alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CHIKUNGUNYA VACCINES

Beth Bell, MD, MPH

Chair, ACIP Chikungunya Vaccines Work Group

ACIP Meeting

June 22, 2023
Background

 In February 2023, FDA accepted Valneva’s Biologics License Application 

(BLA) for their chikungunya vaccine and granted priority review, with 

licensure possible in August 2023

 No chikungunya vaccine ever licensed in United States or globally

 No existing ACIP chikungunya vaccine recommendations

 Chikungunya Vaccines Work Group is developing policy options for ACIP’s 

consideration for use of chikungunya vaccine among U.S. persons at risk of 

chikungunya, including 

– Travelers

– Laboratory workers

– Residents of U.S. territories and states with, or at risk of, transmission
Recap of previous Work Group presentations to ACIP 

 October 2022

– Overview of chikungunya virus disease and vaccines

– Immunogenicity and safety of Valneva’s chikungunya vaccine

 February 2023

– Global epidemiology of chikungunya

– Chikungunya among U.S. travelers

– Persistent arthralgia following chikungunya
Overview of today’s session

 Value and preferences for chikungunya vaccine among U.S. travelers and 

healthcare providers

– Ms. Nicole Lindsey (CDC/NCEZID)

 Chikungunya virus infection among laboratory workers

– Dr. Susan Hills (CDC/NCEZID)

 Update and observations on large chikungunya outbreak in Paraguay

– Dr. Susan Hills (CDC/NCEZID)

 Plans and timelines for Work Group activities

– Dr. Susan Hills (CDC/NCEZID)
ACIP Ex Officio Invited Consultants

Beth Bell, Univ Washington (Chair) Robin Levis, FDA Alan Barrett, Univ Texas Galveston

Wilbur Chen, Univ Maryland Sixun Yang, FDA Carina Blackmore, Florida Dept Health

Lesley Dupuy, NIH Alan Lam, DoD

CDC Leads Margaret Ryan, DoD

Susan Hills, DVBD (Lead) ACIP Liaisons Steven Schofield, CATMAT

Nicole Lindsey, DVBD (Deputy Lead) Elizabeth Barnett, ISTM David Shlim, Jackson Hole Travel & Trop Med

James Campbell, AAP Nestor Sosa, Uni New Mexico Hospital

Mary Pat Friedlander, AAFP Sanet Torres, San Jorge Children & Women's Hospital

Kirsten Vannice, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

Mary Wilson, Univ California San Francisco

Chikungunya Vaccines Work Group members
DVBD DGMQ ISD

Erin Staples Sarah Guagliardo Elisabeth Velazquez

Ann Powers

Laura Adams DHQP GRADE/ETR consultants

Joshua Wong Michael McNeil Doug Campos-Outcalt

Rebecca Morgan

NCEZID GID

Rita Helfand Rebecca Casey ACIP Secretariat

Jessica MacNeil, NCIRD

Leslie Lee, NCIRD

Chikungunya Vaccines Work Group CDC participants
19 April 2013 *************************

NSN: 8960-01-523-6346 (LLNS) *MONOGRAPH NO: M7E

*************************

Item: 

Beverage bases (Powdered), Sweetened with nutritive sweetener, Lemon-lime, Fortified 

with ascorbic acid and enhanced with maltodextrin, Small flat pouch (Type II, Flavor 4, 

Formulation d, Design E)

Document: CID A-A-20098, Beverage Bases (Powdered) and PKG&QAP

Approximate Caloric Value Per Serving: 130 Component Classification: Secondary

Estimated Shelf Life: 36 months at 80°F

Item Characteristics

Appearance:

Dehydrated product: Uniformly blended, free flowing, and a homogenous dry mixture 

free of hard lumps. Granulation can vary from fine powder to small agglomerated 

crystals.

Rehydrated product: Bright pale green, sediment free, clear to slightly cloudy.

Odor: Rehydrated product: Lemon-lime, sweet and sour.

Flavor: Rehydrated product: Lemon-lime, sweet and sour.

Texture: Dehydrated product: Free of hard lumps.

Rehydrated product: Fully dissolve within two minutes with constant stirring.

Possible Deteriorative Changes 

Appearance: Rehydrated: Coagulated, jelled, surface frothing, or cloudiness, excessive sediment 

significantly affecting aesthetic appearance or flavor.

Odor: Burnt, scorched, moldy/mildew.

Flavor: Oxidized or any other flavor not typical of the type of beverage.

Texture: Lumpy or caked, not free flowing.

Unique Examination/Test Procedures

Prepare beverage IAW package instructions. Product should dissolve completely within about two 

minutes.

