text:
G.R. No. 202303, June 04, 2014 - GERARDO R. VILLASEÑOR AND RODEL A. MESA, Petitioner, v. OMBUDSMAN AND HON. HERBERT BAUTISTA, CITY MAYOR, QUEZON CITY, Respondents.
GERARDO R. VILLASEÑOR AND RODEL A. MESA, Petitioner, v. OMBUDSMAN AND HON. HERBERT BAUTISTA, CITY MAYOR, QUEZON CITY, Respondents.
Before the Court is a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court assailing the March 15, 20121 and June 18, 20122 Resolutions of the Court of Appeals (CA), in CA G.R. SP No. 121378, which dismissed for utter lack of merit the petition to nullify or restrain the immediate implementation of the June 17, 2003 Joint Decision of the Office of the Ombudsman in OMB-ADM-0-01-0376 and OMB-ADM-0-01-0390, directing the dismissal from the service and one-year suspension of petitioners Gerardo R. Villasenor (Villasenor) and Rodel A. Mesa (Mesa), respectively.
The petitioners, along with several others, were administratively charged in connection with the Manor Hotel fire tragedy that took place on August 18, 2001, killing 74 people and causing injury to others. Petitioner Villasenor was an electrical inspector from the Electrical Division, and petitioner Mesa was an inspector from the Electrical Engineering Office, both of Quezon City.
In OMB-ADM-0-01-0376, petitioner Villasenor was charged with grave misconduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service and gross negligence. In OMB-ADM-00390, both petitioners were charged with violation of Section 4 of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees).
In OMB-ADM-0-01-0376, Villaseñor was found guilty of conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service and gross neglect of duty for which he was meted the penalty of dismissal from the service with all its accessory penalties.
In OMB-ADM-0-01-0390, Mesa was found guilty of conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service for which he was meted the penalty of one year suspension without pay.
In its Memorandum,3 dated July 26, 2004, the Ombudsman approved the findings in the Joint Decision as regards the petitioners.
On December 13, 2004, Villaseñor and Mesa filed their separate motions for reconsideration4 of the Joint Decision.
On April 18, 2006, Mesa appealed to the CA, which was docketed as CA-G.R. No. 93891. Villaseñor made no appeal, his motion for reconsideration before the Ombudsman being yet unresolved.
In the Order7 dated August 23, 2006, pending resolution of Mesa’s appeal and Villaseñor’s motion for reconsideration, the Ombudsman directed the Mayor of Quezon City and the Secretary of the Department of Interior and Local Government to enforce the Joint Decision immediately upon receipt of the order.
On September 20, 2011, Villaseñor and Mesa filed a special civil action for certiorari8 before the CA docketed as CA-G.R. SP No. 121378, assailing the August 23, 2006 Order of the Ombudsman ordering the immediate implementation of the Joint Decision despite the pendency of Villaseñor’s motion for reconsideration and Mesa’s appeal. They prayed that the said order be annulled and an injunction be issued to restrain its implementation.
In the assailed March 15, 2012 Resolution,9 the CA dismissed the petition for utter lack of merit. It held that the Ombudsman decision was immediately executory pending appeal and would not be stayed by the filing of the appeal or issuance of an injunctive relief.
In the assailed June 18, 2012 Resolution,10 the CA denied the petitioners’ motion for reconsideration.
His dismissal from the service was ordered implemented while his motion for reconsideration remains unresolved.
He argues that the order of dismissal cannot be deemed executory as it has not yet attained finality on account of his unresolved motion for reconsideration.
Petitioner Mesa, on the other hand, argues that the order of suspension against him should not have been implemented pending his appeal with the CA, in accordance with Section 7 of Rule III of the Office of the Ombudsman’s Rules of Procedure. He argues that Administrative Order (A.O.) No. 17, which took effect on September 7, 2003 and amended said Section 7, should not be applied to his case because it was promulgated long after the rendition of the order of his suspension on June 17, 2003. Mesa further argues that to apply the amendment to him will give it a retroactive effect which is prohibited under Article 4 of the Civil Code.
Both petitioners aver that Ombudsman v. Samaniego,11 the case relied upon by the CA, cannot be applied to their case because the principal basis of the ruling was Section 7, as amended, which they insist is inapplicable to them.
Whether the Ombudsman’s order of dismissal from the service and suspension of one year can be implemented pending resolution of petitioner Villasenor’s motion for reconsideration before the Ombudsman, and petitioner Mesa’s appeal before the CA?
SEC. 7. Finality and execution of decision. – Where the respondent is absolved of the charge, and in case of conviction where the penalty imposed is public censure or reprimand, suspension of not more than one month, or a fine equivalent to one month salary, the decision shall be final, executory and unappealable. In all other cases, the decision may be appealed to the Court of Appeals on a verified petition for review under the requirements and conditions set forth in Rule 43 of the Rules of Court, within fifteen (15) days from receipt of the written Notice of the Decision or Order denying the motion for reconsideration.
An appeal shall not stop the decision from being executory. In case the penalty is suspension or removal and the respondent wins such appeal, he shall be considered as having been under preventive suspension and shall be paid the salary and such other emoluments that he did not receive by reason of the suspension or removal.
A decision of the Office of the Ombudsman in administrative cases shall be executed as a matter of course. The Office of the Ombudsman shall ensure that the decision shall be strictly enforced and properly implemented. The refusal or failure by any officer without just cause to comply with an order of the Office of the Ombudsman to remove, suspend, demote, fine, or censure shall be a ground for disciplinary action against such officer.
From the above, it can be gleaned that the Ombudsman decisions in administrative cases may either be unappealable or appealable. Unappealable decisions are final and executory, and they are as follows: (1) respondent is absolved of the charge; (2) the penalty imposed is public censure or reprimand; (3) suspension of not more than one month; and (4) a fine equivalent to one month’s salary. Appealable decisions, on the other hand, are those which fall outside said enumeration, and may be appealed to the CA under Rule 43 of the Rules of Court, within 15 days from receipt of the written notice of the decision or order denying the motion for reconsideration. Section 7 is categorical in providing that an appeal shall not stop the decision from being executory, and that such shall be executed as a matter of course.
Petitioner Mesa was ordered suspended for one year without pay, while petitioner Villasenor was ordered dismissed from the service. These are plainly appealable decisions which are immediately executory pending appeal.
The petitioners cannot argue that A.O. No. 17, which makes appealable decisions of the Ombudsman immediately executory, cannot be applied to them. It is of no moment that A.O. No. 17 took effect on September 7, 2003, after the Joint Decision was issued against Mesa and Villaseñor on June 17, 2003. Of note are the facts that the Joint Decision was approved by the Ombudsman on November 26, 2004; the motions for reconsideration thereto were denied on March 2, 2006; and the Joint Decision was ordered implemented on August 23, 2006, all after A.O. No. 17 had already become effective.
The nature of appealable decisions of the Ombudsman was, in fact, settled in Ombudsman v. Samaniego, where it was held that such are immediately executory pending appeal and may not be stayed by the filing of an appeal or the issuance of an injunctive writ.14 The petitioners argue that this particular case cannot be applied to them because it was based on Section 7, as amended by A.O. No. 17, which cannot be applied to them retroactively. Their argument cannot be given credence. As already discussed, Section 7 may be retroactively applied in the case of the petitioners.
It is, therefore, beyond cavil that petitioner Mesa’s appeal cannot stay the implementation of the order of suspension against him.
Petitioner Villaseñor argues that the Ombudsman erred in implementing the order of dismissal against him despite his pending motion for reconsideration with the same office.
The records show that both petitioners duly filed their respective motions for reconsideration on December 13, 2004. In the March 2, 2006 Memorandum of the Ombudsman, Mesa’s motion for reconsideration, among others, was denied. Thus, he appealed to the CA. A review of the said Memorandum reveals, however, that Villaseñor’s motion for reconsideration was not enumerated15 as one of the pleadings submitted for resolution, and nowhere was his liability discussed or even mentioned therein. It is, therefore, apparent that Villaseñor’s motion for reconsideration was never resolved by the Ombudsman, for which reason he has been unable to file an appeal with the CA.
In order that the foregoing rule may be strictly observed, all concerned are hereby enjoined to implement all Ombudsman decisions, orders or resolutions in administrative disciplinary cases, immediately upon receipt thereof by their respective offices.
The filing of a motion for reconsideration or a petition for review before the Office of the Ombudsman does not operate to stay the immediate implementation of the foregoing Ombudsman decisions, orders or resolutions.
Thus, petitioner Villaseñor’s filing of a motion for reconsideration does not stay the immediate implementation of the Ombudsman’s order of dismissal, considering that “a decision of the Office of the Ombudsman in administrative cases shall be executed as a matter of course” under Section 7. As already explained, no vested right of Villaseñor would be violated as he would be considered under preventive suspension, and entitled to the salary and emoluments he did not receive in the event that he wins his eventual appeal.
The Ombudsman did not, therefore, err in implementing the orders of suspension of one year and dismissal from the service against the petitioners.
The Court notes, however, that under Section 8 of Rule III of the Rules of Procedure of the Office of the Ombudsman, as amended by A.O. No. 17, the Hearing Officer shall decide a motion for reconsideration within 5 days from the date of submission for resolution. Petitioner Villaseñor filed his motion for reconsideration on December 13, 2004, on the same day as petitioner Mesa, whose motion was duly resolved. Whether by oversight or negligence, a period nearly 10 years has elapsed without action on Villaseñor’s motion for reconsideration. The Office of the Ombudsman is called upon to be more vigilant in carrying out its functions and in complying with the periods laid down in the law.
WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. The March 15, 2012 and June 18, 2012 Resolutions of the Court of Appeals, in CA G.R. SP No. 121378 are AFFIRMED.
The Office of the Ombudsman is DIRECTED to resolve the motion for reconsideration of petitioner Gerardo R. Villaseñor in OMB-ADM-0-01-0376 and OMB-ADM-0-01-0390 with immediate dispatch.
Velasco, Jr., (Chairperson), Peralta, Villarama, Jr.,* and Leonen, JJ., concur.
* Designated Acting Member in view of the vacancy in the Third Division, per Special Order No. 1691 dated May 22, 2014.
1Rollo, pp. 303-304; penned by Associate Justice Amy C. Lazaro-Javier, and concurred in by Associate Justice Andres B. Reyes, Jr. and Associate Justice Sesinando E. Villon.
11 G.R. No. 175573, October 5, 2010, 632 SCRA 140.
12Panay Railways Inc. v. Heva Management and Development Corp., G.R. No. 154061, January 25, 2012, 664 SCRA 1, 8.
13Facura v. CA, G.R. No. 166495, February 16, 2011, 643 SCRA 427, 450-451, citing Ombudsman v. Samaniego G.R. No. 175573, October 5, 2010, 632 SCRA 140, 143, citing In the Matter to Declare in Contempt of Court Hon. Simeon A. Datumanong, Secretary of the DPWH, 529 Phil. 619, 630-631 (2006).
14 G.R. No. 175573, October 5, 2010, 632 SCRA 140, 143-145.

matches: v. v. v. v. v. v. v.


text:
With an even number of Justices on the United States Supreme Court, the topic of tie decisions has received a lot of recent play.
On an appellate court of last resort—state or federal—an odd number of justices generally is considered necessary to ensure a clear victor, despite varying views on the law among justices. After all, courts of last resort take cases, usually on a discretionary basis, to answer important legal questions.
Even numbers increase risk of tie votes, which are in some ways worse than the proverbial kiss of a sibling. They result in affirmance without opinion, so a lower court decision with which a significant number of appellate judges may disagree stands as law of the case, and important questions of law go unanswered. See Eric Magnuson, 3-2-1? What kind of decision is that? Briefly, Oct. 20, 2014, at 3 (citing Englund v. MN CA Partners/MN Ventures, 565 N.W.2d 433 (Minn. 1997)).
Tie votes do nothing to offer guidance to prospective litigants on that issue arising in a later case. On occasion, the Minnesota Supreme Court may include opinions by the differing justices in an evenly-divided court’s affirmance where the issue is of statewide significance. See, e.g., In re the Guardianship of Jeffers J. Tschumy, Ward, 853 N.W.2d 728 (Minn. 2014); Sig Ellingson & Co. v. Polk County State Bank of Crookston, 186 Minn. 48, 242 N.W. 626 (Minn. 1932); Folev Bros. v. St. Louis County, 158 Minn. 320, 197 N.W. 763 (Minn. 1928); Gran v. Spangbergen, 53 Minn. 42, 54 N.W.933 (Minn. 1893); Nelson v. Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Co., 41 Minn. 131, 42 N.W. 788 (Minn. 1889).
But even then, the opinions do not answer the substantive issues with the finality of a court that is not evenly divided. A grant of review and affirmance by an evenly divided court may show the world that there is an issue with the lower court’s opinion. The Court of Appeals has itself noted that when the Supreme Court grants further review of a decision of the court of appeals, that decision has only “minimal precedential value.” Fabio v. Bellomo, 489 N.W.2d 241, 247 n.1 (Minn. Ct. App. 1992). But the law remains uncertain.
To avoid affirmances by evenly divided courts, some courts, especially federal courts, are turning to dismissal of petitions for review as improvidently granted (DIG) as a means to prevent this result. See Justin Pidot, Tie Votes in the Supreme Court, 101 Minn. L. Rev. 245 (2016). But again, the law at issue on appeal remains undeveloped.
The practical solution in most state supreme courts is to add a justice to the cohort remaining—a replacement for the justice or justices who have stepped aside. Some states have, through laws or the judiciary’s policies, adopted broad-reaching policies to add a replacement justice anytime a justice recuses. For example, Article VI, Section 11 of the North Dakota Constitution directs the chief justice to assign either an active or retired judge of an inferior court or a retired justice to hear a pending case in place of a justice unable to sit because of conflict of interest or physical or mental incapacity.
In many ways, the safeguard of a full court makes perfect sense. If the state’s constitution has proclaimed that no fewer than seven and no more than nine justices should sit on the court and decide cases, then proceeding with fewer than seven justices has little justification. See Minn. Const., art. VI, § 2. That seems like a simple and straightforward approach, but it is not how we do it in Minnesota.
In this state, the Supreme Court adds a replacement only when the number of justices falls below five. This practice is not the result of a rule or statute, but a policy choice made by the court to protect a workable quorum without adding a replacement in all instances.
Keep in mind that the court decides cases collegially, as a unit that strives to work together to resolve the issues that come before it. Adding a stranger to that mix changes the court, no matter how qualified the replacement might be.
With those thoughts in mind, the court has determined that it is better to decide with fewer than with newer, unless an addition is needed for other reasons. Accordingly, like the United States Supreme Court, there are times when the Minnesota Supreme Court has an even number of justices (six), and ends up split.
Cases in which there are multiple recusals are more common than people think. One such recent example arose with the University of Minnesota—among the largest state institutions—wherein four justices recused as a result of ties to the school, and two replacements participated in their stead. See, e.g., Tatro v. Univ. of Minn., 816 N.W.2d 509 (Minn. 2012) (Gildea, C.J., Page, Anderson, Paul H., and Stras, JJ. took no part). Moreover, on occasion, the entire Supreme Court has recused, requiring the appointment of a court made up entirely of replacements. See, e.g., Page v. Carlson, 488 N.W.2d 274 (Minn. 1992); Wild v. Rarig, 234 N.W.2d 775 (Minn. 1975).
There is not much in the way of formal procedures for when to add a justice—only how to add one and who qualifies. Both the Minnesota Rule of Civil Appellate Procedure 141.01 on recusals and the Minnesota Code of Judicial Conduct, Rule 2.11 on disqualification are silent as to when the Supreme Court should temporarily assign a replacement for a recused justice or justices. But the issue comes up.
Authority to make temporary assignments of justices is found in Article VI, § 2 of the Minnesota Constitution, and at Minn. Stat. § 2.724, subdivisions 2 and 3. Both authorities offer the choice of a judge sitting on either the Court of Appeals or a District Court and the statute adds the possibility of a retired Supreme Court justice. See Minn. Const. art. VI, § 2; Minn. Stat. § 2.724, subd. 2. Section 2.724 further delineates between retired justices and retired judges, specifying that retired justices may be assigned to any court, including the Supreme Court, but retired judges from other courts may not fill a temporary role on the Supreme Court. Minn. Stat. § 2.724, subd. 3. Beyond Article VI, § 2 and Minn. Stat. § 2.724, there is no guidance for temporary appointments of justices. It is unknown whether the Supreme Court’s chief justice makes the selection from a list or by another method.
The Minnesota Supreme Court follows the same ‘five-or-more’ replacement rule when it comes to appellate matters other than written opinions. When recusals reduce the justice count from seven to five, the effect is often felt first at the petition for review stage. Regardless of the number of justices participating in a particular case, three votes are needed to grant review. Securing three out of five votes is considerably more difficult than securing three out of seven votes, in some cases. When there are only four justices, a replacement is added for consideration of the petition, preventing the need for petitioner to achieve three out of four votes.
If a case is important enough for the Minnesota Supreme Court to take it, then it is important enough for the parties—and the state in general—to get an opinion explaining what the law is. After all, that is the purpose of the state’s highest court. Affirmances by evenly divided courts leave important questions unanswered, and it may be time for the Minnesota Supreme Court to rethink its long-standing practice of waiting until the count drops to four before adding a temporarily-assigned justice.
Having the benefit of a full Supreme Court for each decision renders the judiciary better able to fulfill its public obligation. At the end of the day, courts are supposed to decide cases, not leave litigants and the public hanging without answers to important legal questions. And nobody really likes a tie.

matches:
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
§ 2
v.
v.
v.
§ 2
§ 2
§ 2
§ 2
§ 2
§ 2
§ 2


§ 26. The infinitive developed from the verbal noun, which in course о time became verbalized, retaining at the same time some of its nominal properties. Thus in Modern English the infinitive, like the participle and the gerund, has a double nature, nominal and verbal.
§ 27. The tense and aspect distinctions of the infinitive.
Like the tense distinctions of all verbals those of the infinitive № not absolute but relative.
They happened, at the moment, to be standing near a small conservatory at the end of the garden. (Collins) — В этот момент они как раз стояли около небольшой оранжереи в конце сада.
3. The Perfect Infinitive denotes an action prior to the action expressed by the finite verb.
"I'm glad to have seen you," he said. (Dreiser) — «Я рад, что повидал вас», — сказал он.
An intimate friend is said to have dined with him that day. (Hardy) — Говорят, что в этот день у него обедал его близкий ДРУГ.
I meant to have gone there. — Я собирался пойти туда (но не пошел).
I meant to have given you five shillings this morning for a Christmas-box, Sam. I'll give it you this afternoon, Sam. (Dickens) — Я хотел подарить вам пять шиллингов на рождество, Сэм; я подарю их вам сегодня, Сэм.
