text:
41055-9 - II - Heidi Downey, Appellant V. Pierce County, Respondent File Date 11/29/2011
PUBLISHED IN PART. DO NOT CITE UNPUBLISHED PORTION. SEE RAP GR 14.1(a).
Court of Appeals Division II
State of Washington
Opinion Information Sheet
Docket Number: 41055-9
Title of Case: Heidi Downey, Appellant V. Pierce County, Respondent
File Date: 11/29/2011
SOURCE OF APPEAL
Appeal from Pierce County Superior Court
Docket No: 10-2-07721-4
Judgment or order under review
Judge signing: Honorable John Russell Hickman
Authored by Jill M Johanson
Concurring: David H. Armstrong
Marywave Van Deren
COUNSEL OF RECORD
Counsel for Appellant(s)
Adam Phillip Karp
Animal Law Offices
114 W Magnolia St Ste 425
Bellingham, WA, 98225-4354
Counsel for Respondent(s)
Cort O'connor
Pierce County Prosecutor's Office
955 Tacoma Ave S Ste 301
Tacoma, WA, 98402-2160
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
DIVISION  II
HEIDI I. DOWNEY, individually and ex rel. all                    No.  41055-9-II
similarly situated TAXPAYERS of Washington
State and Pierce County,
Appellants,
PUBLISHED IN PART
PIERCE     COUNTY; PIERCE COUNTY                                   OPINION
AUDITOR?S OFFICE; PEIRCE COUNTY
OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER;
and PIERCE COUNTY ANIMAL SERVICES
Respondents.
Johanson, J. ? Heidi I. Downey appeals  a  summary judgment order  (1)  affirming a
hearing examiner?s decision finding that her dog is a dangerous animal under Pierce County Code
(PCC) 6.07.015,1 and (2) dismissing her Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act (UDJA)2/taxpayers?
derivative action3 challenging Pierce County?s dangerous animal declaration (DAD) proceedings.
1 Former PCC 6.07.015 (2008) may have applied to Downey?s case.  The County amended this
ordinance in 2009, but the amendments do not change anything related to the issues before us.
Accordingly, we cite to the 2009 version of the ordinance throughout this opinion.
2 Ch. 7.24 RCW.
3 ?A taxpayers? derivative suit is an action brought by a taxpayer on behalf of himself or herself
and as representative of a class of similarly situated taxpayers to seek relief from illegal or
unauthorized acts of public officials.? Washington Pub. Trust Advocates v. City of Spokane, 117
Wn. App. 178, 181, 69 P.3d 351 (2003) (citing 74 Am. Jur. 2d Taxpayers? Actions § 1 (2001)
No. 41055-9-II
In regard to her UDJA/taxpayers? derivative  claims, she  argues that Pierce County?s DAD
process is facially unconstitutional because (1) it requires the person challenging a DAD to pay a
fee  to obtain an evidentiary hearing and  further  review, (2)  it does not provide an adequate
standard of proof, and (3) it does not allow for subpoena power at the evidentiary hearing.4  We
agree that charging a fee to obtain adversarial/evidentiary review of a DAD violates due process
and that Pierce County?s DAD ordinance does not establish an adequate standard of proof.  But
we hold that Downey has failed to show that the trial court erred in dismissing her other
UDJA/taxpayers? derivative claim challenging the lack of subpoena power at the auditor?s hearing
level of review.
As to Downey?s arguments related to this specific DAD, which we address in the
unpublished portion of this opinion, we hold that, under the appropriate standard of proof, the
evidence was insufficient to support the finding that Downey?s dog attacked her neighbor?s dog
without provocation, and we reverse the DAD with prejudice.
(citing State ex rel. Conrad v. Langer, 68 N.D. 167, 277 N.W. 504, 508 (1937))).  Taxpayers?
derivative suits are recognized at common law and by the Washington courts.  Washington Pub.
Trust Advocates, 117 Wn. App. at 182 (citing Crampton v. Zabriskie, 101 U.S. 601, 609, 25 L.
Ed. 1070 (1879); Robinson v. City of Seattle, 102 Wn. App. 795, 804-05, 10 P.3d 452 (2000)).
On appeal, the parties do not dispute any UDJA/ taxpayers? derivative standing issues.
4 Although Downey mentions a facial ?lack of probable cause? issue in her issue statements, she
addresses  ?probable cause? only in relation to her particular DAD and does not present any
argument related to this issue in the section of her brief relating to her facial constitutional
challenges.  Br. of Appellant at 18.  Accordingly, we do not address whether the animal control
officer is required to prove probable cause to a neutral magistrate before issuing a DAD as part of
Downey?s UDJA/taxpayers? derivative action.
Dangerous Dog Declaration and Auditor?s Designee Review
On April 7, 2009, Downey?s Great Pyrenees-cross dog Blizzard allegedly ?grabbed? Tina
Steiner?s seven pound, Pomeranian Kayla; injuring her so severely that she had to be euthanized.
Clerk?s Papers (CP) at 80.  More than four months later, after initially being unable to identify
Blizzard based on Steiner?s description of the dog that had attacked Kayla, Pierce County Animal
Control Officer Jody Page declared Blizzard a ?dangerous animal? and issued a DAD.     AR (Apr.
15, 2010) at 29 (capitalization omitted).  The DAD form advised Downey that she could appeal
the DAD to the auditor or auditor?s designee (auditor) by filing a written request and paying a
$250 ?review fee.?5  Administrative Record (AR) (Apr. 15, 2010) at 29.
Paying the $250 review fee required under PCC 6.07.015(E)(1), Downey sought review
of the DAD before the auditor.  The auditor held an informal, unrecorded hearing on the matter.
In an amended administrative review decision,6 the auditor upheld the DAD, finding that Blizzard
5 The notice also advised Downey that, instead of appealing, she could either (1) relinquish
Blizzard; or (2) purchase a $500 dangerous animal permit, tattoo or microchip Blizzard for
identification purposes, and otherwise comply with chapter 6.07 PCC?s dangerous animal
requirements.  In addition, the notice advised Downey that during the appeal process, Blizzard
could not be outside a ?proper enclosure? unless he was securely leashed or chained, humanely
muzzled, and under physical restraint of a responsible person.  AR (Apr. 15, 2010) at 29
(capitalization omitted).  It further advised her that if she violated these conditions, the County
could seize Blizzard.
6 Throughout this part of the review process, the County erroneously referred to the matter as a
review of a ?Potentially Dangerous Animal Declaration? (PDAD), rather than a review of a DAD.
See AR (Apr. 15, 2010) at 57, 61.  In fact, the auditor?s original administrative review decision
purported to uphold a PDAD and contained findings supporting that decision.  The auditor later
filed an amended decision correcting this error and upholding the DAD?the amended decision
also contained a new factual finding supporting the auditor?s new DAD conclusion.  In this
appeal, Downey raises several issues related to this apparent misidentification of the DAD as a
had  ?[i]nflicted severe injury on or kill[ed] an animal without provocation while the animal
inflicting the injury [was] off the property where its owner resides.? AR (Apr. 15, 2010) at 70.
Hearing Examiner Appeal
Paying a required  $500 appellate review fee, Downey  then  ?appealed? the  auditor?s
decision to a hearing examiner.  The hearing examiner reviewed the DAD de novo, considered the
materials that the auditor had before him, and heard additional live testimony.  But because there
was no recording or transcription of the  auditor?s hearing, the hearing  examiner could not
consider any testimony offered at the auditor?s hearing.
Steiner was the only person who testified about the attack on Kayla.  She testified that on
the morning of the incident, she had turned Kayla loose to allow her to urinate after first looking
around and not ?see[ing] anything? in the immediate area.  CP at 80.  Steiner then turned her back
to Kayla to put one of her other dogs back into the dog pen.  CP at 80.  While her back was
turned, Steiner heard  ?something,? she was not sure if it was Kayla  ?barking or a yip, but
something.?  CP at 80-81.  When she turned around, she saw that Downey?s ?dog had grabbed
[Kayla] by the stomach and was running with [her].? CP at 80.  Steiner ran after the dogs yelling,
?Kayla,? and the other dog dropped Kayla. CP at 80.
Steiner was unsure where the other dog had come from, but she believed that the attack
happened next to her carport.  Steiner also indicated on a drawing of the surrounding properties
that the attack took place well away from Downey?s property, either on or close to an access
PDAD and to the auditor?s amended decision.  Because we reverse the DAD for insufficient
evidence, we do not reach these issues.
easement crossing another neighbor?s property.  Although Steiner gave varying descriptions over
time of the dog that had grabbed Kayla, at the hearing she identified Blizzard as the attacking dog.
Downey testified that her dogs were kenneled at the time of the attack.  She also testified
that Officer Page could not identify Blizzard from Steiner?s initial descriptions and that it was not
until several months after the incident that Officer Page felt she had a sufficient identification to
issue the DAD.  Downey argued that Steiner did not see the incident and that Steiner?s
identification of Blizzard was incorrect, as evidenced by her descriptions of the attacking dog
changing over time.
Officer Page also testified.  She confirmed that (1) she could not identify the attacking
animal based on Steiner?s initial descriptions; and (2) Steiner had reported that she did not see or
hear the incident start.
The hearing examiner upheld the DAD, finding that Blizzard had attacked Kayla without
provocation while off of Downey?s property.  Downey moved for reconsideration, challenging
several of the hearing examiner?s findings, including that the incident occurred off of Downey?s
property and that the attack  was unprovoked, and raising several other issues related to the
auditor?s review.  The hearing examiner issued written findings of fact and conclusions of law on
the motion for reconsideration, noting that he had reviewed the DAD ?de novo? and that he had
applied the ?preponderance of evidence? standard at the hearing.  AR (Apr. 15, 2010) at 2.  He
then denied the motion for reconsideration, reiterating his original findings of fact.
Superior Court Appeal and UDJA /Taxpayers? Derivative Action
On April 1, 2010, Downey filed an amended complaint in Pierce County Superior Court
appealing the DAD and bringing a UDJA/taxpayers? derivative action requesting injunctive and/or
declaratory relief.  In the first part of her complaint, Downey challenged the DAD on a variety of
grounds, including that the evidence was insufficient to support the DAD, and she petitioned for
return of her ??appeal? costs and attorney?s fees? related to the DAD proceedings.  CP at 18.  In
the second part of her complaint (the UDJA/ taxpayers? derivative action), she argued, inter alia,
that (1) PCC 6.07.015(E)(1)?s requirement that the person challenging a DAD pay a fee for an
initial  evidentiary hearing violated due process,   (2) PCC 6.07.015(E)(3)?s appellate fee
requirement violated due process, and (3) PCC 6.07.015(E)(2) and (3) violated due process by
failing to establish an adequate standard of proof and by not giving the auditor subpoena powers.
Downey moved for summary judgment on her UDJA/taxpayers? derivative claims.  The
superior court (1) denied Downey?s summary judgment motion,           (2) affirmed the hearing
examiner?s decision upholding  the DAD, (3) found that Downey had ?standing to seek the
declaratory and injunctive relief requested under taxpayer derivative suit doctrine and the UDJA,?
and (4) concluded that Downey had not demonstrated that the challenged provisions were
unconstitutional.  CP at 216.  The superior court dismissed all claims with prejudice.  CP at 217.
Downey appeals.
UDJA/Taxpayers? Derivative Claims
Downey     challenges the superior court?s summary judgment dismissal of her
UDJA/taxpayers? derivative claims.  She argues that the County?s dangerous animal ordinances
violate due process because (1) PCC 6.07.015(E)(1) requires the animal?s owner to pay a fee for
the first level of evidentiary review, which occurs during the auditor?s review; (2) PCC
6.07.015(E)(3) requires the animal?s owner to pay a fee for ?appellate? review before the hearing
examiner, which, in fact, appears to be a new evidentiary hearing rather than actual appellate
review; (3) PCC 6.07.015 fails to establish an adequate standard of proof; and (4) PCC 6.07.015
does  not provide for subpoena power at the first level of evidentiary review (the  auditor?s
review).  We hold that (1) because the ordinance requires payment before receiving an evidentiary
hearing and (2) the ordinance fails to establish an adequate standard of proof the ordinance
violates due process.
We review summary judgment orders by engaging in the same inquiry as the trial court.
Morin v. Harrell, 161 Wn.2d 226, 230, 164 P.3d 495 (2007).  Summary judgment is appropriate
when there is no genuine issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a
matter of law.  CR 56(c).  We consider all facts and reasonable inferences from them in the light
most favorable to the nonmoving party.  Biggers v. City of Bainbridge Island, 162 Wn.2d 683,
693, 169 P.3d 14 (2007).   Where, as here, only legal questions are before us, we review those
questions of law de novo.  Wash. State Farm Bureau Fed?n v. Gregoire, 162 Wn.2d 284, 300,
174 P.3d 1142 (2007) (citing Dep?t of Ecology v. Campbell & Gwinn, LLC, 146 Wn.2d 1, 9-10,
43 P.3d 4 (2002)).  Our review is limited to the facts and issues called to the trial court?s
attention, but we are ?entitled to consider relevant law in deciding an issue, regardless of whether