Special Notes
19 April 2013 *************************

NSN: 8960-01-523-6346 (LLNS) *MONOGRAPH NO: M7E

*************************

If slight sedimentation and clouding are observed but the odor and flavor are normal, do not score the 

sedimentation as a defect during surveillance inspection; make note of it in the narrative for future use. 

Coagulation/gelation may occur if the original formulation was incorrect or if the product has been 

temperature abused for a long time. Coagulation / gelation results in clumps of granules that do not 

readily dissolve when product is reconstituted. Particles tend to float in suspension (look like gel pockets 

or tapioca granules that are clumped together).
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 151 (Thursday, August 6, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 42019]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-20993]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP98-301-001]


Trailblazer Pipeline Company; Notice of Compliance Filing

July 31, 1998.
    Take notice that on July 29, 1998, Trailblazer Pipeline Company 
(Trailblazer) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Third 
Revision Volume No. 1, Substitute Fourth Revised Sheet No. 203 and 
Second Revised Sheet No. 203A to be effective August 1, 1998.
    Trailblazer states that these tariff sheets were filed in 
compliance with the Commission's letter order issued July 17, 1998 in 
Docket No. RP98-301-000 (Letter Order). Trailblazer believes that the 
tariff revisions made in the instant filing will bring Trailblazer's 
Tariff into full compliance with the Commission's Order No. 587-G.
    Trailblazer requested waiver of the Commission's Regulations to the 
extent necessary to permit the tendered tariff sheets to become 
effective August 1, 1998, pursuant to Order No. 587-G and the Letter 
Order.
    Trailblazer states that copies of the filing are being mailed to 
Trailblazer's customers, interested state regulatory agencies and all 
parties set out on the official service list in Docket No. RP98-301.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., 
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Section 385.211 of the 
Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed as 
provided in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests 
will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate 
action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to 
the proceedings. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission 
and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-20993 Filed 8-05-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
No. 11-6978.

#### Valentino Henderson, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 1069, 132 S. Ct. 786,

181 L. Ed. 2d 502,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8313.

November 28, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.

Same case below, 437 Fed. Appx. 96.
No. 11-6551.

#### Timothy Joe Owens, Petitioner v. Kenneth S. Tucker, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, et al.

565 U.S. 1066, 132 S. Ct. 773,

181 L. Ed. 2d 496,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8514.

November 28, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
No. 11-5906.

#### Devin Reed, Petitioner v. Illinois.

565 U.S. 966, 132 S. Ct. 460,

181 L. Ed. 2d 300,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 7526.

October 17, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Court of Illinois, Third District, denied.

Same case below, 405 Ill. App. 3d 279, 344 Ill. Dec. 930, 938 N.E.2d 199.
********

********

********

********

********

******NATIONAL ALLOWANCE (NAPA) LOCAL STOCK NUMBER REQUEST FORM**

******PLEASE PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING APPLICABLE INFORMATION AND ANY OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION FOR THE ITEM REQUESTED**

****MILITARY INSTALLATION(S) REQUESTING PRODUCT**:**************

********

****MANUFACTURER NAME: 	NAPA/MPA AGREEMENT NO 	

MANUFACTURER  PHONE# ___________________________MANUFACTURER EMAIL:___________________________

MANUFACTURER POINT OF CONTACT:_____________________________________________________________

APPROVED SOURCE 	 ESTABLISHMENT # 	

FOR SEAFOOD VETCOM 	USDC	

BRAND NAME OF PRODUCT: 	

PLANT NAME/LOCATION ADDRESS: 	

MANUFACTURER SKU#: 	 COUNTRY OF ORIGIN: 	

**CHECK********ONE:**********FRESH		FROZEN 	REFRIGERATED		SHELF STABLE 	CANNED

OTHER (please specify) 	

DESCRIPTION (brief description of product): 	

VARIETY/COLOR/FLAVOR: 	

GRADE OF PRODUCT: 	

FOR MEATS: NAMP/IMPS#: 	 WEIGHT RANGE OR MAXIMUM WEIGHT 	

**PROCESSING:**********RAW 	PRECOOKED 	FULLY COOKED 	OTHER

	BATTERED 	BREADED 	MARINATED 	SEASONED		CUT

	CHOPPED		DICED 	SHREDDED 	SLICED		GROUND

**PACK:**********BULK		INDIVIDUALLY WRAPPED PORTIONS

ITEM WEIGHT: 	 COUNT PER POUND: 	

PRODUCT SIZE: 	

UNITS PER CASE: 	

**PACKAGING:******CAN/CONTAINER SIZE: 	

CONTAINER MATERIAL (GLASS/PLASTIC/METAL): 	

PRIME VENDOR’S NAME: 	

NAPA ALLOWANCE (per case/lb/co/bt):
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

December 2, 2022

No. 04-22-00420-CR

Aaron POUCH,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 198th Judicial District Court, Kerr County, Texas

Trial Court No. B19843-1

Honorable M. Rex Emerson, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

On November 22, 2022, Appellant’s court-appointed appellate counsel filed an Anders

brief and a motion to withdraw. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967); High v. 