The same meaning can be conveyed by the Past Perfect of the finite v°rb followed by the Indefinite Infinitive.
He had meant to marry me. (Eliot) — Он имел намерение жениться на мне.
I meant to go there, but never did.
4. The Perfect Continuous Infinitive denotes an action which lasted a certain time before the action of the finite verb. It is not only a fence form, but also an aspect form.
For about ten days we seemed to have been living on nothing but cold meat, cake and bread and jam. (Jerome) — Дней десять мы, казалось, питались только холодным мясом, печеньем и хлебом с вареньем.
§ 28. The voice distinctions of the infinitive.
It is so glorious to love and to be loved... (Stone) — Так прекрасно любить и быть любимым.
There's no time to lose. (Dreiser) There is no time to be lost. (Eliot) There is nothing to fear (to be feared).
§ 29. The use of the infinitive without the particle to (the bare infinitive).
I don't understand the meaning of this passage. We shall go there at once.
3. After verbs denoting sense perception, such as to hear, to see, to feel, etc.
In a few minutes they heard him ascend the ladder to his own room. (Hardy) — Через несколько минут они услышали, что он поднимается по лестнице в свою комнату.
I never saw you look so well before. (Hardy) — Я никогда не видел, чтобы вы так хорошо выглядели.
I felt my heart jump. (Heym) — Я почувствовал, что у меня ёкнуло сердце.
I felt this to be very true. (Dickens) — Я чувствовал, что это совершенно верно.
5. After the verb to make in the meaning of'заставлять' and the verb to have in the meaning of'заставлять, допускать, велеть'.
What makes you think so? (Carter) — Что заставляет вас так думать?
I... had them take my baggage. (Hemingway) — Я... велел им взять мой багаж.
The verb to have in the meaning of'допускать' is chiefly used after the modal verbs will and would in negative sentences.
I will not have you call him Daniel any more. (Trollope) — Я не допущу, чтобы вы продолжали называть его Даниэлем. I would not have you think that I am selfish. (Trollope) — Я не допущу, чтобы вы считали меня эгоистом.
6. After the verb to know when its meaning approaches that of t0 see, to observe (the verb to know never has this meaning in the Present Indefinite).
I have so often known a change of medicine work wonders (Shaw) — Я так часто замечала, что перемена лекарства творит чудеса.
I have never known her to weep before. (Cronin) — Я никогда раньше не видел, чтобы она плакала.
Note. After the verbs to hear, to see, to make and to know in the Passive Voice the to-Infinitive is used.
He was heard to mention your name several times. — Слышали, как он несколько раз упомянул ваше имя. They were seen to leave the house early in the morning. — Видели, что они рано утром вышли из дома. The child was made to obey. — Ребенка заставили слушаться.
Sir Pitt Crawley was never known to give away a shilling or to do a good action. — Никто никогда не видел, чтобы сэр Пип Кроули дал кому-нибудь шиллинг или сделал доброе дело.
I bowed and waited, thinking she would bid me take a seat. (E. Bront§) — Я поклонился и подождал, думая, что она предложит мне сесть.
8. After the expressions had better; would rather; would sooner; cannot but, nothing butf cannot choose but.
You had better go to bed and leave the patient to me. (Shaw) Вы бы лучше легли спать и оставили пациента на моем попечении.
I would rather not speak upon the subject. (Hardy) — Я бы пред* почел не говорить на эту тему.
I cannot but think so. (Trollope) — Я не могу не думать так.
There was nothing left for him to do but watch and wait. — Единственное, что ему оставалось, — это наблюдать и ждать.
She does nothing but make scenes from morning till night. (Shaw) — Она только и делает, что устраивает сцены с утра до ночи.
I looked long at that picture, and could not choose but look. (Ch. Bronte) — Я долго смотрела на эту картину и не могла не смотреть на нее.
Had better; would rather; to do nothing but belong to colloquial English, whereas cannot but and cannot choose but are characteristic of elevated style.
Why not come and talk to her yourself? (Reade) — Почему бы вам самой не прийти поговорить с ней?
He and his three men could not defend Rollingen even if they wanted to. (Heym) — Он и трое его солдат не могли бы оборонять Роллинген, даже если бы захотели.
The particle to may be separated from the infinitive by an adverb; this is the so-called split infinitive.
He was unable, however, to long keep silence. (Galsworthy) — Он был, однако, не в состоянии долго молчать.
It could be used in colloquial English.
Well, you ought to at least try.
As soon as I get the word, I'm going to really hurry.
§ 30. The functions of the infinitive in the sentence.
The infinitive can be used in different syntactic functions. A single lr*finitive occurs but seldom: in most cases we find an infinitive phrase, e. an infinitive with one or several accompanying words.
1. The infinitive as a subject.
To doubt, under the circumstances, is almost to insult. (Ch. ВгоМё) — Сомневаться при таких обстоятельствах — это почти означает нанести оскорбление.
То acquire knowledge and to acquire it unceasingly,is thefirst duty of the artist. (Thurston) - Приобретать знания, и приобретать их непрерывно — вот первый долг художника.
Even to think of it gave him ineffable torture. (Bennett) Одна мысль об этом причиняла ему невыразимые страдания.
То be recognized, greeted by some local personage afforded her a joy which was very great. (Cronin) — Когда ее узнавал и приветствовал какой-нибудь видный местный житель, она испытывала большую радость.
Though the infinitive as the subject sometimes precedes the predicate, cases when it follows the predicate are far more common; with the infinitive in the latter position, the sentence opens with the introductory it, which serves as an introductory subject. The introductory it is not translated into Russian.
it is useless to discuss the question. (Eliot) — Бесполезно обсуждать этот вопрос.
It was pleasant to be driving a car again. (Braine) — Было приятно снова вести машину.
My intention is to get into parliament. (Trollope) — Моя цель — пройти в парламент.
The abode of Mrs. Betty was not easy to find. (Dickens) — Жилище миссис Бетти было нелегко найти.
3. The infinitive as part of a compound verbal predicate.
(а)With modal verbs, modal expressions, and verbs expressing modality the infinitive forms part of a compound verbal modal predicate.
4. The infinitive as an object.
After the verbs to allow, to order; to ask, to beg, to request, to implore, # teach, to instruct we often find two objects, one of which is expressed by an infinitive.
He found it utterly impossible to leave the spot. (Hardy) — Он считал совершенно невозможным покинуть это место.
5. The infinitive as part of a complex object.
I never saw you act this way before. (Dreiser) — Я никогда раньше не видел, чтобы вы так поступали.
6. The infinitive as an attribute.
The use of the infinitive as an attribute is far more extensive in English than in Russian: in Russian it modifies only abstract nouns, whereas in English it modifies both abstract and class nouns, indefinite pronouns (somebody, something, anybody, anything, etc.), ordinal numerals and the adjective last.
The infinitive as an attribute is rendered in Russian by an infinitive Hiefly after abstract nouns), by a subordinate clause or by a finite verb serving as the predicate of a simple sentence (after ordinal numerals and the adjective last).
I have not had time to examine this room yet. (Conan Doyle) ^ У меня еще не было времени осмотреть эту комнату. Bathsheba was not a woman... to suffer in silence. (Hardy) ^ Батшеба была не такая женщина, которая стала бы страдать молча.
I have nobody to say a kind word to me. (Trollope) — У меня нет никого, кто сказал бы мне доброе слово. Не was the first to offer his hand to the Russians. (Heym) — On первый протянул руку русским.
When his engine broke down, it was the last to be repaired. (Heym) — Когда его машина сломалась, ее починили последней.
The infinitive used as an attribute often has a modal significance - it expresses an action thought of as obligatory or possible.
I've got my wife and little boy to look after. (Dreiser) — У меня есть жена и ребенок, о которых я должен заботиться.
There must be a lot of things in this world to make you very unhappy. (Thurston) — В этом мире, должно быть, много такого, что может сделать вас несчастным.
Tess was no insignificant creature to toy with and dismiss. (Hardy) — Тэсс была не такое незначительное существо, с которым можно поиграть и бросить.
Here is a nice book to read before going to bed. — Вот книга, которую хорошо почитать перед сном.
Here is a charming little cottage to spend the summer in. — Вот очаровательный коттедж, в котором можно хорошо провести лето.
... he had no courage to face danger. (Dreiser) — У него не хватало мужества взглянуть в лицо опасности.
There was no time now to think — there was only time to give the medicine. (Collins) — Теперь не было времени думать — оставалось время только для того, чтобы дать лекарство.
7. The infinitive as an adverbial modifier.
Laws were not made to be broken, laws were made to stay within. (Heym) — Законы были созданы не для того, чтобы их нарушать, а для того, чтобы им подчиняться.
To pacify her, I held the window ajar a few seconds. (E. Bront§) — Чтобы успокоить ее, я на несколько секунд приоткрыла окно.
Sometimes you retreat in order to advance. (Heym) — Иногда отступают для того, чтобы вновь перейти в наступление.
Soames put on his coat so as not to be cold. (Galsworthy) — Соме надел пальто, чтобы не мерзнуть.
(b)The infinitive can be used as an adverbial modifier of result. This chiefly occurs after adjectives modified by the adverbs enough and too.
His eyes were sharp enough to look after his own interest. (Heym) — Глаза у него были достаточно зоркие, чтобы позаботиться о собственной выгоде.
I was too busy to see anyone. (Wilson) — Я был так занят, что не мог ни с кем встречаться.
He was so weak as to be unable to work. — Он был так слаб, что не мог работать.