any party has cited it.?  Rahman v. State, 170 Wn.2d 810, 823-24, 246 P.3d 182 (2011) (citing
Ellis v. City of Seattle, 142 Wn.2d 450, 459 n.3, 13 P.3d 1065 (2000)).   We presume that
ordinances are constitutional, and Downey has the burden of overcoming this presumption by
establishing that the ordinance is unconstitutional beyond a reasonable doubt.  City of Pasco v.
Shaw, 161 Wn.2d 450, 458, 166 P.3d 1157 (2007), cert. denied, 552 U.S. 1275 (2008).
A.  Relevant Dangerous Animal and Administrative Review Provisions
PCC 6.07.015 establishes Pierce County?s DAD procedures, including the ?appeal? and
evidentiary review processes.  It provides, in relevant part:
A.     The animal control authority shall have the ability to declare an animal as
dangerous if there is probable cause to believe the animal falls within the
definitions set forth in Section 6.02.010 N.[7] The finding must be based
upon:
1.      The written complaint of a citizen who is willing to testify that the
animal has acted in a manner which causes it to fall within the
definition of Section 6.02.010 N; or
2.      Animal bite reports filed with the County or the County?s designee;
7 PCC 6.02.010(N) provides in part:
?Dangerous Animal? means any animal that when unprovoked:
2.      inflicts severe injury on or kills an animal without provocation while
the animal inflicting the injury is off the property where its owner resides, .
An animal shall not be declared dangerous if the threat, injury, or
damage was sustained by a person who, at the time, was committing a
willful trespass or other tort upon the property where the owner resides, or
was tormenting, abusing, or assaulting the animal, or was committing or
attempting to commit a crime.
3.      Actions of the animal witnessed by any animal control officer or law
enforcement officer; or
4.      Other substantial evidence.
E.     If the owner of the animal wishes to object to the declaration of a
dangerous animal:
1.      The owner may request a hearing before the County or the
County?s designee by submitting a written request and payment of a
$250.00 administrative review fee to the Auditor or the Auditor?s
designee within ten calendar days of receipt of the declaration, or
within ten calendar days of the publication of the declaration
pursuant to Section 6.07.015 C.3.
2.      If the Auditor or the Auditor?s designee finds that there is
insufficient evidence  to support the declaration, it shall be
rescinded, and the restrictions imposed thereby annulled.
3.      If the Auditor or the Auditor?s designee finds sufficient evidence to
support declaration, the owner may appeal such decision pursuant
to the Pierce County Hearing Examiner Code, Chapter 1.22 PCC;
provided that the appeal and the payment of an appeal fee of
$500.00  must be submitted to the Auditor or the Auditor?s
designee within ten calendar days after the finding of sufficient
evidence by the Auditor or the Auditor?s designee.
PCC 6.07.015 (emphasis added).
PCC 1.22.080(B)(2)(m), which applies to DADs through PCC 6.07.015(E)(3), gives
County  hearing  examiners authority to hear dangerous dog declaration ?appeals? after the
auditor?s review.  PCC 1.22.080(C) provides that the hearing examiner has authority ?to issue
subpoenas compelling the appearance of witnesses and production of documents.?       On review,
?[a] decision of the Administrative Official shall be entitled to substantial weight,? and the party
appealing the decision ?shall have the burden of presenting the evidence necessary to prove to the
Hearing Examiner that the Administrative Official?s decision was clearly erroneous.?        PCC
1.22.090(G).
B.  Fees
Downey  first  argues that PCC 6.07.015(E)(1) and (3)?s  requirements that the animal
owner pay fees to obtain review of a DAD by the auditor or the hearing examiner violate due
process.  We agree that due process requires access to an initial evidentiary hearing without
charge.8
1.  Auditor?s Review
Downey argues that charging a fee for the first review of a DAD violates due process.9
Examining this issue under the Mathews v. Eldridge10 framework,11 we agree.12
8 Because we agree that these provisions violate due process, we do not address Downey?s equal
protection arguments.
9 We note that this issue is properly considered under the UDJA because it involves a justiciable
controversy and, because reversal of the DAD does not provide for the return of Downey?s
administrative fees, Downey does not appear to have any other adequate remedy available to her
to recover these fees.  See Diversified Indus. Dev. Corp. v. Ripley, 82 Wn.2d 811, 814-15, 514
P.2d 137 (1973) (a justiciable controversy is one in which there is ?an actual, present and existing
dispute, or the mature seeds of one,? ?between parties having genuine and opposing interests?;
the controversy must involve direct and substantial interests, ?rather than potential, theoretical,
abstract or academic? interests; and ?a judicial determination of? the issues ?will be final and
conclusive.?); Reeder v. King County, 57 Wn.2d 563, 564, 358 P.2d 810 (1961) (?[P]laintiff is
not entitled to relief by way of a declaratory judgment if, otherwise, he has a completely adequate
remedy available to him.?).
10 424 U.S. 319, 332, 96 S. Ct. 893, 47 L. Ed. 2d 18 (1976).
11 Throughout these proceedings, neither party has addressed this issue under the Mathews v.
Eldridge framework, until we requested that they do so at oral argument.  But, as noted above,
we may ?consider relevant law in deciding an issue, regardless of whether any party has cited it.?
Rahman, 170 Wn.2d at 823-24 (citing Ellis, 142 Wn.2d at 459 n.3).
12 We note that Downey?s reliance on Boddie v. Connecticut, 401 U.S. 371, 382-83, 91 S. Ct.
780, 28 L. Ed. 2d 113 (1971); Putman v. Wenatchee Valley Medical Center, P.S., 166 Wn.2d
974, 216 P.3d 374 (2009); and Bullock v. Roberts, 84 Wn.2d 101, 524 P.2d 385 (1974), alone is
not sufficient to establish that the ordinance violates due process because those cases address
Procedural due process constrains governmental decision making that deprives individuals
of liberty or property interests within the meaning of the due process clause.  Mathews, 424 U.S.
at 332.  Due process is a flexible concept; the exact contours are determined by the particular
situation.  Mathews, 424 U.S. at 334.  But an essential principle of due process is the right to
notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard.  Cleveland Bd. of Educ. v. Loudermill, 470 U.S.
532, 542, 105 S. Ct. 1487, 84 L. Ed. 2d 494 (1985) (quoting Mullane v. Cent. Hanover Bank &
Trust Co., 339 U.S. 306, 313, 70 S. Ct. 652, 94 L. Ed. 865 (1950)).
A meaningful opportunity to be heard means ??at a meaningful time and in a meaningful
manner.??  Mathews, 424 U.S. at 333 (quoting Armstrong v. Manzo, 380 U.S. 545, 552, 85 S. Ct.
1187, 14 L. Ed. 2d 62 (1965)).  The United States Supreme Court ?consistently has held that
some form of hearing is required before an individual is finally deprived of a property interest.?
Mathews, 424 U.S. at 333 (emphasis added).  Determining what process is due in a given
situation requires consideration of (1) the private interest involved, (2) the risk that the current
procedures will erroneously deprive a party of that interest, and (3) the governmental interest
involved.  Mathews, 424 U.S. at 335; Spence v. Kaminski, 103 Wn. App. 325, 335, 12 P.3d 1030
whether the party initiating the proceeding can be required to pay a fee.  Similarly, her reliance on
Griffin v. Illinois, 351 U.S. 12, 76 S. Ct. 585, 100 L. Ed. 891 (1956), and State v. Cushing, 119
N.H. 147, 399 A.2d 297 (1979), is not persuasive because these cases are criminal cases involving
substantially more significant liberty interests that are not present here, and Griffin also involves
an appeal following a criminal conviction.  Additionally, her reference to Waicekauskas v. Burke,
336 Ill. App. 3d 436, 784 N.E.2d 280 (2002), is misplaced because that case addressed whether
an ordinance could penalize an individual for adjudicating a parking ticket, it does not involve a
filing fee requirement.  Finally, we do not consider the unpublished case Downey cites, Louisville
Kennel Club, Inc. v. Louisville/Jefferson County Metro Gov?t, No. 3:07-CV-230-S, 2009 WL
3210690 (W.D. Ky., Oct. 2, 2009), because she did not file a copy of this unpublished opinion
with her brief as GR 14.1(b) requires.
Here, the private interests involved include (1) pet owners? interests in keeping their pets,
which is arguably  more than a mere economic interest because pets are not fungible13; (2)
economic interests in not having to pay additional annual registration and inspection fees or
acquire significant liability insurance in order to retain his or her property; and (3) potentially
being subject to criminal liability for later violations   of  the County?s dangerous animal
restrictions.14 Although these private interests are not as significant as the liberty interest at stake
in a criminal action, they are not negligible.
Furthermore, the risk of erroneous deprivation of these interests under the current
procedures if a pet owner does not or cannot pay the administrative fee for auditor?s review is
high because, at that point, the pet owner has had no opportunity to be heard, and the DAD has
not been subject to any adversarial or evidentiary testing. Moreover, before the government can
deprive an individual of a property interest, it is required to afford her ?some form of hearing.?
Mathews, 424 U.S. at 333.
Finally, although the County?s interest in protecting the public from dangerous animals is
strong,  charging  an  administrative fee to  offset the expense of conducting       preliminary
administrative proceedings and, arguably, control the number of meritless challenges to DADs,
13 See Sherman v. Kissinger, 146 Wn. App. 855, 861, 195 P.3d 539 (2008) (dogs are, ?as a
matter of law,? ?characterized as personal property); Mansour v. King County, 131 Wn. App.
255, 267, 128 P.3d 1241 (2006) (?[A]lthough we have recognized the emotional importance of
pets to their families, legally they remain in many jurisdictions, including Washington, property.?).
14 See  PCC 6.07.045 (?Any person who violates a provision of Chapter 6.07 shall, upon
conviction thereof, be found guilty of a gross misdemeanor.?); see also RCW 16.08.100.
must be balanced against the risk that the fee could compromise the requirement that ?some form
of hearing is required before an individual is finally deprived of a property interest.?  Mathews,
424 U.S. at 333 (emphasis added).  Requiring the responding party to pay a fee to access any
review of a government initiated action could prevent many people from obtaining the review they
are legally entitled to before deprivation of a property interest.  See Ortwein v. Schwab, 410 U.S.
656, 659-60, 93 S. Ct. 1172, 35 L. Ed. 2d 572 (1973) (although requiring welfare recipients to
pay filing fees to obtain further review of a state welfare decision reducing their benefits did not
violate due process, the welfare recipients in question had already received predetermination
evidentiary hearings that were not conditioned on the payment of any fee; noting that these
preliminary hearings, ?not conditioned on payment of any fee,? were required under due process);
see also Boddie v. Connecticut, 401 U.S. 371, 382-83, 91 S. Ct. 780, 28 L. Ed. 2d 113 (1971)
(emphasizing that fees to initiate divorce proceedings could violate an indigent party?s due
process rights in part because ?[t]he requirement that [the parties] resort to the judicial process is
entirely a state-created matter.?).
Given the above factors, we hold that charging a fee to obtain an initial evidentiary review
of a DAD violates due process because (1) the DAD impacts a pet owner?s property and financial
interests, and (2) potentially subjects a pet owner to       future criminal sanctions.     PCC
6.017.015(E)(1)?s administrative  fee requirement is therefore unenforceable.  Accordingly, the
County is directed to reimburse Downey?s $250 administrative fee.
2.  Hearing Examiner?s Review
Downey further argues that PCC 6.07.015(E)(3)?s requirement that pet owners pay a
$500 fee to obtain hearing examiner review violates due process.  Again, we agree.
We recognize that there is no constitutional due process right to appeal civil cases
involving ?only property or financial interests.?  In re Dependency of Grove, 127 Wn.2d 221,
240, 897 P.2d 1252 (1995).  But we do not consider the auditor?s review here to be sufficient to
meet the Mathews v. Eldridge test because it is not a public review and there is no record of the
proceedings that will allow for appellate review.15 Because of the closed nature of the auditor?s
review and the failure to create a reviewable record, there is still a high risk of erroneous
deprivation inherent in the approach Pierce County?s ordinance takes.    The hearing examiner?s
?appeal?  is in fact   the first opportunity the pet owner has to engage in a true
evidentiary/adversarial hearing that is subject to full judicial review, thus lowering the risk of
erroneous depravation.  Accordingly, under the law as it existed at the time of these proceedings,
the hearing examiner?s review is the first evidentiary review and not a true appellate review, and
the $500 fee is inappropriate because it could preclude legitimate challenges to DADs.  See
Ortwein, 410 U.S. at 659-60; see also Boddie, 401 U.S. at 382-83.
Downey has established that PCC 6.07.015(E)(3)?s  filing fee requirement  violates due
15 The private interests involved and the government?s interest in covering costs of protecting the
public from dangerous animals and avoiding unnecessary litigation are identical to factors we
