alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CS 346894-A January 17, 2024

Only Administer Abrysvo (Pfizer)

Vaccine to Pregnant People

Two respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccine products are available for use in the United States.

Abrysvo (Pfizer)

Administer to pregnant people.

Arexvy (GSK)

Do NOT administer to pregnant people.

Strategies to Help Prevent Errors

• Order and stock vaccine products that fit best with your patient population. Avoid 

stocking both products, if possible. 

• If both RSV vaccine products are stocked, label the Arexvy (GSK) vaccine “Do NOT 

administer to pregnant people.” 

• Educate staff on vaccine recommendations. If both RSV products are stocked, train 

staff about the differences in preparation and indications.

• Follow medication administration best practices – read and check the vaccine product 

label at least 3 times and ask another staff member to confirm that it is the correct 

vaccine product for the patient.

• If referring pregnant people to another vaccine provider, tell the provider to administer 

Abrysvo (Pfizer) vaccine and to confirm the vaccine product prior to administration.

CDC Clinical Resources 

Healthcare Providers: RSV Vaccination for Pregnant People | CDC

RSV Vaccine Information Statement | CDC

Adult Immunization Schedule – Healthcare Providers | CDC

Use of the Pfizer Respiratory Syncytial Virus Vaccine During Pregnancy for the Prevention of Respiratory Syncytial Virus–

Associated Lower Respiratory Tract Disease in Infants: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization 

Practices — United States, 2023 | MMWR (cdc.gov)

Vaccine Administration: Preventing Vaccine Administration Errors (cdc.gov)
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 146 (Thursday, July 30, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 40708]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-20323]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. GT98-85-000]


Equitrans, L.P.; Notice of Refund Report

July 24, 1998.
    Take notice that on July 16, 1998, Equitrans, L.P. (Equitrans) 
filed a Report summarizing the refunds of GRI over collections which 
were credited to the July billing invoices of Equitrans' customers.
    Equitrans states that on May 29, 1998 it received a refund from GRI 
of $231,022 for collections in excess of 105% of Equitrans 1997 GRI 
funding level. Equitrans states that it credited this amount to its 
eligible firm customers in billing invoices which were mailed out on 
July 15, 1998. The credits were allocated to Equitrans eligible firm 
customers pro-rata based on GRI rate collections during the 1997 
billing year.
    Equitrans states that a copy of its report has been served on its 
customers and interested state commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed on or 
before July 31, 1998. 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. Any person wishing to 
become a party must file a motion to intervene. 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. 98-20323 Filed 7-29-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
No. 11-7383.

#### James Doyle, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 1130, 132 S. Ct. 1045,

181 L. Ed. 2d 768,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 177.

January 9, 2012.

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

Same case below, 438 Fed. Appx. 288.
App J 

DSCPH 4155.2 

Monograph No BE6. 

30 October 2003 

NSN: 8910-00-965-1553

Item: Egg-Mix, Pasteurized, Dehydrated, Uncooked, Spray-dried, in a No. 3 metal can (404 x 

700) (Type II) 

Document: PCR-E-014, Egg Mix, Pasteurized, Dehydrated, Uncooked, Packaged in a Metal 

Can, Shelf Stable 

Approximate Caloric Value Per Serving: NA Component Classification: Primary 

Estimated Shelf Life: 36 months at 80oF; 6 months at 100oF 

Item Characteristics

Appearance: 

Dehydrated egg shall be uniform in composition and appearance, free from black specs 

or lumps that do not fall apart under light finger pressure. Uniform light yellow color. 

Prepared: Cooked scrambled eggs. Light yellow in color. 

Odor: Dehydrated egg mix. 

Prepared: Cooked scramble eggs. 

Flavor: Prepared: Cooked scrambled eggs. 

Texture: 

Free flowing powder. Upon rehydration the product shall readily attain a slightly thick 

mixed egg consistency. 

Prepared product shall be moist and tender cooked scrambled eggs. May have slight 

syneresis. 

Possible Deteriorative Changes 

Appearance: 

Dry mix may darken in color and/or contain lumps that do not fall apart under light 

finger pressure. 

Prepared eggs may contain undissolved lumps. 

Odor: Rancid, stale, oxidized, bitter, soapy, scorched, cardboard, sulfur or other objectionable 

odors. 

Flavor: Rancid, stale, oxidized, bitter, soapy, scorched, cardboard, sulfur or other objectionable 

flavors. 

