alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Related cases: 

Health related cases: 

Ecotox related cases: 

Conce1·n levels: 

Type of Concern: 

Level of Concern: 

Health 

1-2 

Persistence 

1 

SAT Report 

PMN Number: P-15-0332 

SAT Date: 3/17/2015 

Print Date: 7/2112015 

Eco Comments 

3 

Yes 

Bioaccum 

1 

Toxicity 

1 

Comments 

PMN 

3 1 1 -

Exposure Based Review: 

Health: 

Ecotox: No 

Routes of exposure: Health: De1mal Drinking Water Inhalation 

Ecotox: All releases to water 

Fate: ; PMN negl; 

Keywords: 

Keywords: AQUATOX, LIVER, KIDNEY, THYROID, REPRO, DEV 

Summary of Assessment: 

Fate: 

FATE: 

log Kow = 

log Koc = 3.42 (E) 

log Fish BCF = 0.49 (E) 

log Fish BAF = 0.41 (E) 

PMN Substance: Liquid with MP < 25 oc (E) 

S = Reacts 

Hydrolysis Half-life = da 

VP = 14.1 ton at 25 oc (NOMOS) 
BP = 127 oc (M) 

H < 1.00£-8 (E) 

POTW removal (%) = PMN 90-99 via 

Time for complete ultimate aerobic v.·.v.._. ... , i". 

S01ption to 

PBT Potential: PMN P1B1; 

*CEB FATE: Migration to 

Health: 

Health Summary: 

Abs01ption is good all routes based on nm" <! 11'" 

mutagenicity based on 

developmental toxicity on 

Test Data: 

...... ;.11J'-'<u prope1ties. There is concem for 

, kidney, thyroid), reproductive and 

Low moderate concem. 

Acute oral study - clinical signs, but not were rep01ted at 2000 mg/kg 

Range fmding study (oral) for combined repeated-dose toxicity study with reproduction and 

developmental screening (100, 300 and 1000 mg/kg) - reduced c01pora lutea, preimplantation 

loss, reduced number of implantation sites and emb1yos at 1000 mg/kg. 

Ecotox: 

Test Test Test End Predicted Measured Comments 

Organism Type Point 

fish 96-h LC50 0.28 

daphnid 48-h LC50 0.21 

green algal 96-h EC50 0.51 

fish chronic 0.039 - value 

daphnid - chronic 0.046 

value 

algal - chronic 0.25 

value 

Sewag~ 3-h EC50 - ludg~ 

Sewag~ - Chronic - lud ~ Value 
Ecotox Values Comments: Predictions are based on SARs for 

SAR chemical class =• MWIIlog Kow = 5.06(EPI); 

1.4 mg/L at 20 C (P); pH7; effective concenu·ations based on acttve 

measured concenu·ations; hardness <150.0 mg/L as CaC03; and TOC <2.0 mg/L; 

Ecotox Factors Comments: 

SAT Chair: 

Fate assessor:
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 123 (Friday, June 26, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34924-34925]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-17086]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service


Notice of Approval of Record of Decision; Final Environmental 
Impact Statement for Ala Kahakai National Trail Study, Hawaii County, 
Hawaii

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Sec. 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969 (Pub. L. 91-190, as amended), and the regulations 
promulgated by the Council of Environmental Quality at 40 CFR Part 
1505.2, the Department of Interior, National Park Service has prepared 
and approved a Record of Decision for the Final Environmental Impact 
Statement for the Ala Kahakai

[[Page 34925]]

National Trail Study, Hawaii (FEIS/NTS).
    The National Park Service recommends a continuous historic trail 
management strategy for this trail along and near the coast of Hawaii. 
This strategy (described as the Proposed Action, Alternative B) and 
three other alternatives were detailed and analyzed in the Final 
Environmental Impact Statement issued in April, 1998. The findings in 
the FEIS/NTS include: (1) the Ala Kahakai meets all three criteria for 
a national historic trail (as outlined in the National Trails System 
Act); (2) establishing a continuous trail is physically feasible; (3) 
local communities, landowners, and native Hawaiians must be involved in 
planning and implementing the trail, should it be designated by 
Congress.
    The National Park System Advisory Committee has corroborated the 
national historical significance of the Ala Kahakai. The FEIS/NTS and 
Record of Decision (ROD) will be transmitted to Congress by the 
Secretary of the Interior. Copies of the ROD may be obtained from the 
Superintendent, Pacific Great Basin Support Office, 600 Harrison 
Street, Suite 600, San Francisco, CA 94107-1372, (415) 427-1438.

