alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 145 (Wednesday, July 29, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 40537]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-20276]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Heath


National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders; 
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 Institute on Deafness and Other 
Communications Disorders Special Emphasis Panel.
    Date: August 17, 1998.
    Time: 11:00 AM to 12:00 PM.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: 6120 Executive Blvd., Suite 400C, Bethesda, MD 20852, 
(Telephone Conference Call).
    Contact person: George M. Barnas, Phd, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Scientific Review Branch, Division of Extramural 
Activities/NIDCD, 6120 Executive Blvd., Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-
8683.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.173, 
Biological Research Related to Deafness and Communicative Disorders, 
National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: July 22, 1998.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Committee Management Officer, NIH.
[FR Doc. 98-20276 Filed 7-28-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
No. 11-6698.

#### Jesse Joseph Vasquez, Petitioner v. James A. Yates, Warden, et al.

565 U.S. 1068, 132 S. Ct. 779,

181 L. Ed. 2d 499,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8566.

November 28, 2011.

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

Same case below, 421 Fed. Appx. 755.
# United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 11-1115 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. ZHEN ZHOU WU, a/k/a ALEX WU, Defendant, Appellant. No. 11-1141 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. YUFENG WEI, a/k/a ANNIE WEI, Defendant, Appellant.

ERRATA The opinion of this Court, issued on March 19, 2013, should be amended as follows. On page 21, line 3 of 1st full paragraph, replace "Richardson Electronic" with "Richardson Electronics".
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21-6708

JOHNNY SCOTT WARREN,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

WARDEN STREEVAL,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at 

Roanoke. James P. Jones, District Judge. (7:21-cv-00009-JPJ-PMS)

Submitted: August 19, 2021 Decided: August 24, 2021

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, FLOYD, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Johnny Scott Warren, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Johnny Scott Warren, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order denying 

relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition in which he sought to challenge his conviction by 

way of the savings clause in 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Pursuant to § 2255(e), a prisoner may 

challenge his conviction in a traditional writ of habeas corpus pursuant to § 2241 if a § 2255 

motion would be inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of his detention.

[Section] 2255 is inadequate and ineffective to test the legality of a 

conviction when: (1) at the time of conviction, settled law of this circuit or 

the Supreme Court established the legality of the conviction; (2) subsequent 

to the prisoner’s direct appeal and first § 2255 motion, the substantive law 

changed such that the conduct of which the prisoner was convicted is deemed 

not to be criminal; and (3) the prisoner cannot satisfy the gatekeeping 

provisions of § 2255 because the new rule is not one of constitutional law.

In re Jones, 226 F.3d 328, 333-34 (4th Cir. 2000).

We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm 

the district court’s order. Warren v. Warden Streeval, No. 7:21-cv-00009-JPJ-PMS 

(W.D. Va. Apr. 26, 2021). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 146 (Thursday, July 30, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 40720]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-20304]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration
[Docket No. 83F-0089]


National Starch and Chemical Corp.; Withdrawal of Food Additive 
Petition

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the 
withdrawal, without prejudice to a future filing, of a food additive 
petition (FAP 3B3696) proposing that the food additive regulations be 
amended to provide for the safe use of the partial sodium salt of a 
copolymer of dimethyldiallylammonium chloride with acrylamide and 
acrylic acid as a component of paper and paperboard for use in contact 
with food.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel N. Harrison, Center for Food 
Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS-215), Food and Drug Administration, 
200 C St. SW., Washington, DC 20204, 202-418-3084.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a notice published in the Federal 
Register of April 22, 1983 (48 FR 17390), FDA announced that a food 
additive petition (FAP 3B3696) had been filed by National Starch and 
Chemical Corp., P.O. Box 6500, Bridgewater, NJ 08807-0500. The petition 
proposed to amend the food additive regulations in Sec. 176.170 
Components of paper and paperboard in contact with aqueous and fatty 
foods (21 CFR 176.170) to provide for the safe use of the partial 
sodium salt of a copolymer of dimethyldiallylammonium chloride with 
acrylamide and acrylic acid as a component of paper and paperboard for 
use in contact with food. National Starch and Chemical Corp. has now 
withdrawn the petition without prejudice to a future filing (21 CFR 
171.7).

    Dated: July 2, 1998.
Laura M. Tarantino,
Acting Director, Office of Premarket Approval, Center for Food Safety 
and Applied Nutrition.
[FR Doc. 98-20304 Filed 7-29-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-F
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed April 3, 2019.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D18-211

Lower Tribunal No. 17-22639

________________

MC Trust, etc.,

Appellant,

vs.

Solita Cohen De Mishaan, etc.,

Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, George A.

Sarduy, Judge.