State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). In counsel’s certification to 

this court, Appellant’s counsel explained that he took the following steps:

• notified Appellant that counsel filed an Anders brief and a motion to 

withdraw, and provided Appellant with a copy of the documents;

• advised Appellant of his right to review the appellate record and file a pro se 

brief; and

• provided Appellant with a letter to request a copy of the appellate record. 

See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 318–20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); Ex parte Owens, 206 

S.W.3d 670, 674 n.28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006); Meza v. State, 206 S.W.3d 684, 688–89 (Tex. 

Crim. App. 2006). 

The State filed a letter conditionally waiving its right to file a brief. 

If Appellant desires to file a pro se brief, we order Appellant to do so within thirty days 

of the date of this order. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(a). If Appellant files a pro se brief, the State 

may file a responsive brief not later than thirty days after the date Appellant’s pro se brief is filed 

in this court. See id. R. 38.6(b).
If this court determines Appellant’s appeal is frivolous, Appellant may file a petition for 

discretionary review with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.4. 

Appellant must file the petition with the Clerk of the Court of Criminal Appeals within thirty 

days after this court issues its judgment. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2(a). The petition should be 

addressed to Clerk of the Court of Criminal Appeals, P.O. Box 12308, Austin, Texas 78711. 

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is held in abeyance pending further order of this court.

_________________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 2nd day of December, 2022.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
OFF’ICE OF TSiE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

Wmrable 03~. ii. Sheppard 

C;onptrGller 0P Publia Account8 

Austin, Ie%2s 

utng bieani~~8 for 

12s bQGkS. 

sration to the queaLGtteF OP due;ast 

C8 dtWGGd ldG&3llald Of 

smith OP SaI Bnton3.0, 

on of Austin, in conien l-a, of the Revised Statdeee not makikany specific appropriz+ 

ould be construed as an appropriation, 

of the Coostltution, t&e 

ot h27e been Per s.mre titan tuo gears. 

r, only alrthorizea the Clerks CP the 

ala tG purchase additional tar hooks 

out Of .tAhe 

‘8uclk expGmU.tures shall nGt exceed annually the specific amounts af sach Pees a8- 

dYl.tic?na11p autlloriaed for such purpesa in 

tha General Appropriation Act ef the Lo$s~Jtura mde bienially for the support and malzltenance of the JuUciary Dagwtment of thG 

state Gevverment .* 

.
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**761 CA 13-00467**  PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CENTRA, CARNI, WHALEN, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ.

IN THE MATTER OF JESUS VALDEZ, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,

V ORDER

BRIAN FISCHER, COMMISSIONER, NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND COMMUNITY SUPERVISION, RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.

WYOMING COUNTY-ATTICA LEGAL AID BUREAU, WARSAW (LEAH R. NOWOTARSKI OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER-APPELLANT.

ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (PAUL GROENWEGEN OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Wyoming County (Mark H. Dadd, A.J.) entered February 4, 2013 in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78. The judgment denied the petition.
It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs ( see Matter of Robles v Evans , 100 AD3d 1455, 1455).

Entered: June 13, 2014 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Brett D. Davis, certify that:

 

1.                                      I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of CNH Equipment Trust 2017-B (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);

 

2.                                      Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.                                      Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4.                                      I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicer and based on my knowledge and the compliance review conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material respects; and

 

5.                                      All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

 

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas.

 

----

 

March 27, 2018

 
|   |   |                                                             |
|--------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | By:    | /s/ Brett D. Davis                                               |
|   | Name:  | Brett D. Davis                                                   |
|   | Title: | President (senior   officer in charge of the servicing function) |

 

----
Rulemaking for GHG Emissions from EGUs

Update Briefing February 26, 2014 Attendees Carolyn Hanson - ECOS Tom Tyler - ECOS Carolyn Berndt, National League of Cities Phil Assmus - National Association of Clean Air Agencies Karen Mongoven - National Association of Clean Air Agencies Judy Sheahan - U.S. Conference of Mayors Dave Gatton - U.S. Conference of Mayors Patrick Dolan - National Governors Association Alex Whitaker - National Governors Association Jacqueline Alamia - National Association of Counties Ben Husch - National Conference of State Legislatures Melanie Condon - National Conference of State Legislatures Jack Peterson - County Executives of America EPA: Kevin Culligan, OAR Lora Strine, OAR Bob Wayland, OAR (by phone) Christian Fellner, OAR (by phone) Mary Johnson, OAR (by phone) Mark Rupp, OCIR Jack Bowles, OCIR Andrew Hanson, OCIR Andrea Barbery, OCIR
ex10-1.htm


Exhibit 10.1


 


SECOND AMENDMENT


TO


AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


 


THIS SECOND AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (the “Amendment”) is made and entered into as of the 26th day of March, 2012, by and between CROWN CRAFTS, INC., a Delaware corporation (“Employer”), and NANCI FREEMAN, an individual resident of the State of California (“Employee”).


