillio

19012

4/28/97

Affirmed
EX-4.5



 Exhibit 4.5 
  

					
	E-[__]	  	 INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF 

THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  
	  	*[#]*
		  	SUPERCONDUCTOR TECHNOLOGIES INC.	  	

 THIS CERTIFIES THAT
                                         
       [holder
name]                                        
         is the registered holder of 

                         
                                         
                      **[number][#]**                 
                                         
                   Shares 
 of Series E Convertible
Preferred Stock of Superconductor Technologies Inc. (hereinafter designated the “Corporation”), transferrable only on the share register of the Corporation, in person or by duly authorized Attorney, upon surrender of this Certificate
properly endorsed or assigned. 
 The shares represented by this Certificate are convertible into shares of common stock at the election of the
holder thereof and shall so be converted upon the occurrence of certain events as set forth in the Certificate of Incorporation, and any amendments and restatements thereof, of the Corporation. 

This Certificate and the shares represented hereby are issued and shall be held subject to all the provisions of the Certificate of Incorporation and the
Bylaws of the Corporation and any amendments and restatements thereof to all of which the holder of this Certificate, by acceptance hereof, assents and agrees to be bound. 

A statement of the number of shares constituting each class or series of stock and the designation thereof, and the rights, preferences, privileges and
restrictions granted to or imposed upon the respective classes of shares of stock of the Corporation and upon the holders thereof may be obtained by any stockholder, upon request and without charge, at the principal office of the Corporation.

 SEE REVERSE SIDE OF CERTIFICATE FOR ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS AND RESTRICTIVE LEGENDS. 

In Witness Whereof, the said Corporation has caused this certificate to be signed by its duly authorized officers.

 Dated as of [____________] 
  

			
	  
	  	  

	[________________]	  	[________________]








 THE SECURITIES REPRESENTED BY THIS CERTIFICATE ARE SUBJECT TO CERTAIN LIMITATIONS ON CONVERSION
AS SET FORTH IN THE CERTIFICATE OF DESIGNATION OF PREFERENCES, RIGHTS AND LIMITATIONS OF SERIES E CONVERTIBLE PREFERRED STOCK, A COPY OF WHICH MAY BE INSPECTED AT THE PRINCIPAL OFFICE OF THE CORPORATION, AND ALL OF THE PROVISIONS OF WHICH ARE
INCORPORATED HEREIN.
#### Dela Cuesta v. Hawaiian Ins. Group

20686

2/19/98

Affirmed in part, Vacated and Remanded
#### State v. Miyashita

16862

10/29/96

Granted

- Hawai'i - - P.2d -
#### Ass'n of Apt. Owners of Maalaea Kai, Inc. v. Stillson

22310

02/28/2000

Vacated and Remanded
February 25, 1998

20722

#### State v. Shields

Affirmed
May 5, 1999

21933

#### Cabatbat v. Department of Labor and Indus. Relations

Affirmed
**Annex 59. Item 9.2.4. – Section 2.2.1. and 2.2.2. of Chapter 2.4.5. ‘Infection with *P. marinus*’**

CHAPTER 2.4.5.INFECTION WITH *PERKINSUS MARINUS*

[...]

2.2.	Host factors

2.2.1.	Susceptible host species

~~Eastern oyster, *Crassostrea virginica*; Pacific oyster, *C. gigas*; suminoe oyster, *C. ariakensis;*mangrove oyster,*C. rhizophorae*; Cortez oyster, *C. corteziensis*(Andrews 1996; Calvo *et al.,* 1999; Calvo *et al.,* 2001; Villalba *et al.,* 2004; Cáceres-Martínez *et al.,* 2008); softshell clam, *Mya arenaria*; Baltic macoma, *Macoma balthica* (Dungan *et al.,* 2007).~~

Species that fulfil the criteria for listing as susceptible to infection with *Perkinsus marinus* according to Chapter 1.5. of the *Aquatic Animal Health Code* (*Aquatic Code*) are: ~~American cupped oyster (*Crassostrea virginica*), Ariake cupped oyster (*Magallana* [Syn. *Crassostrea*] *ariakensis*), Cortez oyster (*Crassostrea corteziensis*) and palmate oyster (*Saccostrea palmula*).~~

2.2.2.	~~Susceptible stages of the host~~Species with incomplete evidence for susceptibility

~~All stages after settlement are susceptible.~~

Species for which there is incomplete evidence to fulfil the criteria for listing as susceptible to infection with *P. marinus* according to Chapter 1.5. of the *Aquatic Code* are: ~~Gasar cupped oyster (*Crassostrea tulipa*), mangrove cupped oyster (*Crassostrea rhizophorae),* and Pacific cupped oyster (*Magallana*[Syn. *Crassostrea*] *gigas*).~~

In addition, pathogen-specific positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) results have been reported in the following species, but no active infection has been demonstrated: ~~Columbia black oyster (*Crassostrea columbiensis*), soft shell clam (*Mya arenaria*), and stone oyster (*Striostrea prismatica*).~~

[...]

____________