address above in the context of the auditor?s review.
C.  Inadequate Standard of Proof
Downey  next  argues that PCC 6.07.015(E) violates due process because it does not
provide adequate standards of proof.  Again, we agree.
PCC 6.07.015(A) allows an animal control officer to issue a DAD if the officer determines
that there is ?probable cause? to believe the animal is a dangerous animal as defined by the county
code.  If the animal?s owner challenges the DAD, PCC 6.02.015(E)(2) requires that the auditor
review the case to determine if there is ?sufficient evidence to support the declaration.?  PCC
6.02.015(E)(2) does not expressly require the auditor to determine de novo whether the County
has met any specific standard of proof at the contested hearing.16 Similarly, the hearing examiner
review under PCC 1.22.090(G) requires only that the hearing examiner evaluate the auditor?s
determination to determine if it was ?clearly erroneous,? it does not state what standard of proof
the auditor was required to apply.17
We find Mansour v. King County, 131 Wn. App. 255, 128 P.3d 1241 (2006), a case from
Division One of this court, instructive.  In Mansour, the King County code and board rules did
not  ?require a particular standard of proof in a [dangerous animal] removal proceeding.?
Mansour, 131 Wn. App. at 265.  Under King County?s code and rules, King County ?had to
prove by ?substantial evidence that it did not act arbitrarily or capriciously when it issued the??
16 We note that the County does not assert that any other rules or regulations supplement PCC
6.07.015(E) and further define the auditor?s responsibilities.
17 We recognize that here the auditor and hearing examiner, at the County?s prompting,
apparently applied the correct standard of proof and provided de novo review.  But we are not
addressing Downey?s as applied challenges?her UDJA /taxpayers? derivative action raises the
issue of whether the applicable codes themselves are facially unconstitutional.
removal order.  Mansour, 131 Wn. App. at 265. The Mansour court stated:
An adequate standard of proof is a mandatory [due process] safeguard.[18]
The standard of proof instructs the fact finder ??concerning the degree of
confidence our society thinks he should have in the correctness of the factual
conclusions for a particular type of adjudication.??[19] The nature and importance
of the interest subject to erroneous deprivation establishes the minimum standard
of proof required to satisfy due process.[20]  ?That standard allocates the risk of
error between the litigants: it is indicative of the relative importance attached to
the ultimate decision.  Thus, the more important the decision, the higher the
burden of proof.?[21]
Mansour, 131 Wn. App. at 264-65.  The court held that, at a minimum, the County should have
been held to ?[t]he lowest legal standard of proof,? the preponderance of the evidence standard.
Mansour, 131 Wn. App. at 266.  It further emphasized that ?[a]ppellate review cannot cure an
inadequate standard of proof.?  Mansour, 131 Wn. App. at 267.  We agree and adopt Mansour?s
reasoning.
Here, although the ordinance requires the animal control officer to have probable cause to
issue the DAD22, PCC 6.07.015(E)(3) requires only that the auditor determine if there was
?sufficient evidence to support the [DAD].? Sufficiency of the evidence is a review standard, it is
not a level of proof.  Arguably, the ordinance could require the auditor to determine if the animal
18 Citing Nguyen v. Dep?t of Health Med. Quality Assurance Comm?n, 144 Wn.2d 516, 524, 29
P.3d (2001), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 904 (2002).
19 Quoting Nguyen, 144 Wn.2d at 524 (quoting Addington v. Texas, 441 U.S. 418, 423, 99 S. Ct.
1804, 60 L. Ed. 2d 323 (1979)).
20 Citing Nguyen, 144 Wn.2d at 524.
21 Quoting Nguyen, 144 Wn.2d at 524.
22 PCC 6.07.015(A).
control officer had ?probable cause? to issue the DAD, but that is not clear from the ordinance?s
language.  Furthermore, to the extent the ordinance requires the auditor to determine if the animal
control officer?s probable cause determination was proper, probable cause is a preliminary
determination that may support an initial seizure or temporary detention, it is not an evidentiary
standard of proof that justifies the permanent deprivation of property, which is one of the possible
results of the DAD.  See Nationscapital Mortg. Corp. v. Dep?t of Fin. Insts., 133 Wn. App. 723,
762, 137 P.3d 78 (2006) (determinations of probable cause to bring enforcement actions involve
?different standards of proof? than determinations of whether violations actually occurred) (citing
Withrow v. Larkin, 421 U.S. 35, 95 S. Ct. 1456, 43 L. Ed. 2d 712 (1915)).  Similarly, PCC
1.22.090(G) requires only that the hearing  examiner evaluate the auditor?s determination to
determine if it was ?clearly erroneous,? it does not state what standard of proof the auditor was
required to apply.
Because we cannot discern  any  legally  significant difference between requiring a pet
owner to remove their otherwise properly licensed pet from the county or surrender the pet for
disposal, as was the case in Mansour,23 and imposing expensive and onerous conditions on pet
owners who wish to continue to keep a licensed pet within the county, as is the case here,24 we
adopt Mansour?s holding that the proper standard of proof to uphold DADs is the preponderance
23 Mansour, 131 Wn. App. at 266-67.
24 See PCC 6.07.025 (requiring that the owner of a dangerous animal acquire a permit costing
$500 per year and comply with a variety of additional restrictions (including obtaining $500,000
in liability insurance) and inspections?failure to obtain the permit or otherwise comply with this
ordinance allows the County to seize the animal and hold it for no more than five days before
destroying the animal).
of the evidence standard.  Accordingly, we hold that summary judgment in favor of the County on
this issue was inappropriate and that lack of an adequate evidentiary standard in PCC 6.07.015(A)
violates due process.25
D.  Subpoena Powers
Downey also argues the auditor?s lack of subpoena power violates due process.  This
assertion is speculative.
Although  PCC 6.07.015(E)(3) does not expressly state that the  auditor has subpoena
power, Downey does not direct us to any rules, ordinances, or authority establishing exactly what
powers the auditor has or whether the party challenging the DAD can resort to other judicial
entities to obtain subpoenas if needed.  Accordingly, Downey fails to overcome the presumption
that the County?s DAD ordinances are constitutional and her argument fails.      The trial court
properly dismissed this issue on summary judgment.26  See Shaw, 161 Wn.2d at 458-59.
A majority of the panel having determined that only the foregoing portion of this opinion will
be printed in the Washington Appellate Reports and that the remainder shall be filed for public record
in accordance with RCW 2.06.040, it is so ordered.
25 We do not remand this matter back for a rehearing because we hold in the unpublished portion
of this opinion that the evidence was insufficient to support the DAD.
26 Downey is correct that the Mansour court held that ?[d]ue process requires that a pet owner
contesting a removal order be able to subpoena witnesses and records.?  Mansour, 131 Wn. App.
at 270.  But in Mansour, the court was able to consider the board rules that applied to Mansour?s
hearing, and the board actually denied Mansour?s discovery and subpoena requests.  Mansour,
131 Wn. App. at 269.  Here, in contrast, Downey has not provided any information about the
rules that applied to the auditor?s hearing, nor has she alleged or shown that the auditor would
have denied any discovery or subpoena requests.
Insufficient Evidence
Downey also challenges the hearing examiner?s findings that (1) Blizzard acted without
provocation; and (2) the incident occurred while Blizzard was off of Downey?s property.27
Downey is correct that the record does not support a finding that Blizzard acted without
provocation.28
As a preliminary matter, we note that the hearing examiner, at the County?s prompting,
reviewed the auditor?s decision de novo, applying the preponderance of the evidence standard.
As we discuss above, this standard of proof was appropriate under Mansour, even though it was
not the standard of proof required under the Pierce County ordinances.  Because we hold above
that the Mansour standard of proof applies here, we review Downey?s sufficiency argument in
light of the standards the hearing examiner applied.
We review de novo a hearing examiner?s decision, not the superior court decision on
review.  HJS Dev., Inc. v. Pierce County ex rel., Dep?t of Planning & Land Servs., 148 Wn.2d
451, 483-84, 61 P.3d 1141 (2003).  The first question is whether substantial evidence supports
the hearing examiner?s findings of fact.  City of Univ. Place v. McGuire, 144 Wn.2d 640, 647, 30
P.3d 453 (2001).  ?Substantial evidence is evidence in sufficient quantum to persuade a fair-
27 Although, as the County points out, Downey has failed to properly identify challenged factual
findings on review in her assignments of error or issue statements as required under RAP 10.3, we
reach these issues because her argument clearly establishes that she is challenging these findings.
28 Because Downey succeeds on this sufficiency argument, we do not address any of her ?as
applied? constitutional challenges.  Benchmark Land Co. v. City of Battle Ground, 146 Wn.2d
685, 694, 49 P.3d 860 (2002) (?[I]t is a fundamental principle that [courts] will not reach a
constitutional issue if it can decide a case on other than constitutional grounds.?).
minded person of the truth of the declared premise.?  Holland v. Boeing Co., 90 Wn.2d 384, 390-
91, 583 P.2d 621 (1978).  We next review de novo whether the findings support the hearing
examiner?s conclusions of law.  City of Univ. Place, 144 Wn.2d at 652.  We treat any findings of
fact or conclusions of law the superior court made as surplusage.  Humbert/Birch Creek Constr.
v. Walla Walla County, 145 Wn. App. 185, 192, 185 P.3d 660 (2008).
Downey argues that the County did not carry its burden of establishing lack of
provocation because Steiner had her back turned when the incident started.  We agree.  At best,
Steiner testified that she turned her back on Kayla, heard Kayla bark or ?yip,? and then turned to
see Blizzard with Kayla in his mouth.  CP at 80.  Steiner did not see Blizzard approach Kayla and
did not observe any interaction between the two dogs before seeing Kayla in Blizzard?s mouth.
Because no one saw how the incident started, there was no evidence regarding whether Blizzard?s
apparent attack of Kayla was unprovoked, and the hearing examiner erred in finding that the
County had established lack of provocation by a preponderance of the evidence.29    Accordingly,
we reverse the DAD for insufficient evidence.
29 Downey also argues that because the evidence showed that the incident occurred on an
easement road that leads to her residence, the County failed to establish that it occurred ?while
the animal inflicting the injury is off the property where its owner resides.? PCC 6.02.010(N)(2);
see Br. of Appellant at 50.  She appears to argue that because the easement road provides the
only access to the residence, it should have been considered ?property where [Blizzard?s] owner
resides.? Br. of Appellant at 50.  Because we hold that the County failed to prove that Blizzard?s
actions were unprovoked, we do not address this argument.  We note, however, that an access
easement likely does not grant the party benefitting from the easement the right to ?reside? on that
Citing Dempere v. Nelson, 76 Wn. App. 403, 407, 886 P.2d 219 (1994), review denied,
126 Wn.2d 1015 (1995), abrogated on other grounds by Burnet v. Spokane Ambulance, 131
Wn.2d 484, 494, 933 P.2d 1036 (1997); and Weiss v. Bruno, 83 Wn.2d 911, 914, 523 P.2d 915
(1974), Downey requests attorney fees on appeal, arguing that she is entitled to attorney fees ?on
the equitable basis that they are conferring a substantial benefit to an ascertainable class (taxpayers
and dog owners), and protecting constitutional principles.? Br. of Appellant at 62-63.
?Washington courts follow the American rule in not awarding attorney fees as costs unless
authorized by contract, statute, or recognized equitable exception?      to the American rule.
Mansour, 131 Wn. App. at 273.  Downey does not cite any authority establishing that she is
entitled to attorney fees on equitable grounds for merely ?conferring a substantial benefit to an
ascertainable class.?30 Additionally, she does not meet the test for attorney fee awards under
Weiss because she has not challenged the expenditure of public funds.  See City of Seattle v.
McCready, 131 Wn.2d 266, 276-77, 931 P.2d 156 (1997); see also Mansour, 131 Wn. App. at
In summary, we hold that (1) PCC 6.07.015(E)(1) and (3)?s fee requirements violate due
process; (2) PCC 6.07.015(A) fails to state an adequate standard of review; and (3) sufficient
30 To the extent she is attempting to claim that she is entitled to attorney fees under the ?private
attorney general exception to the American rule,? our Supreme Court expressly rejected that
exception in Blue Sky Advocates v. State, 107 Wn.2d 112, 122, 727 P.2d 644 (1986).  See City of
Seattle v. McCready, 131 Wn.2d 266, 277, 931 P.2d 156 (1997).
evidence does not support  the DAD at issue here and it  is reversed.  Downey?s remaining
arguments fail or we do not reach them.  We also deny Downey?s request for attorney fees.
Johanson, J.
We concur:
Armstrong, P.J.
Van Deren, J.