Philip D. Parrish, P.A., and Philip D. Parrish; Scale Law and Jaime D.

Guttman, for appellant.

Ross & Girten, and Lauri Waldman Ross and Theresa L. Girten; Raquel A.

Rodriguez, for appellee.

Before EMAS, C.J., and LOGUE and HENDON, JJ.

PER CURIAM.
Steven Mishaan (“Steven”), as trustee and on behalf of MC Trust, appeals a

final judgment dismissing with prejudice his action against Solita Cohen de

Mishaan (“Solita”), individually and as trustee of MC Trust, for lack of personal

jurisdiction and, alternatively, on the basis of forum non conveniens.1 We affirm.

After an evidentiary hearing, the trial court determined that it did not have

personal jurisdiction over Solita because she is not a resident of Florida and

because Steven failed to meet his burden of establishing that she had the requisite

minimum contacts with the State of Florida or that the alleged actionable tort was

committed in Florida. Upon our review of the evidentiary hearing transcript and

the record on appeal, we agree. See § 48.193(2), Fla. Stat. (2017); § 736.0202(2),

Fla. Stat. (2017); Venetian Salami Co. v. Parthenais, 554 So. 2d 499 (Fla. 1989);

Machtinger v. Inertial Airline Servs., Inc., 937 So. 2d 730, 734 (Fla. 3d DCA

2006).2 

Affirmed.

1 Because we affirm the trial court’s order on the basis of lack of personal

jurisdiction, we do not reach the merits of the forum non conveniens issue.

2 We affirm without comment the other issues raised on appeal. 

2
No. D-2611.

#### In the Matter of Discipline of Wevley William Shea.

565 U.S. 1053, 132 S. Ct. 810,

181 L. Ed. 2d 521,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8346.

November 28, 2011.

Wevley William Shea, of Anchorage, Alaska, is suspended from the practice of law in this Court and a rule will issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.
## Proposed Rule: Final Confidentiality Determinations for Nine Subparts and Amendments to Subpart A and I under

the Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases Rule Meeting Documentation : SIA and IBM , March 30 , 2012

Date Staff Contact Information

(Name, email, phone #) Name of Organization (Attach list of all attendees names and emails if possible) Summary of Discussion (e.g., applicability, reporting requirements, etc.) Written Comments Provided? Did they also submit to Docket? Date sent to

EPA

- CCD

3/30/12 Lisa Bacanskas

bacanskas.lisa@epa.gov 202

- 343

- 9 758 On the phone: Julie Hatcher, SIA David Isaacs, SIA Jay Dietrich, IBM Brian Lynk, Department of Justice Among the issues: CBI determinations for subpart I Submitted comments to the docket
Percentage of adults aged 19+ years participating in an immunization 

information system -- United States, five cities§, DC, and eight Territories†, 2011

National Coverage: 24% (excluding Territories)

Source: CY2011 IISAR

§ Chicago, IL (0%);

District of Columbia (45%);

Houston, TX (0%); 

New York City, NY (4%); 

Philadelphia, PA (12%); 

San Antonio, TX (14%).

† American Samoa (no report);

Marshall Islands (11%);

Federated States of Micronesia (21%);

Guam (16%);

N. Mariana Islands (no report);

Palau (112%);

Puerto Rico (31%);

Virgin Islands (No IIS).

≥95% (1 grantees)

67%-94% (2 grantees)

34%-66% (16 grantees)

≤33% (24 grantees)

No data/No report (3 grantees)
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-13-00691-CR

IN RE Anthony JACKSON

Original Mandamus Proceeding1

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Delivered and Filed: December 31, 2013

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED AS MOOT

This court issued an opinion conditionally granting mandamus relief in this proceeding on 

December 11, 2013. That opinion is withdrawn on the court’s own motion and the following 

opinion is substituted.

On October 7, 2013, relator Anthony Jackson, an inmate in the Texas Department of 

Criminal Justice-Institutional Division, filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus complaining 

of the trial court’s failure to rule on a pending motion. Jackson had previously filed in the trial 

court a pro se request for appointment of counsel to assist him in requesting DNA testing of 

evidence containing biological material. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 64.01(a-1), (c)

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 1998CR0872, styled The State of Texas v. Anthony Maurice Jackson, 

pending in the 379th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Ron Rangel presiding.

 
04-13-00691-CR

(West Supp. 2013). On October 8, 2013, this court requested a response to the petition for writ of 

mandamus. Neither the State nor the respondent judge filed a response to the petition.

This court issued its opinion conditionally granting mandamus relief on December 11, 

2013. Upon the issuance of that opinion, this court was advised the trial court had signed an order 

granting relator’s motion and assigning appointed counsel as requested on October 8, 2013.