Mr. Rokesmith has been so polite as to place his sitting-room at our disposal today. (Dickens) — Мистер Роксмит был настолько любезен, что отдал на сегодня свою гостиную в наше распоряжение.
And he is such a fool as to think that his idle chatter can influence others. (Trollope) — И он такой дурак, что думает, что его пустая болтовня может на кого-нибудь повлиять.
(c)The infinitive can be an adverbial modifier of comparison (manner); in most cases with an additional meaning of purpose. In this Unction it is introduced by the conjunction as if or as though.
She nervously moved her hand towards his lips as if to stop him... (Dickens) — Она нервно протянула руку к его губам, как будто хотела остановить его.
(d)The infinitive can be used as an adverbial modifier of attendant circumstances.
She was driven away, never to revisit this neighbourhood (E. Bronte) — Она была вынуждена уехать и больше не вернулась в эти места.
I am sorry to have raised your expectations, Mr. Blake, only to disappoint them. (Collins) — Мне очень жаль, что я пробудИл в вас надежду, мистер Блейк, только для того, чтобы затем отнять ее.
Note. Some grammarians maintain that in sentences of this type the infinitive performs the function of an adverbial modifier of result (consequence).
8. The infinitive as parenthesis.
Well, to cut a long story short, they thought it would be more economical to live at the villa. (Maugham) — Короче говоря, они решили, что будет дешевле жить на вилле. Не was rude, to say the least of it. — Он был груб, чтобы не сказать больше.
То put it mildly, he was not up to the mark. — Мягко выражаясь, он был не на высоте.
То speak the truth, I have been a little troubled, but it is over. (Dickens) — По правде говоря, я был несколько встревожен, но теперь это прошло.
Не brought with him a collection of Indian curios, to say nothing of an independent fortune and several slaves. (Dreiser) — Он привез с собой коллекцию индийских художественных вещей, не говоря уже о значительном состоянии и нескольких рабах.
§ 32. The Objective-with-the-Infinitive Construction.
He's a wonderful teacher and I've never seen him lose his temper or get angry about anything. (Wilson) — Он замечательный учитель, и я никогда не видел, чтобы он вышел из себя или рассердился из-за чего-нибудь.
However, sometimes a sentence containing the Objective-with-the- Infinitive Construction is rendered by a simple sentence.
... the bombings at night made the old walls shake to their foundations. (Heym) — От ночных бомбежек старые стены содрогались до самого основания (бомбежки заставляли стены содрогаться).
1. The Objective-with-the-Infinitive Construction is used after verbs denoting sense perception, such as to hear, to see, to watch, to feel, to observey to notice, etc.
I haven't heard anyone call me. (Wilde) — Я не слышал, чтобы кто-нибудь меня звал.
I saw Brown enter the room. (Braine) — Я видел, как Браун вошел в комнату.
I felt the blood rush into my cheeks, and then leave them again. (Collins) — Я почувствовал, как кровь прилила к моим щекам и затем снова отхлынула от них.
I saw the fire slowly conquered. (Collins) — Я видел, как пожар постепенно потушили.
Note 1. The verb to see is followed by a clause and not by the Objective-with-the-Infinitive Construction when it is not really a verb of sense perception, i. e. when it means 'to understand'.
I saw that he did not realize the danger. — Я видел (понимал) что он не сознает опасности.
N о t e 2. When the verb to hear is not a verb of sense perception, i. e. when it means 'to learn', 'to be told', a clause or a gerund (and not the Objective-with-the-Infinitive) is used.
I hear that he left for the South (of his having left for the South). - Я слышал (мне сказали), что он уехал на юг.
After verbs of mental activity in the Objective-with-the-Infinitive Construction the verb to be is generally used. (This restriction does not apply to the verb to expect.) The use of this construction after most verbs of mental activity is more characteristic of literary than of colloquial style.
I know you to be the most honest, spotless creature that ever lived. (Hardy) — Я знаю, что вы самое честное и безупречное существо из всех, когда-либо живших на свете.
I believe him to have no conscience at all. (Hardy) — Я считаю, что у него совершенно нет совести.
If you suppose that boy to be friendless, you deceive yourself (Dickens) — Если вы предполагаете, что у этого мальчика нет друзей, вы ошибаетесь.
Everybody expected her to marry Pete. (Caine) — Все ожидали, что она выйдет замуж за Пита.
The doctor found his heart to have stopped two hours before (Hardy) — Доктор установил, что его сердце перестало биться два часа тому назад.
Note. With the verbs to think, to consider; to find the same idea can be expressed without an infinitive.
The surgeon pronounced the wound to be a slight one. — Врач сказал, что рана легкая.
She declared him to be the most disobedient child in existence. — Она заявила, что это самый непослушный ребенок на свете.
4.The Objective-with-the-Infinitive Construction is used after verbs denoting wish and intention: to want, to wish, to desire, to mean, to intend, to choose (in the meaning of'хотеть').
I want you to come and dine with me. (Dickens) — Я хочу, чтобы вы пришли пообедать со мной.
I particularly wished those books to be returned tonight. (Dickens) — Я очень хотел, чтобы эти книги были возвращены сегодня.
She desired me to follow her upstairs. (Ch. ВгоМё) — Она велела, чтобы я пошла за ней наверх.
I did not mean you to learn the poem by heart. — Я не имел в виду, чтобы вы выучили стихотворение наизусть.
Не intended me to go with him to India. (Ch. ВгоМё) — Он хотел, чтобы я поехала с ним в Индию.
I don't choose you to go by yourself to an hotel. (Collins) — Я не хочу, чтобы вы одна жили в гостинице.
5. The Objective-with-the-Infinitive Construction is used after verbs and expressions denoting feeling and emotion: to like, to dislike, to love, to hate, cannot bear; etc.
I dislike you to talk like that. — Я не люблю, когда вы так говорите.
I hate him to be flogged. (E. ВгоМё) — Я терпеть не могу, когда его бьют.
I cannot bear you to speak of that. (Eliot) — Я не могу выносить, когда вы говорите об этом.
Mr. Merdle ordered his carriage to be ready early in the morning. (Dickens) — Мистер Мердль приказал, чтобы экипаж был готов рано утром.
She... had never allowed the name of John Gordon to pass her lips. (Trollope) — Она никогда не позволяла себе произносить имя Джона Гордона.
Mr. Dombey suffered Florence to play with Paul. — Мистер Домби неохотно разрешил (позволил скрепя сердце) Флоренс играть с Полем.
She suffered Mr. Franklin to lead her back into the room. (Collins) — Она позволила мистеру Франклину отвести себя обратно в комнату.
Miss Jemima could not suffer Becky to leave the Academy without a present. — Мисс Джемайма не могла допустить, чтобы Бекки уехала из пансиона без подарка.
I won't have you speak like it, dear Tess! (Hardy) — Я не могу допустить, чтобы вы так говорили, милая Тэсс!
From these examples we see that the verb to suffer; when followed by the Objective with the Infinitive, is rendered in affirmative sentences by неохотно разрешить, позволить (скрепя сердце). In negative sentences it is rendered by допускать. The verb to have denotes permission only in negative sentences; it is very close in meaning to the verb to suffer and is translated in the same way.
If the object is expressed by a noun or pronoun denoting a living being and the infinitive is active we find two direct objects.
7. The Objective-with-the-Infinitive Construction is used after verbs denoting compulsion: to make (in the meaning of'заставить')' to cause (in the meaning of'заставить', 'распорядиться'), to get (in the meaning of'добиться'), to have (in the meaning of'заставить: сказать чтобы').
Light steps in the gravel made him turn his head. (London) — Легкие шаги по гравию заставили его повернуть голову.
The noise caused her to awake. — Or шума она проснулась (шум заставил ее проснуться).
She caused a telegram to be sent to him.(Galsworthy) – Онараспорядилась, чтобы ему послали телеграмму.
I cannot get her to finish her lessons.(А. ВгоМё) — Я не могудобиться, чтобы она приготовила уроки.
Mr. Dalrymple had the drayman bring in the soap.(Dreiser) —Мистер Далримпл велел возчику внести мыло в дом.
I rely on you to come in time. — Я рассчитываю, что вы придете вовремя.
I rely upon you not to go over to the opposition. (Dickens) — Я рассчитываю, что вы не перейдете на сторону противника.
The gerund, however, is also possible here.
I rely on your coming in time. — Я рассчитываю, что вы придете вовремя.
§ 33. The Subjective Infinitive Construction.
Edith is said to resemble me. (Dickens) — Говорят, что Эдит похожа на меня.
Mr. Bob Sawyer was heard to laugh heartily. (Dickens Слышно было, как весело смеется Боб Сойер. The rider was seen to disappear in the distance. — Видно было, как всадник скрылся вдали.
Tess's father was heard approaching at that moment. (Hardy) — В этот момент они услышали, что подходит отец Тэсс.
2. With verbs denoting mental activity: to think, to consider; to know, to expect, to believe, to suppose.
He was thought to be honest and kindly. (Dreiser) — Его считали честным и добрым человеком.
My father... was considered by many to be a great man. (Gow and D'Usseau) — Многие считали моего отца незаурядным человеком.
Philip Bosinney was known to be a young man without fortune. (Galsworthy) — Было известно, что Филипп Боснии — молодой человек без состояния.
I know that Priam Farll is supposed to have been buried in Westminster Abbey. (Bennett) — Я знаю, что считают (предполагают), будто бы Приам Фарл похоронен в Вестминстерском Аббатстве.
The manuscript is believed to have been written in the 15th century. — Полагают, что эта рукопись написана в XV веке.