 


W I T N E S S E T H:


 


WHEREAS, Employer and Employee have entered into that certain Amended and Restated Employment Agreement dated as of April 20, 2004, as amended by that certain First Amendment to Amended and Restated Employment Agreement by and between Employer and Employee dated as of November 6, 2008 (as so amended, the “Agreement”);


 


WHEREAS, Employer and Employee wish to amend the Agreement as provided herein; and


 


WHEREAS, capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein shall have the same meanings given to such terms in the Agreement;


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the mutual covenants and agreements herein, the parties hereto do hereby agree as follows:


 


1.           Amendment to Agreement.  Section 10.5 of the Agreement is hereby amended by adding the following sentence to the end thereof:


 


“Notwithstanding the foregoing, if this Agreement is terminated pursuant to either of the immediately preceding clauses (i) or (ii), then Employee shall receive the product of two (2) multiplied by the sum she would have received under Section 13.2 hereof following a Change in Control, payable as provided therein.”


 


2.           Miscellaneous.


 


(a)           Choice of Law.  This Amendment shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware without giving effect to the conflict of laws principles thereof.


 


(b)           Counterparts.  This Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument.


 


(c)           Severability.  If any term or provision of this Amendment is held by a court of competent jurisdiction or other authority to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remainder of the terms and provisions of this Amendment shall in no way be affected, impaired or invalidated.


 


(d)           Existing Terms.  The existing terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect except as such terms and conditions are specifically amended by, or conflict with, the terms of this Amendment.


 


[Signature page follows.]


 




  





  











  






 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment, or caused this Amendment to be executed by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized, as of the date first written above.


 




	 	CROWN CRAFTS, INC.	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	By: 	 /s/ E. Randall Chestnut   	 
	 	 	E. Randall Chestnut, Chairman,	 
	 	 	President and Chief Executive Officer	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	/s/ Nanci Freeman 	 
	 	NANCI FREEMAN
ID Descriptor L* a* b* c h dL* da* db* dEcmc*

Standard 3902 STANDARD 15.36 0.54 -0.94

Tolerance

1 3902A FULL BLUE 

LIMIT 14.52 0.55 -1.27 -0.84 0.01 -0.33 0.94

2 3902B FULL VIOLET 

LIMIT 13.88 0.72 -1.13 -1.48 0.18 -0.19 1.49

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Shade Number BLACK 557 Piece/Roll Number 3902

DLA/ARMY SHADE TOLERANCE PROJECT June 11, 2018

Fabric Nomenclature CLOTH, KNIT, POLYESTER, SIDE PANEL 

FOR APFU TRUNKS

UQC-S-08-13

GL/PD 13-06B

COMMENTS: NUMBERS ARE FOR REFERENCE ONLY 

Equipment Type HUNTER ULTRA SCAN PRO Setting Mode: Specular Included - 

Reflectance

UV Filter – OUT UV Lamp OFF
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 98-50373

Conference Calendar

 

CHARLIE RAY RUMPH,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

UNK DOUGLAS; 

MARLIN POLICE DEPARTMENT,

Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. W-97-CV-254

- - - - - - - - - -

October 20, 1998

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and WIENER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Charlie Ray Rumph appeals the district court’s dismissal of

his civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for failure to

pay the filing fee after having been denied leave to proceed in

forma pauperis (IFP). This is essentially a challenge to the

district court’s finding that Rumph did not submit financial

information sufficient to establish that he was financially

qualified for IFP status. See Adkins v. E.I. du Pont De Nemours

& Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339-40 (1948) (central inquiry is whether 
No. 98-50373

-2-

the movant can afford the costs of the appeal without or

deprivation of the necessities of life). Rumph provided the

district court with an affidavit of poverty in support of his

motion wherein he stated that he receives a monthly pension, but

he did not give the amount of that pension. The district court

did not abuse its wide discretion in denying Rumph’s IFP motion. 

See Flowers v. Turbine Support Division, 507 F.2d 1242, 1244 (5th

Cir. 1975).

 AFFIRMED.