Although neither a copy of the trial court’s order nor a response advising of the trial court’s action 

was provided to this court prior to the issuance of our prior opinion, the trial court’s order was 

signed before the opinion issued. Relator has obtained the relief sought in his petition for writ of 

mandamus. Accordingly, the petition is denied as moot. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a). 

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH

- 2 -
**Exhibit 32.1**

** **

**CERTIFICATION**

**PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEYACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with Amendment No. 1 to AnnualReport on Form 10-K/A of Andover National Corporation. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending December31, 2019 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Peter A. Cohen,Principal Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

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

 

(2)       Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operationsof the Company.

 

 

Date: April 30, 2020

 

Peter A. Cohen	

Chief Executive Officer	

Principal Executive Officer
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3321 

To amend the STEM Education Act of 2015 to require the National Science 

Foundation to promote the integration of art and design in STEM 

education, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 18, 2019 

Mr. LANGEVIN (for himself, Ms. BONAMICI, and Ms. STEFANIK) introduced 

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Science, Space, 

and Technology 

A BILL 

To amend the STEM Education Act of 2015 to require 

the National Science Foundation to promote the integration of art and design in STEM education, and for 

other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘STEM to STEAM Act 

5 of 2019’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HR 3321 IH

1 SEC. 2. INTEGRATING ART AND DESIGN INTO NATIONAL 

2 SCIENCE FOUNDATION INFORMAL STEM EDU3 CATION PROGRAM. 

4 Section 3 of the STEM Education Act of 2015 (42 

5 U.S.C. 1862q) is amended— 

6 (1) in subsection (a)— 

7 (A) in paragraph (2), by striking ‘‘and’’ at 

8 the end; 

9 (B) in paragraph (3), by striking the pe10 riod and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

11 (C) by adding at the end the following: 

12 ‘‘(4) the integration of art and design in STEM 

13 educational programs.’’; and 

14 (2) in subsection (b)— 

15 (A) in paragraph (3), by striking ‘‘and’’ at 

16 the end; 

17 (B) in paragraph (4), by striking the pe18 riod and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

19 (C) by adding at the end the following: 

20 ‘‘(5) design and testing of programming that 

21 integrates art and design in STEM education to pro22 mote creativity and innovation.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
No. 11-6998.

#### Travis McLean, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 1070, 132 S. Ct. 789,

181 L. Ed. 2d 504,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8363.

November 28, 2011.

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

Same case below, 439 Fed. Appx. 261.
(1) Adjusting Price $20.81 CWT

(2) Base Price $20.30 CWT

(3) Change from Base Price per CWT $0.51

(4) Price change per gallon $0.0439

(Line (3) divide by 11.63 gallons/cwt)

(5) Price change per half gallon $0.0219

Price change per quart $0.0110

Price change per pint $0.0055

Price change per 12-oz pg. $0.0041

Price change per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) $0.0034

Price change per half pint $0.0027

(6) Price adjustment per gallon $0.04

Price adjustment per half gallon $0.02

Price adjustment per quart $0.01

Price adjustment per pint $0.01

Price change per 12-oz pg. $0.00

Price adjustment per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) $0.00

Price adjustment per half pint $0.00

NOTE: Numbers in brackets are negative or decreases, all others are positive or increases.

Monthly EPA Calculation for Class I Milk (Clause 52.216-9032 Alt. I)

Based on California Dept. of Food and Agriculture Announcement of Minimum Prices

 Effective Date: October 6, 2013
Tolerance ID Descriptor L* a* b* c h dL* da* db* dEcmc*