text:
Q: How to drop rows in a df based on NaN values in specific columns not using column names but integer position for the subset? I have a dataframe with 9 columns (long cryptic column names) and ~1000 rows. I want to drop/delete merely the rows where the values in column 2 and 3 are NaN.
I know there is DataFrame.dropna(subset=[]) but I don't want to select the columns by label but by position.
Is there a way to do it? Renaming the columns is no option.
SOLUTION for me:
df.dropna(subset=df.columns[[2,3]], how='all')

EDIT:
This are some rows of my dataframe: (the important columns are Temp. and Event)
              Datum Zeit   Zeitzone  \
Anz.
926  2019-09-17 09:00:00  GMT+02:00
927  2019-09-17 10:00:00  GMT+02:00
928  2019-09-17 11:00:00  GMT+02:00
929  2019-09-17 12:00:00  GMT+02:00
930  2019-09-17 13:00:00  GMT+02:00
931  2019-09-17 13:10:32  GMT+02:00
932  2019-09-17 13:11:21  GMT+02:00
933  2019-09-17 13:11:41  GMT+02:00
934  2019-09-17 13:11:42  GMT+02:00
935  2019-09-17 13:11:53  GMT+02:00

      Temp., °C (LGR S/N: 20009596, SEN S/N: 20009596, LBL: 1m)  \
Anz.
926                                              12.401
927                                              13.942
928                                              15.760
929                                              15.569
930                                              15.187
931                                                 NaN
932                                                 NaN
933                                                 NaN
934                                                 NaN
935                                                 NaN

      Event, units (LGR S/N: 20009596, SEN S/N: 20009596, LBL: 0,2 mm Niederschlag)  \
Anz.
926                                                 NaN
927                                                 NaN
928                                                 NaN
929                                                 NaN
930                                                 NaN
931                                               163.0
932                                                 NaN
933                                                 NaN
934                                                 NaN
935                                               163.0

     Notiz Koppler verbunden (LGR S/N: 20009596)  \
Anz.
926                                          NaN
927                                          NaN
928                                          NaN
929                                          NaN
930                                          NaN
931                                          NaN
932                                Protokolliert
933                                          NaN
934                                Protokolliert
935                                          NaN

     Koppler abgetrennt (LGR S/N: 20009596)  \
Anz.
926                                     NaN
927                                     NaN
928                                     NaN
929                                     NaN
930                                     NaN
931                                     NaN
932                                     NaN
933                           Protokolliert
934                                     NaN
935                                     NaN

     Host verbunden (LGR S/N: 20009596) Angehalten (LGR S/N: 20009596)  \
Anz.
926                                 NaN                            NaN
927                                 NaN                            NaN
928                                 NaN                            NaN
929                                 NaN                            NaN
930                                 NaN                            NaN
931                                 NaN                            NaN
932                                 NaN                            NaN
933                                 NaN                            NaN
934                       Protokolliert                            NaN
935                                 NaN                  Protokolliert

     Dateiende (LGR S/N: 20009596)
Anz.
926                            NaN
927                            NaN
928                            NaN
929                            NaN
930                            NaN
931                            NaN
932                            NaN
933                            NaN
934                            NaN
935                  Protokolliert

And this is how I want it to be (I left the index how it was to make it more visible):
              Datum Zeit   Zeitzone  \
Anz.
926  2019-09-17 09:00:00  GMT+02:00
927  2019-09-17 10:00:00  GMT+02:00
928  2019-09-17 11:00:00  GMT+02:00
929  2019-09-17 12:00:00  GMT+02:00
930  2019-09-17 13:00:00  GMT+02:00
931  2019-09-17 13:10:32  GMT+02:00
935  2019-09-17 13:11:53  GMT+02:00

      Temp., °C (LGR S/N: 20009596, SEN S/N: 20009596, LBL: 1m)  \
Anz.
926                                              12.401
927                                              13.942
928                                              15.760
929                                              15.569
930                                              15.187
931                                                 NaN
935                                                 NaN

      Event, units (LGR S/N: 20009596, SEN S/N: 20009596, LBL: 0,2 mm Niederschlag)  \
Anz.
926                                                 NaN
927                                                 NaN
928                                                 NaN
929                                                 NaN
930                                                 NaN
931                                               163.0
935                                               163.0

     Notiz Koppler verbunden (LGR S/N: 20009596)  \
Anz.
926                                          NaN
927                                          NaN
928                                          NaN
929                                          NaN
930                                          NaN
931                                          NaN
935                                          NaN