    Dated: June 15, 1998.
John J. Reynolds,
Regional Director, Pacific West Region.
[FR Doc. 98-17086 Filed 6-25-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-70-P
# C_2016305EN.01000502.xml

| 22.8.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 305/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.8.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 305/5

---

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 14 June 2016 — European Commission v Peter McBride and Others

(Case C-361/14 P) (1)

1

((Appeal - Resource conservation measures and restructuring of the fisheries sector - Requests for increased safety tonnage - Annulment by the European Union judicature of the decision initially rejecting those requests - Article 266 TFEU - Repeal of the legal basis on which that initial decision was founded - Competence and legal basis to adopt new decisions - Annulment by the General Court of new decisions rejecting the requests - Principle of legal certainty))

(2016/C 305/07)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Appellant: European Commission (represented by: A. Bouquet and A. Szmytkowska, acting as Agents, and by B. Doherty, Barrister-at-Law)

Appellant:

Other parties to the proceedings: Peter McBride, Hugh McBride, Mullglen Ltd, Cathal Boyle, Thomas Flaherty, Ocean Trawlers Ltd, Patrick Fitzpatrick, Eamon McHugh, Eugene Hannigan, Larry Murphy, Brendan Gill (represented by: N. Travers, Senior Counsel, D. Barry, Solicitor, and E. Barrington, Senior Counsel)

Other parties to the proceedings:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

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

2.

Orders the European Commission to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 339, 29.9.2014.

1

---
Pre-decisional: for internal use only. 1	

Tips From Former Smokers - Tips 2018/TV 

Christine/TV “Oral Cancer Effects” :30 

The	spot	opens	on	the	Tips	From	Former	Smokers	logo	and	cuts	to	a	picture	of	Christine	before	her	cancer	at	

age	39.	

ART CARD: A TIP FROM A FORMER SMOKER 

SUPER: Christine at 39 

The	spot	cuts	to	shots	of	Christine	getting	ready	in	her	bedroom	and	brushing	her	hair.	

CHRISTINE: I’m Christine and I used to smoke. 

My tip is: when you hear the words oral cancer, think about more than just your mouth. 

The	spot	cuts	to	an	image	of	the	scars	of	Christine’s	arms.	

CHRISTINE: The skin grafts and reconstructive surgery can really leave a mark on your arm... 

We	now	see	an	image	of	the	scars	on	Christine’s	shoulder	and	neck.	

CHRISTINE: ...your shoulder and your neck. 

The	spot	cuts	to	Christine’s	face.	She’s	speaking	to	the	camera	and	her	age	(55)	and	state	(Pennsylvania)	

appear	on	screen.	

SUPER: Christine, 55, Pennsylvania 	

CHRISTINE: Not to mention what it can do to your face. 

The	spot	cuts	to	the	art	card,	which	reads	“Smoking	causes	oral	cancer.”	

ART CARD: Smoking causes oral cancer. 

ANNCR: You can quit. For free help, visit CDC.GOV/TIPS 	

ART CARD: You can quit. For free help, visit CDC.GOV/TIPS. CDC Logo 	

BROUGHT TO YOU BY THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 

#CDCTips
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 123 (Friday, June 26, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 34907]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-17003]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Cancer Institute; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Cancer Institute Initial Review 
Group, Subcommittee A--Cancer Centers.
    Date: August 6-7, 1998.
    Time: August 6, 1998, 8:00 am to 6:00 pm--August 7, 1998, 8:00 
am to 1:00 pm.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Bethesda Hyatt Regency, One Bethesda Metro, Bethesda, MD 
20814.
    Contact Person: David E. Maslow, PhD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Grants Review Branch, Division of Extramural 
Activities, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of 
Health, 6130 Executive Boulevard--EPN 643A, Rockville, MD 20892-
7405, (301) 496-2330.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.393, 
Cancer Cause and Prevention Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and 
Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer Treatment Research; 93.396, 
Cancer Biology Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; 93.398, 
Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Cancer Control; 93.392, Cancer 
Construction, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: June 19, 1998.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Committee Management Officer, NIH.
[FR Doc. 98-17003 Filed 6-25-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
<PAGE>
EXHIBIT 24(B)

                                POWER OF ATTORNEY

The undersigned director of both Eagle-Picher Holdings, Inc. and Eagle-Picher
Industries, Inc. hereby consents to and appoints John H. Weber, Thomas R.
Pilholski and David G. Krall, and each of them, as his true and lawful
attorneys-in-fact and agents with all power of substitution, for him and in his
name, place and stead, in any and all capacities, to sign the Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the 2002 fiscal year of both Eagle-Picher Holdings, Inc. and
Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc., corporations organized and existing under the
laws of the State of Delaware and the State of Ohio respectively, and any and
all amendments thereto, and to file the same, with all exhibits thereto, and all
documents in connection therewith, with the Securities and Exchange Commission
pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, granting
unto said attorneys-in-fact and agents, and each of them, full power and
authority to do and perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary
to be done in and about the same as fully to all intents and purposes as he
might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that said
attorneys-in-fact and agents, or either of them, or their or his substitute or
substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue thereof.