Little Abrahamwas aroused... and made to put on his clothes.. (Hardy) — Маленького Эбрахама разбудили и заставили одеться.
4. With the verbs to say and to report.
Voice a complex sentence is mostly used: its principal clause is of the type which in Russian syntax is called 'indefinite personal' (неопределенно-личное предложение).
After verbs in the Passive Voice the Subjective Infinitive Construction is more characteristic of literary than of colloquial style, except with the verbs to suppose, to expect, to make; with these verbs the Subjective Infinitive can be found both in fiction and in colloquial language.
The parish is not likely to quarrel with him for the right to keep the child. (Eliot) — Приход вряд ли будет оспаривать у него право содержать этого ребенка.
But he is sure to marry her. (Hardy) — Но он бесспорно (несомненно) женится на ней.
This fire is certain to produce a panic in the morning. (Dreiser) — Этот пожар бесспорно (несомненно) вызовет утром панику.
Sentences of this kind are rendered in Russian by a simple sentence with a modal word.
He is sure to come. — Он обязательно придет. He is sure of coming. — Он уверен, что он придет.
Theyseemed to have quite forgotten him already. (Hardy) — Они, казалось (по-видимому), уже совершенно забыли его.Her eyesappeared always to gaze beyond, and far beyond. (E. Bronte) — Ее глаза, казалось, всегда были устремлены куда-то далеко-далеко.
Mrs. Cowperwood, in spite of the difference in their years, appeared to be a fit mate for him at this time. (Dreiser) — Несмотря на разницу в возрасте, миссис Каупервуд в этот период его жизни, по-видимому (казалось), была для него подходящей женой.
Only yesterday we happened to see Scames Forsyte. (Galsworthy) — Только вчера мы случайно встретили Сомса Форсайта.
By 11 o'clock her motherhad chanced to look into her room (Dreiser) — Около 11 часов мать случайно заглянула к ней в комнату.
The experiment proved to be a failure. (Collins) — Опыт оказался неудачным.
They all turned out to be good fighters. (Gow and D'Usseau) ^ Все они оказались хорошими бойцами.
N о t е. The infinitive in sentences with the Subjective Infinitive Construction cannot refer to a future action except with verbs and word-groups whose meaning allows of it: to expect, to be sure (certain), to be likely.
We are sure to come at the heart of the matter. (Dickens) - Мы обязательно доберемся до сути дела. Не is expected to give us an answer tomorrow. — Ожидают, что он даст нам ответ завтра.
§ 34. The fог-to-Infinitive Construction.
The for-to-Infinitive Construction is a construction in which the infinitive is in predicate relation to a noun or pronoun preceded by the preposition for.
For me to ask would be treason, and for me to be told would be treason. (Wilson) — Если бы я спросила, это было бы предательством; если бы мне сказали, это было бы предательством.
I sometimes think it is a shame for people to spend so much money this way. (Dreiser) — Я часто думаю, что стыдно людям тратить на это так много денег.


text:
A method for determining bias across two domains comprising gene expression data. The method can comprise (a) providing a first domain and a second domain; (b) obtaining information indicative of a bias within the first domain; (c) obtaining information indicative of a bias within the second domain; and (d) using the information indicative of the bias within the first domain and the information indicative of the bias within the second domain to produce an indication of bias across the two domains.
This application is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/944,673 filed on Sep. 17, 2004, and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/944,668 filed on Sep. 17, 2004. U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/944,673 claims a benefit to U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/504,500 filed on Sep. 19, 2003; U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/504,052 filed on Sep. 19, 2003; U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/589,224 filed Jul. 19, 2004; U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/589,225 filed on Jul. 19, 2004; and U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/601,716 filed on Aug. 13, 2004. U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/944,668 is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/913,601 filed on Aug. 5, 2004 and further claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/504,052 filed on Sep. 19, 2003; U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/589,224 filed Jul. 19, 2004; and U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/601,716 filed on Aug. 13, 2004.
All literature and similar materials cited in this application, including but not limited to, patents, patent applications, articles, books, treatises, and internet web pages, regardless of the format of such literature and similar materials, are expressly incorporated by reference in their entirety for any purpose. In the event that one or more of the incorporated literature and similar materials differs from or contradicts this application, including but not limited to defined terms, term usage, described techniques, or the like, this application controls.
Currently, genomic analysis, including that of the estimated 30,000 human genes is a major focus of basic and applied biochemical and pharmaceutical research. Such analysis may aid in developing diagnostics, medicines, and therapies for a wide variety of disorders. However, the complexity of the human genome and the interrelated functions of genes often make this task difficult. There is a continuing need for methods and apparatus to aid in such analysis.
The skilled artisan will understand that the drawings, described herein, are for illustration purposes only. The drawings are not intended to limit the scope of the present teachings in any way.
FIG. 2 is a flowchart illustrating a process for determining bias.
FIG. 3 is a graph exemplifying a comparison of amplification with IVT and multiplex preamplification.
FIG. 4 is a graph exemplifying a ΔΔCT comparison of a brain and a liver sample.
FIG. 5 is a graph exemplifying a ΔΔCT comparison between four different sample inputs.
FIG. 6 is a graph exemplifying a ΔΔΔCT of a liver and a brain sample with IVT preamplification.
FIG. 7 is a graph exemplifying a ΔΔΔCT of a liver and a brain sample with multiplex preamplification.
FIG. 8 is a flowchart illustrating a process for determining bias between two gene expression platforms.
The following description of various embodiments is merely exemplary in nature and is in no way intended to limit the present teachings, applications, or uses. Although the present teachings will be discussed in various embodiments as relating to polynucleotide amplification, such as PCR, such discussion should not be regarded as limiting the present teaching to only such applications.
In general, gene expression is a process by which a gene's coded information is converted into the structures present and operating in the cell. Gene expression is a multi-step process that begins with transcription and translation and is followed by folding, post-translational modification and targeting. The amount of protein that a cell expresses depends on the tissue, the developmental stage of the organism and the metabolic or physiologic state of the cell. Expressed genes can include those that are transcribed into mRNA and then translated into protein and those that are transcribed into RNA but not translated into protein. In various embodiments, gene expression can be studied using analytical techniques such as polymerase chain reaction (PCR), Northern blots, serial analysis of gene expression (SAGE) microarrays, hybridization arrays, and high density oligonucleotide arrays.
Briefly, by way of background, PCR can be used to amplify a sample of target Deoxyribose Nucleic Acid (DNA) for analysis. Typically, the PCR reaction involves copying the strands of the target DNA and then using the copies to generate additional copies in subsequent cycles. Each cycle doubles the amount of the target DNA present, thereby resulting in a geometric progression in the number of copies of the target DNA. The temperature of a double-stranded target DNA is elevated to denature the DNA, and the temperature is then reduced to anneal at least one primer to each strand of the denatured target DNA. In some embodiments, the target DNA can be a cDNA. In some embodiments, primers are used as a pair—a forward primer and a reverse primer—and can be referred to as a primer pair or primer set. In some embodiments, the primer set comprises a 5′ upstream primer that can bind with the 5′ end of one strand of the denatured target DNA and a 3′ downstream primer that can bind with the 3′ end of the other strand of the denatured target DNA. Once a given primer binds to the strand of the denatured target DNA, the primer can be extended by the action of a polymerase. In some embodiments, the polymerase can be a thermostable DNA polymerase, for example, a Taq polymerase. The product of this extension, which sometimes may be referred to as an amplicon, can then be denatured from the resultant strands and the process can be repeated. Temperatures suitable for carrying out the reactions are well known in the art. Certain basic principles of PCR are set forth in U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,683,195, 4,683,202, 4,800,159, and 4,965,188, each issued to Mullis et al.
In some embodiments, PCR can be conducted under conditions allowing for quantitative and/or qualitative analysis of one or more target DNA. Accordingly, detection probes can be used for detecting the presence of the target DNA in an assay. In some embodiments, the detection probes can comprise physical (e.g., fluorescent) or chemical properties that change upon binding of the detection probe to the target DNA. Some embodiments of the present teaching can provide real time fluorescence-based detection and analysis of amplicons as described, for example, in PCT Publication No. WO 95/30139 and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 08/235,411.
In some embodiments, assay can be a homogenous polynucleotide amplification assay, for coupled amplification and detection, wherein the process of amplification generates a detectable signal and the need for subsequent sample handling and manipulation to detect the amplified product is minimized or eliminated. Homogeneous assays can provide for amplification that is detectable without opening a sealed well or further processing steps once amplification is initiated. Such homogeneous assays can be suitable for use in conjunction with detection probes. For example, in some embodiments, the use of an oligonucleotide detection probe, specific for detecting a particular target DNA can be included in an amplification reaction in addition to a DNA binding agent of the present teachings. Homogenous assays among those useful herein are described, for example, in commonly assigned U.S. Pat. No. 6,814,934.
In some embodiments, methods are provided for detecting a plurality of targets. Such methods include those comprising forming an initial mixture comprising an analyte sample suspected of comprising the plurality of targets, a polymerase, and a plurality of primer sets. In some embodiments, each primer set comprises a forward primer and a reverse primer and at least one detection probe unique for one of the plurality of primer sets. In some embodiments, the initial mixture can be formed under conditions in which one primer elongates if hybridized to a target.
In some embodiments for amplification of a polynucleotide, assay can comprise a preamplification product, wherein one or more polynucleotides in an analyte has been amplified prior to being deposited in at least one of the plurality of wells. In some embodiments, these methods can further comprise forming a plurality of preamplification products by subjecting an initial analyte comprising a plurality of polynucleotides to at least one cycle of PCR to form a detection mixture comprising a plurality of preamplification products. The detection mixture of preamplification products can be then used for further amplification using a PCR. In some embodiments, preamplification comprises the use of isothermal methods.