     Koppler abgetrennt (LGR S/N: 20009596)  \
Anz.
926                                     NaN
927                                     NaN
928                                     NaN
929                                     NaN
930                                     NaN
931                                     NaN
935                                     NaN

     Host verbunden (LGR S/N: 20009596) Angehalten (LGR S/N: 20009596)  \
Anz.
926                                 NaN                            NaN
927                                 NaN                            NaN
928                                 NaN                            NaN
929                                 NaN                            NaN
930                                 NaN                            NaN
931                                 NaN                            NaN
935                                 NaN                  Protokolliert

     Dateiende (LGR S/N: 20009596)
Anz.
926                            NaN
927                            NaN
928                            NaN
929                            NaN
930                            NaN
931                            NaN
935                  Protokolliert

A: Instead of deleting the rows that you do not want, try keeping those that you want:
df[df.iloc[:,[2,3]].notnull().all(axis=1)]

But what is wrong with getting the column names by index?
df.dropna(subset=df.columns[[2,3]])

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


68Ga-PSMA PET demonstrates promise in the assessment of prostate cancer (PC) patients with biochemical recurrence (BCR) following radical prostatectomy (RP). Imaging was performed on 34 patients with BCR, using both 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT and 68Ga-PSMA PET/MRI. Studies that were performed on the same day between March 2017 and March 2018 were included, and retrospectively reviewed. Patients underwent dual-imaging/single-injection protocol within 3 hours of injection. All images were interpreted by at least one experienced nuclear medicine physician, and two experienced radiologists. Conflicting outcomes were identified and resolved by consensus between the reviewing physicians. Imaging concordance was found in 91% (31/34) of patients. Ultimately, PET/MRI was not superior to PET/CT, as it resulted in significant "halo artifacts" surrounding the bladder in some cases, due to its strong organ background ratios. As a consequence, more sophisticated scatter algorithms should be implemented in the future.
PC is one of the most frequently diagnosed cancers, and a leading cause of cancer-related death among men worldwide [1,2]. Approximately 15-30% of men treated with RP will develop BCR, as defined by the EAU-ESTRO-SIOG guidelines . Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) is uniquely overexpressed in primary tumors and many metastatic lesions of the prostate, with minimal expression in any other tissue . This characteristic makes it an ideal target for imaging in the setting of BCR. 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT (positron emission tomography/computed tomography) is a novel imaging modality, which has shown great potential in the staging of PC patients [5-7]. The tracer (68Ga-PSMA-HBED-CC) is characterized by a very high lesion-to-background signal ratio .
Retrospective trials demonstrate superior detection rates and higher accuracy for the localization of BCR when compared with morphologic or choline PET/CT [6,9-11]. The recent introduction of PET/MRI (PET/magnetic resonance imaging) offers the possibility to combine molecular information of PET with both the high soft-tissue contrast and the functional information of MRI. The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of 68Ga-PSMA PET/MRI compared to 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT in the restaging of BCR of PC.
All patients with prior RP and subsequent BCR, scheduled for restaging at the Department of Nuclear Medicine of the Bundeswehr Central Hospital, Koblenz, between March 2017 and March 2018 were eligible for this study and gave written informed consent. BCR was defined by the EAU-ESTRO-SIOG guidelines . Patients with contraindications to MRI were excluded. A total of 34 patients were included and received both imaging modalities, in a sequential fashion, using a single-injection protocol. Only a single PET/CT and PET/MRI was performed per patient. The PET/CT images were obtained using the Biograph64 TruePoint (True V HD) PET / CT scanner (Siemens, Erlangen, Germany). Whole body images (pelvis to head) were taken 60 minutes after injection of 68Ga-PSMA (mean 176 MBq, between 157-268 MBq, depending on body weight).
Two hours following injection of the radiotracer, PET/MRI was then performed on a fully integrated, whole-body hybrid PET/MRI system (Biograph mMR, 3-Tesla hybrid system, Siemens, Erlangen, Germany).
Disease recurrence was defined as a PSMA-avid lesion, corresponding to a morphological substrate on CT or MRI imaging.
All images were interpreted by at least one experienced nuclear medicine physician, and two experienced radiologists. When conflicting interpretations were identified, they were resolved by panel discussion and consensus between all of the reviewing physicians.
During the study period, 95 patients with BCR underwent restaging imaging at our institution. Of these, 24 were excluded due to MRI contraindications or refusal by the patient to have the second scan. In 37 patients the PET/MRI could not be performed after the PET/CT due to time constraints or accessibility of the PET/MRI scanner. Ultimately, a total of 34 patients met inclusion criteria and underwent both PET/CT and PET/MRI per the study protocol and were analyzed. The mean age was 67.6 (range 46-86) and the mean PSA was 3.76 ng/dl (range 6.01-16.68). Detection of local and/or distant recurrence was found in 25 of patients. Of these, 13 were local, 4 were distant, and 8 were both. Study concordance between PET/MRI and PET/CT was observed in 31 of 34 patients (91%). In these cases, there were no discrepancies of even a single lesion (local recurrence, lymph node, distant metastasis).
In 2 cases there were metabolically active PC foci on PET/CT that were indistinguishable on PET/MRI; in fact, in one case the prostate bed could not be assessed at all on the PET/MRI. In another, a clearly PSMA avid lymph node on PET/CT could not be verified in PET/MRI due to "halo artifact", a typical artifact formation in PET/MRI, which interferes with the detection of malignant lesions .
Conversely, in one case PET/MRI demonstrated 4 avid lymph nodes, whereas PET/CT only identified 2 lymph node-metastases.
Nine patients with BCR had a negative study with both imaging devices. The PSA level tended to be a predictor of positivity, which has been demonstrated previously.
Detection of early recurrent prostate cancer poses several challenges. Many different modalities are being evaluated, however, few studies provide a direct comparison of the diagnostic capability between hybrid 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT with 68Ga-PSMA PET/MRI in a well-defined population of biochemical recurrent PC. The Department of Nuclear Medicine of the Bundeswehr Central Hospital, Koblenz has carried out nearly 200 examinations with the PSMA PET/CT since July 2015, making it an ideal center to perform a comparative study. After first establishing a diagnostic protocol for PET/MRI, we then performed sequential imaging with PET/CT followed by PET/MRI on 34 patients with BCR. Surprisingly, we found no significant difference in diagnostic performance for local recurrence and/or lymph node findings or distant metastases.
In general, PET/MRI proved not to be superior to PET/CT, which was clearly attributed to halo artifacts surrounding the bladder, a finding that has been reported previously . The bladder had a strong organ-to-background uptake ratio, which is thought to obscure potential nearby lesion. Prompt gamma decay has been discussed as co-factor for these artifacts . As a consequence, more sophisticated scatter algorithms have to be implemented in the/our clinical routine in the future .
The PET-signal itself is the key factor to detect location of recurrence or metastases by PSMA PET in patients with prostate cancer, independent of the morphological device (CT or MRI).
Stewart BW, Wild CP (2014) World cancer report. International Agency for Research on cancer. Lyon, France.
Ferlay JS, Ervik M, Dikskit R (2013) GLOBOCAN, Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide; IARC Cancer Base No. 11 Lyon, France.
©2018 Hoffmann MA. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.


All kidding aside, I could almost understand not patching or updating their Apache software. Patching and keeping software up-to-date is a task that many organizations don't do a great job of even though there are some great solutions out there. But putting in a firewall?
The most recent data I've seen says firewalls are installed in well over 95% of network installations. With even home cable and DSL routers having firewall software installed, I always assumed the small fraction of networks without firewalls had to be those small installs tucked back in some out-of-the-way corner. To think that a company the size of Sony would forego firewalls is mind boggling!
So, why would Sony not put a firewall in place? I would think it is a management issue (I know I am a bit obsessed with the "security needs management" theme lately). But, the same people who didn't comment for almost a week after this incident, who have repeated incidents and breaches, who installed a root kit on their CDs a while back, just don't seem to get the whole internet security/privacy thing.
Here is the lesson for the rest of us: Sony is going to pay dearly for this, I'm afraid. This could be a case that the authorities and courts use as an example. A defendant with deep pockets, sensitive financial data lost and it appears a negligent attitude and track record. I don't think anyone is going to want to be the next Sony.
Go one step further though. Just putting a firewall in place is not enough. You need firewall analysis and firewall management if your investment in a firewall is going to be worthwhile. Just don't stop at the firewall. Remember, security needs management!


text:
118178 Rinckart è un asteroide della fascia principale. Scoperto nel 1992, presenta un'orbita caratterizzata da un semiasse maggiore pari a 2,5918739 UA e da un'eccentricità di 0,2376297, inclinata di 9,08344° rispetto all'eclittica.

Collegamenti esterni

Corpi celesti scoperti nel 1992
Rinckart

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


[ACCESS RESTRICTED TO THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI AT AUTHOR'S REQUEST.] This study examined the associations between adults' experiences with violence, spousal and non-marital perceived emotional support, and physical and mental health using hierarchical multiple regression. A sample of 3,612 adults from the Americans' Changing Lives study, 641 of whom had been attacked or assaulted at least once in their lives, was studied. Main effects, mediation, and moderation (i.e., stress-buffering) models with perceived emotional support as the potential mediator and moderator for the association between violence and health were evaluated. Findings demonstrated that the main effects model explained a significant amount of variance in infrequent depressive symptoms, life satisfaction, and self-rated health outcomes in the full sample, and in infrequent depressive symptoms, life satisfaction, and the absence of chronic conditions outcomes for violence survivors. However, none of the full mediation models explained a significant amount of variance in the health outcomes. For the moderation model, non-marital perceived emotional support moderated the association between the recency of an attack/assault using the self-rated health and functional health indicators for violence survivors, dependent on the time since the attack/assault. These findings suggest that the recency of an attack and source of support are critical to understanding the effect of violence on health, with implications for practitioners working with violence survivors.


President Trump's tweet of an altered video showing him tackling CNN at a wrestling match is his most retweeted post yet.
The Sunday post has been retweeted more than 340,000 times.
A Twitter spokesman told The Associated Press the tweet targeting CNN was the president's most shared post.
In the video, which was taken from Trump's appearance at WWE's Wrestlemania in 2007, Trump is seen tackling and then pummeling a man with CNN's logo superimposed over his face.
Trump faced backlash for his tweet going after CNN, with some journalists and lawmakers saying the president appeared to be promoting violence against the media.
CNN responded to the tweet Sunday, calling it a "sad day" when the president encourages violence against reporters.
"Instead of preparing for his overseas trip, his first meeting with Vladimir Putin, dealing with North Korea and working on his healthcare bill, he is instead involved in juvenile behavior far below the dignity of his office. We will keep doing our jobs. He should start doing his," the network said in a statement.
Trump in recent weeks has continued to escalate his attacks on the media, specifically going after CNN, which he has derided as "fake news."