Texture: 

Dry egg mix may clump excessively, and not readily dissolve upon mixing or grilling. 

Upon mixing the product may not readily attain a slightly thick mixed egg 

consistency. 

Prepared eggs may contain undissolved lumps. 

Monograph No. BE6, Page 1 of 2 Pages 
App J 

DSCPH 4155.2 

Monograph No BE6. 

30 October 2003 

NSN: 8910-00-965-1553

Unique Examination/Test Procedures

Prepare as directed on label. 

Monograph No. BE6, Page 2 of 2 Pages
7 February 2013 ***********************

NSN: 8940-01-600-6714 (MTS) *MONOGRAPH NO: BE8

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

Item: Meatballs in Tomato Sauce

Document: CID A-A-20349 Meatballs in Tomato Sauce, Canned or in Flexible Pouches and 

PKG&QAP

Approximate Caloric Value Per Serving: 250 Component Classification: Primary

Estimated Shelf Life: 36 months at 80°F

Item Characteristics

Appearance:

Meatballs in tomato sauce.

Meatballs: Cooked ground beef color and uniform in size and shape.

Tomato sauce: Medium red to dark reddish brown color.

Odor:

Meatballs: Cooked beef.

Tomato sauce: Well blended cooked tomato mildly seasoned with Italian herbs and 

spices.

Flavor:

Meatballs: Cooked beef.

Tomato sauce: Well blended cooked tomato mildly seasoned with Italian herbs and 

spices.

Texture: Meatballs: Moist and tender. Not dry or mushy.

Tomato sauce: Moderately thick.

Possible Deteriorative Changes 

Appearance: Meatballs: May darken.

Tomato sauce: May darken

Odor:

Meatballs: Excessively metallic, rancid, sour, scorched, bitter or other objectionable 

odors. 

Tomato sauce: May exhibit loss of Italian herbs or spices.

Flavor:

Meatballs: Excessively metallic, rancid, sour, scorched, bitter or other objectionable 

flavors. 

Tomato sauce: May have too much or too little Italian seasoning.

Texture:

Meatballs: May become dry, chewy, or mushy. 

Tomato sauce: May become excessively thick or thin or oily.

Unique Examination/Test Procedures

NA 
7 February 201

3***********************

NSN: 8940-01-600-6714 (MTS)*MONOGRAPH NO: BE8 ***********************

Special Notes

NA
Opinion issued January 18 , 202 4

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01 - 23 - 00661 - CV

——————————— IN RE FRANK C . POWELL , Relat or
Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDU M OPINION Relator, Frank C. Powell, filed a petition for writ of mandamus compelling the trial court to hold a hearing on relator’s formal bill of exception. 1 After the petition was filed, our Court issued an order in relator’s related appeal (Case No. 01

- 23

- 00224

- CV ) abating the appeal for the trial court to conduct a hearing on relator’s

1 The underlying case is Commission for Lawyer Discipline v. Frank C. Powell , cause number 2021

- 56827 , pending in the 270th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Terri Holder sitting by assignment.2

bill of exception. The trial court subsequently conducted the ordered hearing. Accordingly, we dismiss the mandamus petition as moot. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Ad ams and Justices Landau and Rivas

- Molloy.
No. 11-7186.

#### Clarence Hicks, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 1088, 132 S. Ct. 833,

181 L. Ed. 2d 542,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8688,

December 5, 2011.

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

Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.

Same case below, 421 Fed. Appx. 276.
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

Filed: October 23, 2015

No. 14-392

* * * * * * * * * * AMY M NESBITT, ERIC L NESBITT, * legal representatives and parents of a minor *

child

, MNN, *

*

Petitioners, *

*

v. * Attorney Fees and Costs; Stipulation

*

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * AND HUMAN SERVICES, *

*

Respondent. *

*

* * * * * * * * * *

Richard Moeller, Esq. , Bernstein, Moore, et al., Sioux City, IA, for petitioners, Julia McInerny, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

DECISION ON ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS 1

Roth, Special Master:

In this case under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 2 Chief Special

Master Dorsey issued a decision on July 8, 2015, that awarded compensation pursuant to the parties’ joint stipulation . This case was reassigned to me on October 21, 2015. On October 23,

2015 , the parties filed a stipulation for attorney fees and costs. The stipulation indicates that respondent does not object to the amount that petitioners request. Additionally, pursuant to General Order #9, the stipulation notes that petitioners incurred no personal litigation costs.