In some embodiments, a two-step multiplex amplification reaction can be performed wherein the first step truncates a standard multiplex amplification round to boost a copy number of the DNA target by about 100-1000 or more fold. Following the first step, the resulting product can be divided into optimized secondary single amplification reactions, each containing one or more of the primer sets that were used previously in the first or multiplexed booster step. The booster step can occur, for example, using an aqueous target or using a solid phase archived nucleic acid. See, for example, U.S. Pat. No. 6,605,452, Marmaro.
In some embodiments, preamplification methods can employ in vitro transcription (IVT) comprising amplifying at least one sequence in a collection of nucleic acids sequences. The processes can comprise synthesizing a nucleic acid by hybridizing a primer complex to the sequence and extending the primer to form a first strand complementary to the sequence and a second strand complementary to the first strand. The primer complex can comprise a primer complementary to the sequence and a promoter region in anti-sense orientation with respect to the sequence. Copies of anti-sense RNA can be transcribed off the second strand. The promoter region, which can be single or double stranded, can be capable of inducing transcription from an operably linked DNA sequence in the presence of ribonucleotides and a RNA polymerase under suitable conditions. Suitable promoter regions may be prokaryote viruses, such as from T3 or T7 bacteriophage. In some embodiments, the primer can be a single stranded nucleotide of sufficient length to act as a template for synthesis of extension products under suitable conditions and can be poly (T) or a collection of degenerate sequences. In some embodiments, the methods involve the incorporation of an RNA polymerase promoter into selected cDNA molecule by priming cDNA synthesis with a primer complex comprising a synthetic oligonucleotide containing the promoter. Following synthesis of double-stranded cDNA, a polymerase generally specific for the promoter can be added, and anti-sense RNA can be transcribed from the cDNA template. The progressive synthesis of multiple RNA molecules from a single cDNA template results in amplified, anti-sense RNA (aRNA) that serves as starting material for cloning procedures by using random primers. The amplification, which will typically be at least about 20-40, typically to 50 to 100 or 250-fold, but can be 500 to 1000-fold or more, can be achieved from nanogram quantities or less of cDNA.
In some embodiments, a two stage preamplification method can be used to preamplify assay in one vessel by IVT and, for example, this preamplification stage can be 100×sample. In the second stage, the preamplified product can be divided into aliquots and preamplified by PCR and, for example, this preamplification stage can be 16,000×sample or more.
In some embodiments, the preamplification can be a multiplex preamplification, wherein the analyte sample can be divided into a plurality of aliquots. Each aliquot can then be subjected to preamplification using a plurality of primer sets for DNA targets. In some embodiments, the primer sets in at least some of the plurality of aliquots differ from the primer sets in the remaining aliquots. Each resulting preamplification product detection mixture can then be dispersed into at least some of a plurality of wells of a microplate comprising an assay having corresponding primer sets and detection probes for further amplification and detection according to the methods described herein. In some embodiments, the primer sets of assay in each of the plurality of wells can correspond to the primer sets used in making the preamplification product detection mixture. The resulting assay in each of the plurality of wells thus can comprise a preamplification product and primer sets and detection probes for amplification for DNA targets, which, if present in the analyte sample, have been preamplified.
Since a plurality of different sequences can be amplified simultaneously in a single reaction, the multiplex preamplification can be used in a variety of contexts to effectively increase the concentration or quantity of a sample available for downstream analysis and/or assays. In some embodiments, because of the increased concentration or quantity of target DNA, significantly more analyses can be performed with multiplex amplified samples than can be performed with the original sample. In many embodiments, multiplex amplification further permits the ability to perform analyses that require more sample or a higher concentration of sample than was originally available. In such embodiments, multiplex amplification enables downstream analysis for assays that could not have been possible with the original sample due to its limited quantity. In some embodiments, the plurality of aliquots can comprise 16 aliquots with each of the 16 aliquots comprising about 1536 primer sets. In such embodiments, a sample comprising a whole genome for a species, for example a human genome, can be preamplified. In some embodiments, the plurality of aliquots can be greater than 16 aliquots. In some embodiments, the number of primer sets can be greater than 1536 primer sets. In some embodiments, the plurality of aliquots can be less than 16 aliquots and the number of primer sets can be greater than 1536 primer sets. For examples of such embodiments, see PCT Publication No. WO 2004/051218 to Andersen and Ruff.
In some embodiments, multiplex methods are provided wherein assay comprises a first universal primer that binds to a complement of a first target, a second universal primer that binds to a complement of a second target, a first detection probe comprising a sequence that binds to the sequence comprised by the first target, and a second detection probe comprising a sequence that binds to a sequence comprised by the second target. In some embodiments, at least some of a plurality of wells of a microplate comprise a solution operable to perform multiplex PCR. The first and second detection probes can comprise different labels, for example, different fluorophores such as, in non-limiting example, VIC and FAM. Sequences of the first and second detection probes can differ by as little as one nucleotide, two nucleotides, three nucleotides, four nucleotides, or greater, provided that hybridization occurs under conditions that allow each detection probe to hybridize specifically to its corresponding detection probe.
In some embodiments, multiplex PCR can be used for relative quantification, where one primer set and detection probe amplifies the target DNA and another primer set and detection probe amplifies an endogenous reference. In some embodiments, the present teaching provide for analysis of at least four DNA targets in each of a plurality of wells and/or analysis of a plurality of DNA targets and a reference in each of a plurality of wells.
In some embodiments, as seen in FIG. 1, a plurality of microplates having assay filled thereon can be analyzed as described herein with sequence detection system, such as a PCR system to generate data. In some embodiments, this data can be stored in a gene expression analysis system database 736. Software can then be used to generate gene expression analysis information 738.
In some embodiments, a gene expression analysis system can utilize computer software that organizes analysis sessions into studies and stores them in database 738. An analysis session can comprise the results of running microplate in sequence detection system. To analyze session data, one can load an existing study that contains analysis session data or create a new study and attach analysis session data to it. Studies can be opened and reexamined an unlimited number of times to reanalyze the analysis session data or to add other analysis sessions to the analysis.
In some embodiments, gene expression analysis system database 736 stores the analyzed data for each microplate run on sequence detection system as an analysis session in database 736. The software can identify each analysis session by marking indicia of the associated microplate and the date on which it was created. Once analysis sessions have been assigned to a study, various functions can be performed. These functions comprise, but are not limited to, designating replicates, removing outliers, filtering data out of a particular view or report, correction of preamplification values via stored values, and computation of gene expression values.
where CT is the threshold cycle for detection of a fluorophore in real time PCR; CTq is the threshold cycle for detection of a fluorophore for a target DNA in assay 1000; and CTendo is the threshold cycle for detection of a fluorophore for an endogenous reference or a passive internal reference in assay.
where CTq is the threshold cycle for detection of a fluorophore for the target DNA in assay 1000; CTcb is the threshold cycle for detection of a fluorophore for a calibrator sample; ΔCTq is a difference in threshold cycles for the target DNA and an endogenous reference; and ΔCTcb is a difference in threshold cycles for the calibrator sample and the endogenous reference If ΔΔCT is determined, the relative quantity of the target DNA can be determined using a relationship of relative quantity of the target DNA can be equal to 2−ΔΔC T. In various embodiments, ΔΔCT can be about zero. In some embodiments, ΔΔCT can be less than ±1. In various embodiments, the above calculations can be adapted for use in multiplex PCR (See, for example, Livak et al. Applied Biosystems User Bulletin #2, updated October 2001 and Livak and Schmittgen, Methods (25) 402-408 (2001).
In some embodiments, assay can be preamplified, as discussed herein, in order to increase the amount of target DNA prior to distribution into a plurality of wells of a microplate. In some embodiments, assay can be collected, for example, via a needle biopsy that typically yields a small amount of sample. Distributing this sample across a large number of wells can result in variances in sample distribution that can affect the veracity of subsequent gene expression computations. In such situations, assay can be preamplified using, for example, a pooled primer set to increase the number of copies of all target DNA simultaneously.
In various embodiments, preamplification processes can be non-biased, such that all target DNA are amplified similarly and to about the same power. In such embodiments, each target DNA can be amplified reproducibly from one input sample to the next input sample. For example, if target DNA X is initially present in sample A at 100 target molecules, then after 10 cycles of PCR amplification (1000-fold), 100,000 target molecules should be present. Continuing with the example, if target DNA X is initially present in sample B at 500 target molecules, then after 10 cycles of PCR amplification (1000-fold), 500,000 target molecules should be present. In this example, the ratio of target DNA X in samples A/B remains constant before and after the amplification procedure.
In various embodiments, a minor proportion of all target DNA can have an observed preamplification efficiency of less than 100%. In such embodiments, if the amplification bias is reproducible and consistent from one input sample to another, then the ability to accurately compute comparative relative quantitation between any two samples containing different relative amounts of target can be maintained. Continuing the example from above and assuming 50% reproducible amplification efficiency, if target DNA X is initially present in sample A at 100 target molecules, then after 10 cycles of PCR amplification (50% of 1000-fold), 50,000 target molecules should be present. Further continuing the example, if target X is initially present in sample B at 500 target molecules, then after 10 cycles of PCR amplification (50% of 1000-fold), 250,000 target molecules should be present. In this example, the ratio of template X in samples A/B remains constant before and after the amplification procedure and is the same ratio as the 100% efficiency scenario.