New Century US, in cooperation with the Virginia Economic Development Council, is participating in a trade mission to Indonesia and The Philippines.
The trade mission will introduce New Century capabilities to firms who do business with the police and military markets in those nations.
"New Century US had a great experience in 2015 working directly with a non-US government client, and we are hoping to replicate that in South East Asia," said Matthew Braun, Director of Business Development. "We have also been very pleased and impressed with the support we receive from the State of Virginia to expand our international marketing efforts through the VALET Program."
New Century plans to meet with a variety of commercial and government officials during the trade mission, which takes place from October 24th through the 28th, 2016.


Honeybees, The Breaks' sophomore album, is a groovy blend of rock n' roll, blues, and folk. The band has built on their previous sounds with the additions of harmonies, keys, and banjo. This project includes a mix of off-the-floor tracking completed at Trench Recordings and collaborations with fellow musicians 'The Broadview Band' at The Townhouse in Toronto, recorded over the course of winter 2013.


Survivor Series is finally upon us and after Sunday we can put this show on show violence nonsense behind us. Not that WWE hasn't kept us on our toes, with the WWE title changing hands last week. Tonight, though, RAW still has yet to answer the blue brand for invading their shows several times over the past few weeks. And could there be another title change in store?
Shane is rallying the troops backstage to start the show in Charlotte, North Carolina. Shane wants everyone to get along and be prepared for Sunday. The New Day accepts the Shield's challenge at Survivor Series.
Daniel Bryan heads to the ring, looking no worse for wear after getting attacked by Kane on RAW two weeks ago. Daniel says there is a chance of a RAW attack tonight, but they will show on Sunday that they are the better show. If you were living under rock this week, Bryan reminds us that John Cena is on Team Smackdown.
Bryan then introduces the new WWE Champion AJ Styles. Daniel does his best Paul Heyman to talk up AJ and calls Brock Lesnar a quitter. Styles wants to speak for himself, telling the crowd that he will find a way at Survivor Series. AJ promises to show why Smackdown is the "A" show.
After the commercial break, AJ Styles runs into Jinder Mahal backstage, who tells the champ he is coming for the WWE title.
Sin Cara has been a thorn in Corbin's side all month, but with the title on the line Baron is able to step up. Corbin dodges a swanton bomb. Sin Cara lands on his feet, but walks right into the End of Days.
Shane tells Daniel it's great to have him back and have his support. Daniel wants to have a talk with Shane after Sunday about the raid on RAW.
Natalya kicks out of an early cover. The champ rolls to the floor, but Flair follows her, slamming her into the security barrier. Charlotte keeps the pressure on as we go to commercial.
After the break, Flair is trapped in a surfboard. She breaks free and chops away at Natalya, who shuts her down with a discuss clothesline. The champs stomps on Flair's neck, but then runs into a spear. Natalya kicks out of the pin. The champ blocks the figure four by kicking Charlotte into the corner. Flair responds with a suplex, but the champ rolls out of the ring. Charlotte catches he with a boot from the apron. Flair climbs the security barrier, but Nattie catches her and drives her back first in the ring post. The champ drags the challenger into the ring and locks in a Sharp Shooter. Charlotte is able to crawl to the ropes and break the hold.
Charlotte dumps Nattie out of the ring. The champ runs back in, but catches a big boot. Flair locks in the figure four and bridges into the figure eight. Natalya taps out.
Renee Young asks the new champ how the win feels. Charlotte says she will make Alexa Bliss bow down to the Queen. Charlotte then dedicates this win to her dad who is at home. She makes her way up the ramp, when her dad's music hits. Ric walks out on stage and the two embrace.
The Bludgeon Brothers are still a thing? Ugh. Looks like they are set to debut next week.
Jimmy lays into Gable in the corner with chops. Gable hits a dragon screw over the middle rope and follows up by beating on that knee. Gable misses a moonsault, lands on his feet, but Jimmy kicks him in the knee. Jimmy follows with a Samoan drop. Gable cuts Jimmy off as he sets up for a suicide dive. Jey talks trash to Chad on the outside, but Gable knocks him off the apron. He turns around into a super kick from Jimmy, who covers and gets the win.
Back in the locker room, Sami Zayn is feeling left out since he won't be on Survivor Series. Owens says it's all Shane's fault and they should be taking on the Shield. Owens says they are the only team that matters.
Before the match, The New Day cut a promo on the Shield. Kofi says he knows he can trust Big E and Xavier 100%, while the Shield have all ready broken up once.
The match is a back and forth affair, but after an early commercial break, the Shield hits the arena. They march down to the ring, as Sami and Owens join the New Day in the ring. Reigns, Ambrose and Rollins surround the ring, as KO and Zayn bail. The Shield attacks, laying the wood to New Day. The Usos run in to lend a hand, but then Seamus and Cesaro come out of the crowd.
Backstage, the RAW women storm into the Smackdown locker room attacking the women of the blue brand. Alexa Bliss decks Charlotte, laying her out.
Back in the ring, the rest of the RAW roster streams into the ring. Shane leads the charge out of the back and there is an all out brawl in the ring. Angle walks out on stage and brings out his heavy hitter, Braun Strowman. The Monster among Men enters the ring and decimates the Smackdown roster. Shane throws some punches, but Braun lays him out with a clothesline. The Shield pick up Shane making sure that he sees the carnage. They hold him so Kurt Angle can get in his face, telling him Sunday with be worse. The Shield hits the Cerberus power bomb on Shane. Angle gets in on the action, hitting Shane with an Angle Slam. The Shield finishes McMahon off with one more Cerberus power bomb to end the show.


text:
Review (magazine)
Review (band)
Pull Tiger Tail
Animator (disambiguation)
A review is an evaluation of a publication, service, or company such as a movie (a movie review), video game (video game review), musical composition (music review of a composition or recording), book (book review); a piece of hardware like a car, home appliance, or computer; or an event or performance, such as a live music concert, play, musical theater show, dance show, or art exhibition. In addition to a critical evaluation, the review's author may assign the work a rating to indicate its relative merit. More loosely, an author may review current events, trends, or items in the news. A compilation of reviews may itself be called a review. The New York Review of Books, for instance, is a collection of essays on literature, culture, and current affairs. National Review, founded by William F. Buckley, Jr., is an influential conservative magazine, and Monthly Review is a long-running socialist periodical.
In academia
A peer review is the process by which scholars or scientists assess the work of their colleagues that has been submitted for publication in the scientific or scholarly literature.
This page contains text from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia -	https://wn.com/Review
Review is an American magazine covering national and international economic issues. It is published by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
This page contains text from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia -	https://wn.com/Review_(magazine)
Review (Bulgarian: Ревю) is a Bulgarian new wave band that spawned in the late 1980s and has been one of the most influential acts in the history of Bulgarian rock music. It was founded by Vasil Giurov, Kiril Manchev, Boicho Karaboichev and Milena Slavova in 1985 in Sofia. Their first album was called Reviu-ІV.88-V.89 and includes 10 tracks. The band split up in 1990 and reformed in 2001. They released the album 10 in 2002. In 2003 Милена quit the band and left for England.
This page contains text from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia -	https://wn.com/Review_(band)
An animator is an artist who creates multiple images, known as frames, which give an illusion of movement called animation when displayed in rapid sequence. Animators can work in a variety of fields including film, television, and video games. Animation is closely related to filmmaking and like filmmaking is extremely labor-intensive, which means that most significant works require the collaboration of several animators. The methods of creating the images or frames for an animation piece depends on the animators' artistic styles and their field.
Other artists who contribute to animated cartoons, but who are not animators, include layout artists (who design the backgrounds, lighting, and camera angles), storyboard artists (who draw panels of the action from the script), and background artists (who paint the "scenery"). Animated films share some film crew positions with regular live action films, such as director, producer, sound engineer, and editor, but differ radically in that for most of the history of animation, they did not need most of the crew positions seen on a physical set.
This page contains text from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia -	https://wn.com/Animator
Pull Tiger Tail (often abbreviated to PTT) were an indie rock band based in London and originating from Stratford-upon-Avon and Edinburgh; they formed in 2006 while attending Goldsmiths College. All three members had grown up together in Stratford-upon-Avon where they played in indie-rock band Antihero, releasing two singles and winning the support of John Peel on Radio 1. The 3 friends shared a flat together when moving to London to attend Goldsmiths.
Pull Tiger Tail played their debut gig at London's Tatty Bogle club on 2 February 2006.
The band released their debut single, "Animator", on Young and Lost Club Records on 25 September 2006. Copies were limited to 1000, with 500 7"s, each hand customised by the band, and 500 CDs available.
Their final single with B-Unique was "Hurricanes", released on 11 June 2007. An iTunes error prevented the single hitting the Top 40. Because of this, the band was dropped. However, B-Unique retained the band's album, resulting in a lengthy legal battle to return the album to Pull Tiger Tail.
This page contains text from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia -	https://wn.com/Pull_Tiger_Tail
An animator is an artist who creates multiple images that give an illusion of movement when displayed in rapid sequence.
Animator may also refer to:
Animator.ru, a Russian website
"Animator" (song), a 2006 indie rock song
Autodesk Animator, a 2D animation and painting program
ANIMATOR, an animated film festival
This page contains text from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia -	https://wn.com/Animator_(disambiguation)
cedarfinancereview.com
animatorreview.com
netbooksreviewed.com
mappingdronereview.com
autotirereviews.com
performerreview.com
interiordesignreview.com
africabusinessreview.com
forextrainingreviews.com
indiahotelreviews.com
stockoptionreview.com
colloidalsilverreviews.com
personalmoviereview.com
reviewnh.com
seoexpertreview.com
fulllengthmoviereview.com
filmsreviews.com
camerareviewonline.com
aeroreview.com
energyreview.com
Latest News for: Animator review
'The end of the road may well be here': Humane Society of St. Lucie County failing financially
WPTV 16 Jul 2019
In a Facebook post, shelter leadership said they are running out of money and may not be able to continue offering services without donations and more financial commitment from the municipalities for which they provide animal services ... WPTV first reported concerns highlighted in an inspection by the Animal Shelter Standards Committee last summer....
FWP public hearings scheduled
Ravalli Republic 15 Jul 2019
Based on recommendations from the Hunting and Trapping Regulations Review Working Group, the commission is proposing to add clarifying language from what was previously adopted to make it clear that this rule applies to animals that are hunted and/or trapped ... of the animal....
American Humane Certifies Cabo Dolphins for Animal Well-Being
Longview News-Journal 15 Jul 2019
"Through dolphin interaction and marine mammal knowledge, they can inspire visitors to protect the animals they see." ... The Humane Certified program's extensive criteria exhaustively review the many dimensions of animal welfare and well-being, with areas of evaluation including....
Canada Dot Com 15 Jul 2019
CALGARY — Injuries have forced a veterinary medical team to euthanize three more horses competing in this year's Calgary Stampede chuckwagon races, bringing to six the number of animals to die during the annual Rangeland Derby event ... all three animals were euthanized....
Chuckwagon race safety up for review after six horses die at Stampede
Chuckwagon race safety up for review after six horses die during Calgary Stampede crash
We have been hearing about the promises of biotechnology for decades,
Agweb 15 Jul 2019
No APHIS Review Necessary ... In June, USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) announced a proposal to substantially update its regulations under the Plant Protection Act (PPA) to allow many genetically engineered traits to forego cumbersome reviews....
Reviews of new 'Lion King' poles apart
Korea Times 14 Jul 2019
The poster of Lion King, a remake from the original Disney animation in 1994/ Courtesy of Universal Music Korea ... In its film review, the Chosun Ilbo newspaper described it "a total package" that meets four key criterion for a box office hit ― namely technology, music, casting and a core message....
Pets and People: End-of-year highlights
Frederick News-Post 14 Jul 2019
Frederick County Government's fiscal year ended on June 30. In addition to reviewing statistics, budget, staffing, and other administrative items, the Frederick County Division of Animal Control and Pet Adoption Center has an opportunity to reflect on accomplishments achieved through ... ....
Fresh from the lab: Startups make meat that avoids slaughter
Messenger-Inquirer 14 Jul 2019
"So we make slaughter-free meat, and we know there's a massive market for people that want delicious meat that doesn't require animal slaughter." ... "Do these really solve the environmental problem? Do they really solve the animal welfare problem? That needs to be part of the review as well."....
'Lion King' Voice Star Beyonce, Jay-Z Mingle With Prince Harry, Meghan Markle at European Premiere
The Hollywood Reporter 14 Jul 2019
I know they are animals, but it helps us tell human stories ... While early reviews have been favorable to this 2019 photo-real take on the 1994 animation, some have questioned the further leap of faith it takes to witness seemingly real lions' mouths move as they talk and sing....
Australia's ban on live sheep trade could be extended due to heat stress risk
the grim truth about animal exports ... The deadly voyage on the Awassi Express in August 2017, which triggered the review of Australia's heat stress guidelines and the ban on summer voyages, had a mortality rate of 3.76%, or 2,400 sheep ... "Any decision to continue the export of sheep in September and October is placing profits ahead of animal welfare."....