In Witness Whereof, the undersigned has hereunto set his hand on this 19th day
of February, 2003.

/S/ DANIEL C.  WYLER
---------------------------
Daniel C. Wyler
Director
No. 10-478.

#### Sher J. Rana, Petitioner v. Toyota Motor Credit Corporation.

562 U.S. 1065, 131 S. Ct. 666,

178 L. Ed. 2d 484,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9345.

November 29, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Virginia denied.
PLANIFIQUE. PROPORCIONE. ADIESTRE.

Las caídas son la causa principal de 

muerte en la construcción

Fuente:

*http://www.cpwr.com/sites/default/files/publications/CB%20page%2044.pdf.

NIOSH Uso Seguro de Escaleras para iphone y Android

Descarga el ap. Uso Seguro de Escaleras

Usted puede ayudar a prevenir muertes y lesiones relacionadas con caídas. 

Únase a la Campaña! www.stopconstructionfalls.com

24%

Caídas mortales desde escaleras 

representan el 24% de las muertes por 

caídas en la construcción.*

Propietarios de pequeñas empresas, 

tengan en cuenta: 

55% de las caídas mortales en la 

construcción provienen de empresas 

con 1-10 empleados.*
No. 09-11293.

#### In re James Oliver, Petitioner.

562 U.S. 825, 131 S. Ct. 174,

178 L. Ed. 2d 255,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7797.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of habeas corpus denied.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Wayne Steinhilber, Appellant.

[64 NYS3d 918]

Application by the appellant for a writ of error coram nobis to vacate, on the ground of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, a decision and order of this Court dated November 18, 2015 *(People v Steinhilber,*133 AD3d 798 [2015]), affirming a judgment of the County Court, Orange County, rendered February 19, 2014.

Ordered that the application is denied.

The appellant has failed to establish that he was denied the effective assistance of appellate counsel *(see Jones v Barnes,*463 US 745 [1983]; *People v Stultz,*2 NY3d 277 [2004]).

Dillon, J.P., Cohen, Duffy and Connolly, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 10.23 - ADDENDUM TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


         This Addendum (the "Addendum") is made effective as of the 12th day  of
December,  2001 and is intended  to amend a certain  Employment  Agreement  (the
"Agreement")  by and between Erie Indemnity  Company and John J.  Brinling,  Jr.
effective as of December 16, 1997.

         WHEREAS, the Company has determined that it is in the best interest  of
the Company  and its  Shareholders  to secure the  continued  employment  of the
Executive in accordance with the terms of the Agreement; and

         WHEREAS,  the  Board  of  Directors  of  the  Company  has   previously
considered  and agreed to extend  the term of the  Agreement  from its  original
term; and

         WHEREAS, the  Board  of  Directors  of  the  Company  at its meeting of
December  11, 2001 has again  agreed to extend the term of the  Agreement  for a
period of one (1) additional year as contained herein; and

         WHEREAS, the Executive is agreeable to the extension of the Agreement.

         NOW, THEREFORE, intending to be legally bound hereby, the parties agree
         as follows:

          1.  Paragraph 1 of the  Agreement  with  respect to the Term is hereby
          amended by extending the Term to expire on December 15, 2003.

          2. All other  terms and  conditions  of the  Agreement  remain in full
          force and effect.



ATTEST:                                 ERIE INDEMNITY COMPANY


/s/  Jan R. Van Gorder                  By: /s/  F. William Hirt
     Jan R. Van Gorder                           F. William Hirt
     Secretary                                   Chairman of the Board


WITNESS:

/s/  Sheila M. Hirsch                       /s/  John J. Brinling Jr.
     Sheila M. Hirsch                            John J. Brinling Jr.
     Executive Secretary                         5691 Culpepper Drive
                                                 Erie, PA   16506


                                       38
No. 10-7507.

#### Michael Swain, Petitioner v. Florida.

562 U.S. 1185, 131 S. Ct. 1010,

178 L. Ed. 2d 839,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 787.

January 18, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District, denied.