In various embodiments, an unbiased amplification of each target DNA (x, y, z, etc.) can be determined by calculating the difference in CT value of the target DNA (x,y,z, etc.) from the CT value of a selected endogenous reference, and such calculation is referred to as the ΔCT value for each given target DNA, as described above. In various embodiments, a reference for a bias calculation can be non-preamplified, amplified target DNA and an experimental sample can be a preamplified amplified target DNA. In some embodiments, the standard sample and experimental sample can originate from the same sample, for example, same tissue, same individual and/or same species. In various embodiments, comparison of ΔCT values between the non-preamplified amplified target DNA and preamplified amplified target DNA can provide a measure for the bias of the preamplification process between the endogenous reference and the target DNA (x, y, z, etc.).
In various embodiments, the difference between the two ΔCT values (ΔΔCT) can be zero and as such there is no bias from preamplification. This is explained in greater detail below with reference to FIG. 2. In some embodiments, the gene expression analysis system can be calibrated for potential differences in preamplification efficiency that can arise from a variety of sources, such as the effects of multiple primer sets in the same reaction. In some embodiments, calibration can be performed by computing a reference number that reflects preamplification bias. Reference number similarity for a given target DNA across different samples is indicative that the preamplification reaction ΔCTS can be used to achieve reliable gene expression computations.
In various embodiments, a value for ΔΔCTTxSA can be zero or close to zero, which can indicate that there is no bias in the preamplification of target DNA Tx. In various embodiments, a negative ΔΔCT TxSA value can indicate the preamplification process was less than 100% efficient for a given target DNA (Tx). For example, when using an IVT preamplification process, a percentage of target DNA with a ΔΔCT of +/−1 CT of zero can be ˜50%, as shown in FIG. 3. In another example, when using a multiplex preamplification process, a percentage of target DNA with a ΔΔCT of +/−1 CT of zero can be ˜90%, as shown in FIG. 4.
In various embodiments, an amplification efficiency can be less than 100% for a particular target DNA, therefore ΔΔCT is less than zero for the particular target DNA. An example, as shown in FIG. 5, can be an evaluation of ΔΔCT values for a group of target DNA from a 1536-plex for the multiplex preamplification process including four different human sample input sources: liver, lung, brain and an universal reference tissue composite. In this example, most ΔΔCT values are near zero, however, some of the target DNA have a negative ΔΔCT value but these negative values are reproducible from one sample input source to another. In various embodiments, a gene expression analysis system can determine if a bias exists for target DNA analyzed for different sample inputs.
In various embodiments a value for ΔΔΔCTTx can be zero or reasonably close to zero which can indicate that the preamplified ΔCT values for Tx (ΔCT preamplified TxSA and ΔCT preamplified TxSB) can be used for relative gene expression computation between different samples via a standard relative gene expression calculation.
In some embodiments, a standard relative gene expression calculation can determine the amount of the target DNA. In some embodiments, a standard relative gene expression calculation employs a comparative CT. In various embodiments, the above methods can be practiced during experimental design and once the conditions have been optimized so that the ΔΔΔCTTx is reasonably close to zero, subsequent experiments only require the computation of the ΔCT value for the preamplified reactions. In various embodiments, ΔΔCTTxSA values can be stored in a database or other storage medium. In such embodiments, these values can then be used to convert ΔΔCTpreamplifiedTxSA values to ΔΔCT not preamplifiedTxSA values. In such embodiments, the ΔΔCT preamplifiedTxSy values can be mapped back to a common domain. In various embodiments, a not preamplified domain can be calculated using other gene expression instrument platforms such as, for example, a microarray. In various embodiments, the ΔΔCTTxSA values need not be stored for all different sample source inputs (SA) if it can be illustrated that the ΔΔCT preamplifiedTx is reasonably consistent over different sample source inputs. For example, a distribution of ΔΔΔCT for two different sample inputs (liver and brain) are shown in FIG. 6 (IVT preamplification) and FIG. 7 (multiplex preamplification).
In various embodiments, gene expression can be assessed with microarray technology, which can provide a measure of the cellular concentration of different mRNAs. In some embodiments, a microarray can be a piece of glass or plastic on which single stranded pieces of DNA are affixed in a microscopic array as probes. In some embodiments, thousands of identical probes can be affixed at each point in the array which can make effective detectors.
Typically arrays can be used to detect the presence of mRNAs that may have been transcribed from different genes and which encode different proteins. The RNA can be extracted from many cells, ideally from a single cell type, then converted to cDNA. In various embodiments, the cDNA may be amplified in quantity by PCR. Fluorescent tags can be enzymatically incorporated into the or can be chemically attached to strands of cDNA. In various embodiments, a cDNA molecule that contains a sequence complementary to one of the probes will hybridize via base pairing to the point at which the complementary probes are affixed. In such embodiments, the point on the array can then fluoresce when examined using a microarray scanner. In some embodiments, the intensity of the fluorescence can be proportional to the number of copies of a particular mRNA that were present and thus roughly indicates the activity or expression level of that gene.
In various embodiments, a microarray can be, for example, a cDNA array, a hybridization array, a DNA microchip, a high density sequence oligonucleotide array, or the like. In various embodiments, a microarray can be available from a commercial source such as, for example, Applied Biosystems, Affymetrix, Agilent, Illumina, or Xeotron. In various embodiments, a microarray can be made by any number of technologies including printing with fine-pointed pins onto glass slides, photolithography using pre-made masks, photolithography using dynamic micromirror devices, or ink-jet printers. The lack of standardization in microarrays can present an interoperability problem in bioinformatics, since it can limit the exchange of array data.
where R is the resulting measurement from a microarray. Such calculations are available commercially, such as GeneSpring from Silicon Genetics. Other embodiments include converting microarray output data into a ΔΔCT format using a Global Pattern Recognition (GPR) algorithm which can convert intensity values generated from microarrays from linear values to algorithmic values and can use transformed intensity cutoffs to effect gene and normalizer filters. In such embodiments, GPR, a software algorithm for gene expression analysis is available from The Jackson Laboratory. In various embodiments, microarray output data can be in a standard language or format such as MAGE-ML (microarray and gene expression markup language), MAML (microarray markup language), or MIAME (minimum information about microarray experiments). In various embodiments, such standardized formats and language can be converted to a ΔΔCT format.
In various embodiments, after microarray output data is in a ΔΔCT format, then real-time PCR data can be directly compared to data from microarray platforms as shown in FIG. 8. In various embodiments, a ΔΔΔCT calculation can be a validation tool to confirm that relative quantitation data can be compared from one amplification/detection process to another. In various embodiments, ΔΔΔCT calculation can be a validation tool to confirm that relative quantitation data can be compared from one sample input source to another sample input source, for example, comparing a sample from liver to a sample from brain in the same individual. In various embodiments, ΔΔΔCT calculation can be a validation tool to confirm that relative quantitation data can be compared from one high-density sequence detector system to another high-density sequence detection system. In various embodiments, ΔΔΔCT calculation can be a validation tool to confirm that relative quantitation data can be compared from one platform to another, for example, data from real time PCR to data from a hybridization array is especially valuable for cross-platform validation. In various embodiments, real time PCR and hybridization array data can be directly compared. In various embodiments, a TaqMan ΔΔCT can be compared to a microarray output converted to the ΔΔCT format. In such embodiments, the resultant ΔΔΔCT, if within +/−1 CT of zero, can determine a high-degree of confidence that the actual fold difference observed within each of the two platforms is correlative.
In various embodiments, a correction, which can be a quantity added to a calculated or observed value to obtain the true value, may be used so that data generated on two different platforms can be used together in further calculations and analysis. Such embodiments allow for larger and sometimes more complete data sets to be used in gene expression studies. In some embodiments, the correction can be calculated from a resulting ΔΔΔCT. In various embodiments, a correction can be a bias correction.
using the information indicative of the bias within the first domain and the information indicative of the bias within the second domain to produce an indication of bias across the two domains.
2. The method according to claim 1, wherein the providing a first domain and a second domain further comprises providing at least one of the first domain and the second domain comprising information collected from a polynucleotide amplification instrument.
3. The method according to claim 2 wherein the polynucleotide amplification instrument is capable of running polymerase chain reactions.
4. The method according to claim 1 wherein the providing a first domain and a second domain further comprises providing at least one of the first domain and the second domain comprising information generated by gene expression analysis.
5. The method according to claim 4 wherein the providing at least one of the first domain and the second domain comprise data generated by gene expression analysis comprising generating gene expression data from an polynucleotide amplification instrument.
6. The method according to claim 4 wherein the providing at least one of the first domain and the second domain comprise data generated by gene expression analysis comprising generating gene expression data from an microarray.
7. The method according to claim 4 wherein the providing at least one of the first domain and the second domain comprise data generated by gene expression analysis comprising generating gene expression data from a hybridization chip.
8. The method according to claim 1 wherein the providing a first domain and a second domain further comprises providing information from a preamplified and amplified sample and providing information from an amplified sample.
9. The method according to claim 1 further comprising amplifying a polynucleotide sample.
10. The method according to claim 9 further comprising collecting information indicative of the amplifying a polynucleotide sample.
11. The method according to claim 10 further comprising organizing the information indicative of the amplifying a polynucleotide sample into the first domain.
12. The method according to claim 9 further comprising preamplifying a polynucleotide sample.
13. The method according to claim 12 further comprising collecting information indicative of the preamplifying a polynucleotide sample and amplifying a polynucleotide sample.