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Assam groups fume over move to restart mega dam workhttps://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-others/assam-groups-fume-over-move-to-restart-mega-dam-work/
Assam groups fume over move to restart mega dam work
Both AASU and KMSS have hit out at the Centre and announced separate agitations beginning next week.
Written by Samudra Gupta Kashyap | Guwahati | Published: July 5, 2014 2:05:51 am
Conspiracy to derail NRC process: AASU on govt plea seeking sample re-verification
AASU to BJP: Toe party line on Citizenship Bill at your risk
National Register of Citizens: Beginnings and endings
Union Power Minister Piyush Goyal's announcement that the Centre would soon resume construction of NHPC's 2,000-MW Lower Subansiri hydel project has stirred a hornet's nest in Assam, with several groups, including the All Assam Students' Union (AASU) and Krishak Mukti Sangram Samiti (KMSS), threatening that they would not allow the project at any cost.
Goyal on Wednesday had told the media that the Centre would resume Lower Subansiri project construction within a week. On Thursday, he told a delegation of the Assam BJP that the central government would convince the people of the state so that the project was completed soon. Nearly 60 per cent complete, there was no progress in construction of the project, located along the Assam-Arunachal Pradesh border, since December 2011 following massive protests in Assam.
"The Home Ministry has given us assurance to clear those hurdles, and we will resume work on Lower Subansiri project within a week," Goyal told Arunachal Pradesh CM Nabam Tuki when the latter called on him Wednesday. The minister also announced that the project would be completed in about three years.
Both AASU and KMSS have hit out at the Centre and announced separate agitations beginning next week. In Lakhimpur district, which will directly bear the brunt of the project's downstream impact, student groups burnt effigies of Prime Minister Narendra Modi in protest.
"How can the government go ahead with the hydel project when an Expert Committee has recommended several modifications?" asked AASU president Sankar Prasad Roy.
The student body also recalled an advertisement by the BJP during the Lok Sabha elections in Assam newspapers in which the party had promised to hold political as well as technical consultations among the Centre and the governments of Assam and Arunachal Pradesh before taking a final decision on dams and hydel projects in Arunachal.
The agitating groups have been raising concern over the seismic safety of the dam as also over downstream effects and environmental issues, including threat to bio-diversity both in the upstream and downstream areas. The NHPC has agreed to bring the dam height down from 167 to 116 metres following recommendations by an expert group.
KMSS president Akhil Gogoi said his group will resist all attempts by the government to resume work on the Lower Subansiri project. "The BJP government has taken an anti-people decision. It has changed stand after coming to power," Gogoi said.
AASU
KMSS
Krishak Mukti Sangram Samiti
NHPC
1 CBI questions Goa Gov Wanchoo, he quits
2 Cong, social activists threaten protest
3 Riding tech wave


Math Facts in a Flash is exactly what its simple title sounds like: straightforward Web-based practice designed to strengthen students' fluency in basic math concepts like addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, fractions, decimals, and percentages. The goal, according to Renaissance Learning (which makes Math Facts in a Flash), is "automaticity" – or unconscious mastery, in which a student moves from calculating an answer to just "knowing" it as fact, similar to the effect one might get from using flash cards (a fair off-line comparison for this product, and surely no coincidence with the word Flash in the name).
The product has been around since 2002, first as a CD-ROM product that moved onto the Web in 2005, and is being used by about 11,000 schools in the United States and the United Kingdom, who pay a little more than $1/student for school subscriptions. A Spanish version of the product is also available.
Starting with a 40-item timed test, students then work from that baseline (online or on printed worksheets/flash cards) on the math facts that proved most difficult and receive immediate feedback on those skills – then continue to re-take timed tests until they answer all problems correctly within a short period of time (about 2 minutes) and move onto the next level.
The product also integrates with the company's NEO 2 wireless laptops and its Renaissance Responder clickers. Students can also practice at home with the Renaissance Home Connect site (which parents can also use to view their student's progress). Teachers can view dashboard reports to understand how students or classrooms are progressing toward benchmarks or responding to intervention.


MIAMI — Miami state Rep. Jeanette Nuñez is to be named Republican Ron DeSantis' running mate Thursday, the first time a Cuban-American woman has been chosen as a lieutenant governor candidate in Florida, sources familiar with the decision tell POLITICO.
Nuñez, a Miami native who has served for eight years in the Florida House, would not comment about her joining the ticket nor would a campaign spokesman for DeSantis, who plans to make a campaign stop Thursday in the heart of the Cuban-American community in Miami's Little Havana.
Nuñez initially did not want the hassle of running statewide, nor of being vetted for the post of lieutenant governor, but she decided to give it a second look at the urging of one of her closest political allies, Sen. Marco Rubio, in the wake of Democrat Andrew Gillum's surprising win in his gubernatorial race Aug. 28, according to one knowledgeable source.
Rubio also has a good working relationship with DeSantis, a congressman from Ponte Vedra, who briefly ran for Rubio's seat when the senator in 2016 was running for president. When Rubio decided to run for reelection, DeSantis stepped aside gracefully. Rubio's former chief of staff is House Speaker Richard Corcoran, who chose Nuñez to serve as speaker pro tempore in the Florida House. Another connection between the two Republicans: They share political consultants at the firm Something Else Strategies, and the same pollster, Whit Ayers.
Nuñez's support for Rubio in one case led her to oppose Donald Trump before the 2016 presidential primary in Florida.
The bilingual Nuñez gives DeSantis an extra lift in Miami-Dade County's sizable and politically active Cuban-American community. Cuban-Americans were a key to DeSantis' big win over Agriculture Commissioner Adam Putnam in last week's primary. On Thursday, DeSantis is scheduled to appear with Nuñez at the Manuel Artime Theater to honor the fallen Brothers to the Rescue Pilots who were shot down on a relief flight mission by the Cuban regime in 1996.
DeSantis' decision to pick Nuñez was lauded by fellow Miamian and current lieutenant governor, Carlos Lopez-Cantera, the state's first Cuban-American to hold the post.
"@RonDeSantisFL has made a wise choice in selecting @RepJNunez to be the 20th Lt. Governor of our great state of Florida," Lopez-Cantera announced on Twitter, noting that the pick had not yet been officially confirmed.
As a former health care lobbyist and legislative aide, Nuñez also has deep knowledge of the legislative process and the prickly personalities in the state Capitol.
In picking the 46-year-old married mother of three, DeSantis' campaign could help blunt the coming onslaught of Democrats who are counting on strong support from female voters.
DeSantis' Democratic opponent, Gillum, was rumored to be mulling two female running mates as well: his former primary opponent and fellow Tallahassee resident Gwen Graham, a former congresswoman, and state Sen. Lauren Book.
Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz, a Republican and a former colleague of Nuñez in the Florida House, said Schale's reaction is the rule, not the exception.
Still, Gaetz said, Nuñez wants to win and knows how to do it.