I find that this petition was brought in good faith and that there existed a reasonable basis

1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I intend to post this decision on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, § 205, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012 ))

. In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to delete medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I will delete such material from public access.

2 The applicable statutory provisions defining the program are found at 42 U.S.C. § 300aa- 10 et seq

. (2012).for the claim. Therefore, an award for fees and costs is appropriate, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§

300aa-15(b) and (e)(1). Further, the proposed amount seems reasonable and appropriate. Accordingly, I hereby award the total $20,660.24 3 in the form of a check made payable jointly to petitioners and Berenstein, Moore, Heffernan, Moeller & Johnson, LLP, for petitioners ’ attorney fees and costs.

The clerk of the court shall enter judgment in accordance herewith. 4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Mindy Michaels Roth Mindy Michaels Roth Special Master

3 This amount is intended to cover all legal expenses incurred in this matter. This award encompasses all charges by the attorney against a client, “advanced costs” as well as fe es for legal services rendered. Furthermore, 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(e)(3) prevents an attorney from charging or collecting fees (including costs) that would be in addition to

the amount awarded herein. See generally Beck v. Sec’y, HHS , 924 F.2d 1029 (Fed. Cir.1991).

4 Entry of judgment can be expedited by each party’s fili ng of a notice renouncing the right to seek review. See Vaccine Rule 11(a).
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
OF 2002



In connection with the Annual Report on
Form 10-K of CannAssist International Corp. (the “Company”) for the year ending December 31, 2019, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), each of the undersigned officers of the Company,
hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
to his or her 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 results of operations of the Company.







|Dated:  August 19, 2020 | By: /s/ | Mark Palumbo                                           | 
|----------------------- | ------- | ------------------------------------------------------ | 
|                        |         | Mark Palumbo                                           | 
|                        |         | Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)  | 
|                        |         |                                                        | 
|Dated:  August 19, 2020 | By: /s/ | Mark Palumbo                                           | 
|                        |         | Mark Palumbo                                           | 
|                        |         | Chief Financial Officer  (Principal Financial Officer) | 







This certification accompanies each Report pursuant to §
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed
filed by the Company for purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906
has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
Date: 29 November 2023 *********************

NSN: 8940-01-650-9564 (CBB) * MONOGRAPH M2C1

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

Item: Chicken burrito bowl

Document: PCR-C-088, Chicken Burrito Bowl (Chicken with Brown Rice, Beans, and Vegetables), 

Packaged in a Flexible Pouch, Shelf Stable

Approximate Caloric Value Per Serving: 280 Component Classification: Primary

Estimated Shelf Life: 36 months at 80°F

Item Characteristics

Appearance:

Mixture of cooked whole muscle chicken meat, brown rice, pinto beans, corn, tomatoes, 

and green chilies with taco seasoning.

Chicken: Pieces (natural proportions, not from log product), off-white to tan color (may be 

a reddish-brown color from taco seasoning), at least 65 percent by weight of the cooked 

chicken pieces not less than 3/4 inches in any one dimension.

Brown rice: Distinct long grains, parboiled, light to medium tan color.

Pinto beans: Reddish-brown color, practically free of broken, mashed beans or loose skins.

Corn: Whole kernel, yellow color.

Tomatoes: 3/4 inch dices, red color.

Green chilies: Green colored dices.

Odor: Cooked chicken, brown rice, pinto bean, corn, tomato, mild green chilies, and mild taco 

seasoning.

Flavor: Cooked chicken, brown rice, pinto bean, corn, tomato, mild green chilies, and mild taco 

seasoning.

Texture:

Chicken: Moist, tender.

Brown rice: Moist, slightly soft to slight firm.

Pinto beans: Slightly soft to slightly firm.

Corn: Slightly firm exterior, tender interior.

Tomatoes: Soft, tender.

Green chilies: Soft, tender.

Possible Deteriorative Changes

Appearance: Excessive darkening of chicken, rice, pinto beans and vegetables.

Odor: Scorched, sour, bitter, rancid, metallic. Loss of spice.

Flavor: Scorched, sour, bitter, rancid, metallic. Loss of spice.

Texture:

Chicken: Dry, rubbery, stringy or chewy.

Rice: Dry, excessively firm or mushy.

Pinto beans: Excessively mushy or firm.

Corn: Excessively firm or mushy.

Tomatoes, green chilies: Overly soft.