Same case below, 43 So. 3d 60.
Exhibit 32.1  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)  In connection with the Quarterly Report of DigitalTown, Inc. (the Company), on Form 10-Q for the period ended November 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 135)), that to my 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 result of operations of the Company.   Date: January 14, 2011   /s/ Richard A. Pomije___ Richard A. Pomije CEO            Exhibit 32.2  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)  In connection with the Quarterly Report of DigitalTown, Inc. (the Company), on Form 10-Q for the period ended November 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 135)), that to my 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 result of operations of the Company.   Date: January 14, 2011   /s/ Paul R. Gramstad______ Paul R. Gramstad CFO
No. 09-11108.

#### Andre Williams, Petitioner v. Rick Thaler, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

562 U.S. 1171, 131 S. Ct. 982,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 436.

178 L. Ed. 2d 810,

January 10, 2011.

Petition for rehearing denied.

Former decision, 562 U.S. 862, 131 S. Ct. 143, 178 L. Ed. 2d 85, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 6349.
Meeting Summary

November 19, 2015

P r ofenofos Registration R e view

Meeting Between EPA/OPP and Syngenta

Meeting partici pants: Chuck Levey ( Syngenta Crop Protection) ; Christina Scheltema, Tracy

Perry, and Kelly Sherman (EPA/OPP/ Pesticide Re

- evalu ation Division); Char les (Billy) Smith

(Health Effects Di vision)

Summary: Members of the OPP profenofos team met briefly with Syngenta to discuss the

ongoing registration review of the insecticide profenofos. The preliminary risk assessment s for

this organoph ospha te published on September 24 , 2015 , and EPA is currently ac cepting public

comments on the a s s essment s

. The comment period will be extended for an additional 45 days.
# C_2015016EN.01000901.xml

| 19.1.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 16/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.1.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 16/9

---

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 13 November 2014 — European Commission v United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

(Case C-112/14) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Freedom of establishment - Free movement of capital - Articles 49 TFEU and 63 TFEU - Articles 31 and 40 of the EEA Agreement - National tax legislation - Attribution of gains to participators in close companies - Different treatment of resident and non-resident companies - Wholly artificial constructions - Proportionality)

(2015/C 016/12)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: R. Lyal and L. Armati, acting as Agents)

Defendant: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: L. Christie, acting as Agent)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1) | Declares that, by adopting and maintaining tax legislation concerning the attribution of gains to participators in non-resident companies which provides for a difference in treatment between domestic and cross-border activities, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 63 TFEU and Article 40 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area of 2 May 1992; |
| --- | --- |

1)

Declares that, by adopting and maintaining tax legislation concerning the attribution of gains to participators in non-resident companies which provides for a difference in treatment between domestic and cross-border activities, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 63 TFEU and Article 40 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area of 2 May 1992;

| 2) | Orders the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2)

Orders the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 184, 16.6.2014.

---
# C_2013207EN.01004301.xml

| 20.7.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 207/43 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.7.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 207/43

---

Action brought on 15 May 2013 — Skysoft Computersysteme/OHIM — British Sky Broadcasting and Sky IP International (SKYSOFT)

(Case T-262/13)

2013/C 207/72

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Skysoft Computersysteme GmbH (Kleinmachnow, Germany) (represented by: P. Ehrlinger and T. Hagen, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: British Sky Broadcasting Group plc and Sky IP International Ltd (Isleworth, United Kingdom)

Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | Set aside the contested decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 March 2013, as it dismissed the appeal of the plaintiff against the decision of the OHIM Opposition Division of 30 September 2011 and did not reject the opposition of the intervening party; |
| --- | --- |

—

Set aside the contested decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 March 2013, as it dismissed the appeal of the plaintiff against the decision of the OHIM Opposition Division of 30 September 2011 and did not reject the opposition of the intervening party;

| — | Order the intervening party to pay the costs of the proceedings including the costs incurred during the course of the appeal proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the intervening party to pay the costs of the proceedings including the costs incurred during the course of the appeal proceedings.

| — | Request the defendant to produce the annexes submitted by the intervening party and the plaintiff within the framework of the opposition proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

Request the defendant to produce the annexes submitted by the intervening party and the plaintiff within the framework of the opposition proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘SKYSOFT’ — Community trade mark application No 4 782 645 for products and services in classes 9, 35, 37, 38 and 42

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited in opposition: The word mark ‘SKY’ for goods and services in classes 9, 16, 18, 25, 28, 35, 38, 41 and 42

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition for all the contested goods and services

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Articles 8(1)(b) Council Regulation No 207/2009.

Pleas in law:

---