text:
Russia tests an intercontinental ballistic missile
The Soviet Union announces that it has successfully tested an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) capable of being fired "into any part of the world." The announcement caused great concern in the United States, and started a national debate over the "missile gap" between America and Russia.
For years after World War II, both the United States and the Soviet Union had been trying to perfect a long-range missile capable of carrying nuclear warheads. Building on the successes of Nazi Germany in developing the V-1 and V-2 rockets that pummeled Great Britain during the last months of World War II, both American and Russian scientists raced to improve the range and accuracy of such missiles. (Both nations relied heavily on captured German scientists in their efforts.) In July 1957, the United States seemed to win the race when the Atlas, an ICBM with a speed of up to 20,000 miles an hour and an effective range of 5,000 miles, was ready for testing. The test, however, was a disaster. The missile rose only about 5,000 feet into the air, tumbled, and plunged to earth. Just a month later, the Soviets claimed success by announcing that their own ICBM had been tested, had "covered a huge distance in a brief time," and "landed in the target area." No details were given in the Russian announcement and some commentators in the United States doubted that the ICBM test had been as successful as claimed. Nevertheless, the Soviet possession of this "ultimate weapon," coupled with recent successful test by the Russians of atomic and hydrogen bombs, raised concerns in America. If the Soviets did indeed perfect their ICBM, no part of the United States would be completely safe from possible atomic attack.
Less than two months later, the Soviets sent the satellite Sputnik into space. Concern quickly turned to fear in the United States, as it appeared that the Russians were gaining the upper hand in the arms and space races. The American government accelerated its own missile and space programs. The Soviet successes–and American failures–became an issue in the 1960 presidential campaign. Democratic challenger John F. Kennedy charged that the outgoing Eisenhower administration had allowed a dangerous "missile gap" to develop between the United States and the Soviet Union. Following his victory in 1960, Kennedy made missile development and the space program priorities for his presidency.
https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/russia-tests-an-intercontinental-ballistic-missile
Nuclear WeaponsCold War
"Preppy Murder" stuns New York
On this day in 1986, 18-year-old Jennifer Levin is found dead in New York City's Central Park less than two hours after she was seen leaving a bar on the city's Upper East Side with 19-year-old Robert Chambers. The tall, handsome Chambers was soon arrested and charged with ...read more
Battle of Crecy
During the Hundred Years War, King Edward III's English army annihilates a French force under King Philip VI at the Battle of Crecy in Normandy. The battle, which saw an early use of the deadly longbow by the English, is regarded as one of the most decisive in history. On July ...read more
Democratic convention besieged by protesters
As the Democratic National Convention gets underway in Chicago, thousands of antiwar demonstrators take to Chicago's streets to protest the Vietnam War and its support by the top Democratic presidential candidate, Vice President Hubert Humphrey. During the four-day convention, ...read more
19th Amendment adopted
The 19th Amendment, guaranteeing women the right to vote, is formally adopted into the U.S. Constitution by proclamation of Secretary of State Bainbridge Colby. The amendment was the culmination of more than 70 years of struggle by woman suffragists. Its two sections read simply: ...read more
First televised Major League baseball game
On this day in 1939, the first televised Major League baseball game is broadcast on station W2XBS, the station that was to become WNBC-TV. Announcer Red Barber called the game between the Cincinnati Reds and the Brooklyn Dodgers at Ebbets Field in Brooklyn, New York. At the time, ...read more
Johnson receives Democratic nomination for president
Lyndon B. Johnson is nominated to run for the presidency at the Democratic National Convention in Atlantic City, New Jersey. His running mate would be Hubert H. Humphrey. Former Vice President Johnson had assumed the reigns of government in November 1963 when President John F. ...read more
George Washington writes to Henry Lee
On this day in 1794, President George Washington writes to Henry "Light Horse Harry" Lee, Virginia's governor and a former general, regarding the Whiskey Rebellion, an insurrection that was the first great test of Washington's authority as president of the United States. In the ...read more
Grease movie soundtrack earns its second #1 hit
The 1960s was the final decade in which the musical hits of Broadway were routinely and successfully adapted by Hollywood into big-budget screen versions. West Side Story (1961), My Fair Lady (1964), The Sound Of Music (1965), Funny Girl (1968)—all of these movie musicals were ...read more
Battle of Tannenberg begins
On August 26, 1914, the German 8th Army, under the leadership of Paul von Hindenburg and Erich Ludendorff, strikes with lethal force against the advancing Russian 2nd Army, led by General Aleksandr Samsonov, in East Prussia during the opening weeks of the First World War. In the ...read more


This is a placeholder page for Gail Avillia, which means this person is not currently on this site. We do suggest using the tools below to find Gail Avillia.
You are visiting the placeholder page for Gail Avillia. This page is here because someone used our placeholder utility to look for Gail Avillia. We created this page automatically in hopes Gail Avillia would find it. If you are not Gail Avillia, but are an alumni of Taunton High School, register on this site for free now.


BERLIN (Reuters) - Germany's coal commission said on Friday a magazine report saying the commission aimed to shut down coal-powered plants in western Germany corresponding to 37 gigawatts between 2022 and 2030 was "completely unfounded".
Der Spiegel earlier reported that the commission recommended to start shutting down most power plants in western Germany in 2022 whereas plants in the eastern part of the country should not go offline before a second phase would start in 2030.
The coal commission, which includes politicians, experts and lobbyists, is in charge of finding a strategy for Germany's exit from coal and is due to publish its final report in early 2019.


That someone is Cameron and his team from Greasebusters (formally Fat Busters Steam Cleaning). Cameron started out on the Gold Coast in 2006 causally talking it over with a friend (at a wedding of all places) about the concept of commercial kitchen cleaning, and the dirty business of exhaust duct and canopy cleaning.
There are over 10,000 commercial kitchens on the Gold Coast, and 10 years on from that casual conversation, Cameron is responsible for the maintenance and exhaust cleaning of many of those venues. It's been a hard slog from conversation, concept to a successful commercial kitchen cleaning business.
Many of Greasebusters original customers are still with Cameron today, which proves familiarity, trust and hard work still count in today's digital modern world.
"In this line of work the only way people really get what I do, is to show them". "It's not enough to say". "Oh yeah I do exhaust duct cleaning". "You have to see, to believe, the grime, grease and downright dirty state these ducts and canopies are in when I go out to give a fire risk assessment".
Take a look at my favourite before and after shots of some really, REALLY horrible exhaust duct cleaning jobs.
My first duct cleaning job way back in 2006 for a hotel on the Gold Coast. A hole had to be cut on the side of the duct to get in, which is standard for all first time duct cleaning jobs. I had said to the hotel manager. "This has not been cleaned before was!" He asked, how I could tell.
I simply said "there's no hole". The ducting extended horizontally thirty meters inside, and the roofing twenty foot in the air. Needless to say it was a long and painful job, but one that felt hugely satisfying afterwards.
Another Gold Coast canopy and exhaust duct cleaning job for an iconic hotel. As you can see from the photos someone had started the job, but did not finish it. It needed another four hours of hard grafting to get it back to bare metal and finish the job properly.
Many of my competitors only do what you can see, which is the back wall, the easy bit. The client trusts what the professionals say, and that they will do a proper job that brings them in line with health and safety and reduces their chance of a fire breaking out. In this case someone had a bit of a go, but by no means was it a proper deep clean.
It is hugely important, especially for health and safety reasons that your canopy and duct is kept in immaculate condition. Greasebusters stand by their canopy and duct cleaning services, and issue a certificate of compliance along with photos and a written report on work carried out for insurance purposes.
10 years on and I'm still cleaning canopies and ducts on a weekly basis, these photos are from a clean we did for a large Gold Coast venue just recently. As per usual it had never been cleaned, my boys and I had to cut an access panel and scrape it all back to bare metal again. Not so bad and a bit of fun (if you can believe it), I had a lot of room to move and clean.
If you think you have a fire hazard in your kitchen, call Greasebusters today for a no obligation fire risk assessment.
The market leaders in professional commercial kitchen cleaning, exhaust cleaning, and duct cleaning on the Gold Coast. Also check out my Facebook page for all the gruesome, dirty cleaning details.


text:
Mobile. Switch to mobile site.
bigger. Increase font size.
reset. Reset font size to default.
smaller. Decrease font size.
bigger. Increase font size
reset. Reset font size to default
smaller. Decrease font size
EXAMINATION EQUIPMENT
Complementary content (upper)
Ophthalmic Surgeon Zois Papadopoulos graduated with honors from the 1st Lyceum of the American College of Anatolia in Thessaloniki and was admitted after pan-Hellenic examinations with 3rd highest exam score among passing candidates in the Medical School of the Democritus University of Thrace.
After completing his ophthalmology education at the University Hospital of Alexandroupolis, he moved to London, Great Britain in 2017, where he completed his Master of Science in Clinical Ophthalmology at the world-renowned University College London (UCL) and specialized in Macular Diseases and Electrophysiology of Vision at Moorfields Eye Hospital in London.
The following year, he continued his education in the United States, specifically at Harvard Medical School of Harvard University in Boston, and further specialized in treating retinal disease as a Clinical-Research Fellow. At Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary Hospital, one of the best Eye Hospitals in the United States, he was trained by the world's leading Professor Demetrios G. Vavvas, known for his contribution to the development of retinal surgery.
In 2019 he returned to Greece and specialized for 6 months in Ophthalmic Ultrasound at the 2nd Department of "Ophthalmiatreio" Eye hospital of Athens, one of the most well-equipped and technologically advanced hospitals in capital city.
He also holds the European Council of Ophthalmology (FEBO) Diploma after successful examinations in 2018 in Paris and since 2019 he is PhD candidate in Medicine at the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki on the subject: "Τhe effect of antioxidant supplements on aqueous humor inflammatory biomarker levels of patients with age-related macular degeneration"
Since September 2020, he has been operating a state-of-the-art ophthalmology clinic with cutting-edge examination equipment in the heart of Alexandroupolis on 35-37 Venizelou Street.
Thraki Orasis with scientific director Ophthalmic Surgeon Zois Papadopoulos is a standard ophthalmology clinic, which meets all modern diagnostic standards, for the prevention and treatment of eye diseases.
Eleutheriou Venizelou 35-37 Alexandroupolis 68100
E-mail: zoispapadopoulos@gmail.com
Τ. 2551305054


Please join us for a chef-crafted dinner, sourced from the fields of Colorado farmers, featuring seasonal and local ingredients. Dinner will be held rain or shine on East Meadow Drive, so please dress accordingly and bring your sense of outdoor culinary adventure! Wine and beer will be included in price.
The Vail Farmers Market is entering its 18 years in Vail on Meadow Drive. The event started with a few tents and now has grown to over 135 tents for 17 Sundays of the summer. We have entertainment for everyone and bring people from all over to enjoy the Rocky Mountains on a Sunday. Enjoy strolling down East Meadow Drive in Vail while tasting treats from Colorado. Parking for the Market is at the Vail Village Parking or Lionshead Parking. The Market begins June 16th and goes through October 6th, 2019.
Use the category links below to filter through our vendors or click the link at the bottom of this section to view all the vendors on one page.
We are full for the 2019 season. Feel free to fill out our Stand-By Vendor Application so we have your info on file, in case we have any changes. Thank you!


Recall that the launch was scheduled for May 22nd and later June 1st before it was shifted indefinitely, Linda Ikeji wrote on her blog.
OK, finally we are going to debut our online streaming service, Linda Ikeji TV, tomorrow June 8th at 12noon. To be honest, there are still so much content to upload for your viewing pleasure but I figured if we continue to wait to upload everything we have, it will take a few more weeks and I'm too impatient for you guys to see what we've done so far! But so much more is coming to you guys, I promise! And plenty of our shows, events, concerts and happenings will also be streamed live on LITV eventually.
So guys, tomorrow, finally you get to watch some episodes of Oyinbo Wives of Lagos, Magodo Mums and Their Single Friend, King Tonto, Ice Prince: Rise and Grind, Toyin Abraham: True & Bare, Annabel, Double Trouble, Life's Lessons, Verified and so much more, including TV series and movies. Hope you guys like it!
Oh by the way, you guys will pay us a small token to access our shows. This whole thing cost me so much money to put together, please support a sister! Ejor! Lol.