Unique Examination/Test Procedures

N/A

Special Notes

N/A
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Petitioner

v.
JAMES ARTHUR BALL, III., Respondent : : : : : : : : : : : No. 719 MAL 2014
Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM AND NOW , this 24th day of March, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED . The issues, as stated by petitioner, are:
(1) Given the extensive impact the Superior Court’s published opinion could have on the lower courts and prosecution offices in situations where a defendant initiates a statutory summary appeal from a Magisterial District Judge’s sua sponte finding of guilt on an uncharged, lesser-included offense, should this Honorable Court grant review because the purpose for double jeopardy protections are not implicated, or implicated minimally, when the defendant appeals his conviction for a trial de novo ? (2) Should this Honorable Court exercise its supervisory authority over the Superior Court’s erroneous discharge of defendant and remand his case for sentencing on the lesser-included offense he appeals and necessarily was found guilty of committing?
No. 11-7138.

#### Burl Bargeron, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 1085, 132 S. Ct. 829,

181 L. Ed. 2d 537,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8714.

December 5, 2011.

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

Same case below, 435 Fed. Appx. 892.
No. 11-6256.

#### Enjoli Elan McClendon, Petitioner v. California.

565 U.S. 1038, 132 S. Ct. 580,

181 L. Ed. 2d 427,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8259.

November 14, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District, denied.
No. 11-6174.

#### Marco Antonio Garcia, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 956, 132 S. Ct. 432,

181 L. Ed. 2d 281,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 7214.

October 11, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
**Exhibit 35.2**

 

**Servicer Compliance Statement of Deere Credit Services, Inc.**

 

I, Steven N. Owenson, Senior Vice President and Controller of Deere Credit Services, Inc., state:

 

A review of Deere Credit Services, Inc.’s activities for the period from October 29, 2018 through November 3, 2019 (the “Reporting Period”) and of Deere Credit Services, Inc.’s performance under the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of July 18, 2017 among John Deere Capital Corporation, John Deere Receivables, Inc. and John Deere Owner Trust 2017-B has been made under my supervision, and to the best of my knowledge based on such review, Deere Credit Services, Inc. has fulfilled all its obligations under all relevant agreements in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.

 

 

 
| Date: January 10,   2020 |   | Deere Credit   Services, Inc.     |
|-------------------------------|--------|----------------------------------------|
|                          |   |                                   |
|                          |   | * *                               |
|                          | By:    | */s/ Steven N. Owenson*                |
|                          |   | Steven N. Owenson                      |
|                          |   | Senior Vice President   and Controller |

 

----
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

HARBURG MEDICAL SALES CO.,

Petitioner

v.

PMA MANAGEMENT CORP. (BUREAU OF 

WORKERS' COMPENSATION, FEE 

REVIEW HEARING OFFICE),

Respondents

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 537 MAL 2021

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the 

Commonwealth Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 31st day of March, 2022, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.

Justice Brobson did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.
(1) Adjusting Price $17.97 CWT

(2) Base Price $18.51 CWT

(3) Change from Base Price per CWT ($0.54)

(4) Price change per gallon ($0.0464)

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

(5) Price change per half gallon ($0.0232)

Price change per quart ($0.0116)

Price change per pint ($0.0058)

Price change per 12-oz pg. ($0.0044)

Price change per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) ($0.0036)

Price change per half pint ($0.0029)

(6) Price adjustment per gallon ($0.05)

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: Dec. 3, 2017
No. 11-372.

#### Steven H. Wodka, Petitioner v. Causeway Capital Management LLC, et al.

565 U.S. 1060, 132 S. Ct. 769,

181 L. Ed. 2d 486,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8643.

November 28, 2011.

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

Same case below, 433 Fed. Appx. 563.
H. R. 4659

One Hundred Ninth Congress

of the

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and six 

An Act 

To amend the USA PATRIOT ACT to extend the sunset of certain provisions 

of such Act.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE USA 

PATRIOT ACT. 

Section 224(a) of the Uniting and Strengthening America by 

Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct 

Terrorism (USA PATRIOT ACT) Act of 2001 (Public Law 107–

56; 115 Stat. 295) is amended by striking ‘‘February 3, 2006’’ 

and inserting ‘‘March 10, 2006’’.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
No. 11-7191.

#### Samuel McNeil, Petitioner v. Home Budget Loans, et al.

565 U.S. 1126, 132 S. Ct. 1033,

181 L. Ed. 2d 761,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 142.

January 9, 2012.

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