TAN 525 STANDARD 58.69 6.46 16.97

1 3905I FULL VIOLET 

LIMIT -2.3 0.19 -2.20 2.11

OLIVE 527 STANDARD 50.92 0.15 20.82

2 3905A FULL ORANGE 

LIMIT -2.09 0.35 0.95 1.16

DARK 

GREEN

528

STANDARD 37.24 -4.98 12.52

3 3905C FULL YELLOW 

LIMIT -0.87 -0.14 1.71 1.37

BROWN 

529 STANDARD 36.57 5.55 13.26

4 3905B RED-ORANGE 

LIMIT 1.04 1.93 1.37 2.45

5 3905G THIN RED LIMIT 3.35 0.08 0.65 1.93

DARK 

CREAM

559

STANDARD 63.74 2.03 13.64

6 3905H FULL ORANGE 

LIMIT -2.85 0.69 0.47 1.51

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

Reflectance

UV Filter – OUT UV Lamp OFF

Shade Number OCP Piece/Roll Number 3905

DLA/ARMY SHADE TOLERANCE PROJECT February 3, 2022

Fabric Nomenclature CLOTH, DUCK, TEXTURED NYLON, 500 

DENIER MIL-DTL-32439
LIGHT 

SAGE

560

STANDARD 53.94 0.93 15.48

7 3905D ORANGE LIMIT -2.01 0.59 0.75 1.25

8 3905E RED LIMIT -1.31 0.54 0.31 0.89

9 3905F FULL LIMIT -3.04 0.16 0.65 1.44

BARK 

BROWN

561

STANDARD 25.69 3.62 3.28

COMMENTS: NUMBERS ARE FOR REFERENCE ONLY
DOW CONFIDENTIAL

- Do not share without permission



### Gel Time determination in CASE materials

DOW Europe

Birch Vale



## HYP 012A Gel / Demould Time (Elevated Temperature) Author: G Mason

Date : 30/04/09

Apparatus Reagents

1 L. tin

Palette Knife

120 x 220 x 2 mm Sheet Mould

80 mm diameter x 30 mm Block Mould Hot Plate

Vacuum Chamber

Digital Thermometer with flat probe

Top pan balance

0

– 100 Thermometer

Air circulating oven

Timer Specified co

– reactant

Macsil

PPE Protective clothing, safety glasses, disposable gloves.

Step Action

1. Check the temperature of the hotplate with the digital thermometer (should be 75

- 85 C)DOW CONFIDENTIAL

- Do not share without permission

2. Spray the hotplate with Macsil.

3. Make sure you have a count up timer available.

4. Ensure the prepolymer is clear, if cloudy discard and get fresh.

5. Make sure the sample is thoroughly mixed

6. Ensure the sample and the relevant prepolymer are at the temperature specified by the test sheet. (+/

- 1 degree)

7. (Half an hour in the 40C oven is usually sufficient but check with a thermometer

– other ways of heating will be required if the temp is higher than this).

8. Check balance is level and the pan is clean.

9. Weigh the two components into a one

- litre tin in the specified ratio.

You will need a combined weight of 250

– 300g to cast two sheets and a block.

10. Start the timer and begin mixing thoroughly

11. Scraping down the sides and along the bottom of the tin once

12. Mix for one minute.

13. Then put the tin in the vacuum chamber and degas for 1’ 45’’ (shaking the chamber if necessary to stop it overflowing). (See STP 117)

14. Remove from the chamber and transfer immediately to the mould (sheets first) noting whereabouts the first part was poured on.

15. You should create two sheets if physical tests are required and at least a 1cm thick block for a hardness test.

16. The surface of the sheets can be flamed to remove any surface bubbles.

17. Take care not to burn the surface.

18. To test for gel time, touch the surface of the sheet at the point where it was first poured on with a spatula and gently pull it away.

19. The gel time is when a string is created between the sheet and the spatula.

20. Record the time to the nearest 5 seconds but leave the timer counting if there is a demould specification.

21. The demould time is when the block can be easily removed from the mouldDOW CONFIDENTIAL

- Do not share without permission without deformation.

22. If physical tests or hardness is specified see STP 115.

23. Dispose of sample as polyol waste.

Revision History Date: By:

Document Revised into DOW format 14/10/2009 G Mason
(1) Adjusting Price

Base Skim Milk Price for Class I $7.32 CWT 0.965 $7.0638

Advanced Butterfat Pricing Factor $2.7212 LB 3.5 $9.5242

Class I Price $16.5880

(2) Base Price

Base Skim Milk Price for Class I $7.34 CWT 0.965 $7.0831

Advanced Butterfat Pricing Factor $2.3492 LB 3.5 $8.2222

Class I Price $15.3053

(3) Change from Base Price per CWT $1.2827

(4) Price change per gallon $0.1103

(Line (3) divide by 11.63 gallons/cwt)

(5) Price change per half gallon $0.0551

Price change per quart $0.0276

Price change per pint $0.0138

Price change per 12-oz pg. $0.0099

Price change per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) $0.0083

Price change per half pint $0.0069

(6) Price adjustment per gallon $0.11

Price adjustment per half gallon $0.06

Price adjustment per quart $0.03

Price adjustment per pint $0.01

Price change per 12-oz pg. $0.01

Price adjustment per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) $0.01

Price adjustment per half pint $0.01

**No price adjustment is required if the price change per-gallon, in either direction,

is not equal to or greater than +/-$0.0100 (See paragraph (f)(1) of the clause). 

NOTE: Numbers in brackets are negative or decreases, all others are positives or increases. 

Monthly EPA Calculation for Class I Milk (Clause 52.216-9032)

Based on USDA Announcement of Advanced Prices and Pricing Factors

Effective Date: July 2, 2017
No. 11-6920.

#### Godwin Asifo, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 1044, 132 S. Ct. 599,

181 L. Ed. 2d 439,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8111.

November 14, 2011.

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

Same case below, 445 Fed. Appx. 625.