14. The method according to claim 13 further comprising organizing the information indicative of the preamplifying a polynucleotide sample and amplifying a polynucleotide sample into the first domain.
15. The method according to claim 14 wherein the obtaining information indicative of bias within the first domain comprises evaluating a bias between the amplifying a polynucleotide sample and the preamplifying a polynucleotide sample and amplifying a polynucleotide sample.
16. The method according to claim 15 wherein the obtaining information indicative of bias within the second domain comprises evaluating a bias between the amplifying a second polynucleotide sample and the preamplifying a polynucleotide second sample and amplifying a second polynucleotide sample.
17. The method according to claim 16 wherein the polynucleotide sample and the second polynucleotide sample are from different tissues.
18. The method according to claim 17 wherein the different tissues are from the same individual.
19. The method according to claim 1 wherein the obtaining information indicative of bias within the first domain further comprises performing a ΔΔCT calculation.
20. The method according to claim 1 wherein the obtaining information indicative of bias within the second domain further comprises performing a ΔΔCT calculation.
21. The method according to claim 1 wherein the using the information indicative of bias within the first domain and the information indicative of bias within the second domain to produce an indication of bias across the two domains further comprises performing a ΔΔΔCT calculation.
22. The method according to claim 1 wherein the obtaining information indicative of bias within the first domain comprises information from a first amplification device and the obtaining information indicative of bias within the second domain comprises from information a second amplification device.
23. The method according to claim 1 further comprising converting information from a micro array device into a ΔΔCT format.
24. The method according to claim 23 the obtaining information indicative of bias within the first domain comprises information from a first amplification device and the obtaining information indicative of bias within the second domain comprises from information from a microarray device.
25. The method according to claim 1 wherein the obtaining information indicative of bias within the first domain comprises information from a first tissue type and the obtaining information indicative of bias within the second domain comprises from information a second tissue type.
26. The method according to claim 1 wherein the obtaining information indicative of bias within the first domain comprises information from gene expression of a first individual and the obtaining information indicative of bias within the second domain comprises from information from gene expression of a second individual.
27. The method according to claim 26 wherein the first individual and the second individual are from the same species.
28. The method according to claim 26 wherein the first individual and the second individual are from different species.
29. The method according to claim 1 further comprising applying a correction to at least one of the first domains and the second domains.
30. The method according to claim 29 wherein the applying a correction to at least one of the first domains and the second domains corrects for a bias across the first domain and the second domain.
31. The method according to claim 1 wherein at least one of the first domain and the second domain comprises genomic information.
providing a second domain comprising preamplified gene expression data and non-preamplified gene expression data from a second sample input.
determining a bias between the preamplified gene expression data and the non-preamplified gene expression data of the second domain.
using the bias of the first domain and the bias of the second domain to produce an indication of bias across the first domain and the second domain.
33. The method according to claim 32 further comprising amplifying the first sample input.
34. The method according to claim 33 further comprising collecting data from the amplifying the first sample input.
35. The method according to claim 33 further comprising adding a first reference to the first sample input.
36. The method according to claim 34 further comprising using the first reference to normalize data from the amplifying the first sample input.
37. The method according to claim 34 further comprising using a ΔCT calculation to normalize data from the amplifying the first sample input.
38. The method according to claim 32 further comprising preamplifying the first sample input.
39. The method according to claim 38 further comprising amplifying the first sample input.
40. The method according to claim 39 further comprising collecting data from the amplifying the first sample input.
41. The method according to claim 39 further comprising adding a first reference to the first sample input.
42. The method according to claim 41 further comprising using the first reference to normalize data from the preamplifying and amplifying the first sample input.
43. The method according to claim 41 further comprising using a ΔCT calculation to normalize data from the preamplifying and amplifying the first sample input.
44. The method according claims 37 and 43 further comprising using a ΔΔCT calculation to determine bias.
45. The method according to claim 32 further comprising amplifying the second sample input.
46. The method according to claim 45 further comprising collecting data from the amplifying the second sample input.
47. The method according to claim 45 further comprising adding a second reference to the second sample input.
48. The method according to claim 46 further comprising using the second reference to normalize data from the amplifying the second sample input.
49. The method according to claim 46 further comprising using a ΔCT calculation to normalize data from the amplifying the second sample input.
50. The method according to claim 32 further comprising preamplifying the second sample input.
51. The method according to claim 50 further comprising amplifying the second sample input.
52. The method according to claim 51 further comprising collecting data from the amplifying the second sample input.
53. The method according to claim 50 further comprising adding a second reference to the second sample input.
54. The method according to claim 53 further comprising using the second reference to normalize data from the preamplifying and amplifying the second sample input.
55. The method according to claim 53 further comprising using a ΔCT calculation to normalize data from the preamplifying and amplifying the second sample input.
56. The method according claims 49 and 55 further comprising using a ΔΔCT calculation to determine bias.
57. A method according to claim 32 wherein the using the bias of the first domain and the bias of the second domain to produce an indication of bias across the first domain and the second domain further comprises performing a ΔΔΔCT calculation.
59. The system according to claim 58 further comprising at least one computer.
60. The system according to claim 58 further comprising at least one PCR device.
61. The system according to claim 58 further comprising at least one microarray device.
62. The system according to claim 58 further comprising high density sequence detection system.
63. The system according to claim 58 further comprising at least one sample.
64. The system according to claim 58 further comprising a graphical use interface.
65. The system according to claim 58 further comprising a network.
66. The system according to claim 65 wherein the first domain and the second domain are at different loci on the network.
67. The system according to claim 58 further comprising a hybridization chip device.
68. The system according to claim 58 wherein at least one of the first algorithm, the second algorithm, and the third algorithm is a comparative method.
69. The system according to claim 58 wherein at least one of the first algorithm and the second algorithm is a ΔΔCT calculation.
70. The system according to claim 58 wherein the third algorithm is a ΔΔΔCT calculation.
71. The system of claim 58 wherein at least one of the first domain and the second domain comprises polynucleotide information.
72. The system of claim 58 wherein at least one of the first domain and the second domain comprises gene expression information.
73. The system of claim 58 wherein at least one of the first domain and the second domain comprises polynucleotide amplification information.
74. The system of claim 58 wherein at least one of the first domain and the second domain comprises genomic information.
75. The system of claim 58 wherein the first domain comprises information on a first tissue and the second domain comprises information on a second tissue type.
76. The system according to claim 58 wherein at least one of the first domain and the second domain comprises information from a preamplified and amplified sample and providing information from an amplified sample.
77. The system according the claim 63 wherein the at least one sample is analyzed for gene expression.
78. The system according to claim 58 further comprising a data bank of reference information.
79. The system according to claim 78 further comprising obtaining information indicative of a bias within at least one of the first domain and the second domain using the data bank of reference information.

matches:
Application No. 60
Application No. 60
Application No. 60
Application No. 60
Application No. 60
Application No. 60
Application No. 60
Application No. 60


79-4804. Same; transfers to state economic development initiatives fund; authorized allocations and uses, accounts created; investment by director of investments, disposition of proceeds; transfers of moneys to state water plan fund. (a) After the transfer of moneys pursuant to K.S.A. 2018 Supp. 79-4806, and amendments thereto, an amount equal to 85% of the balance of all moneys credited to the state gaming revenues fund shall be transferred and credited to the state economic development initiatives fund. Expenditures from the state economic development initiatives fund shall be made in accordance with appropriations acts for the financing of such programs supporting and enhancing the existing economic foundation of the state and fostering growth through the expansion of current, and the establishment and attraction of new, commercial and industrial enterprises as provided by this section and as may be authorized by law and not less than 1/2 of such money shall be distributed equally among the congressional districts of the state. Except as provided by subsection (g), all moneys credited to the state economic development initiatives fund shall be credited within the fund, as provided by law, to an account or accounts of the fund which are created by this section.
(b) There is hereby created the Kansas capital formation account in the state economic development initiatives fund. All moneys credited to the Kansas capital formation account shall be used to provide, encourage and implement capital development and formation in Kansas.
(c) There is hereby created the Kansas economic development research and development account in the state economic development initiatives fund. All moneys credited to the Kansas economic development research and development account shall be used to promote, encourage and implement research and development programs and activities in Kansas and technical assistance funded through state educational institutions under the supervision and control of the state board of regents or other Kansas colleges and universities.
(d) There is hereby created the Kansas economic development endowment account in the state economic development initiatives fund. All moneys credited to the Kansas economic development endowment account shall be accumulated and invested as provided in this section to provide an ongoing source of funds which shall be used for economic development activities in Kansas, including, but not limited to, continuing appropriations or demand transfers for programs and projects which shall include, but are not limited to, specific community infrastructure projects in Kansas that stimulate economic growth.
(e) Except as provided in subsection (f), the director of investments may invest and reinvest moneys credited to the state economic development initiatives fund in accordance with investment policies established by the pooled money investment board under K.S.A. 75-4232, and amendments thereto, in the pooled money investment portfolio. All moneys received as interest earned by the investment of the moneys credited to the state economic development initiatives fund shall be deposited in the state treasury and credited to the Kansas economic development endowment account of such fund.
(f) Moneys credited to the Kansas economic development endowment account of the state economic development initiatives fund may be invested in government guaranteed loans and debentures as provided by law in addition to the investments authorized by subsection (e) or in lieu of such investments. All moneys received as interest earned by the investment under this subsection of the moneys credited to the Kansas economic development endowment account shall be deposited in the state treasury and credited to the Kansas economic development endowment account of the state economic development initiatives fund.
(g) Except as provided further, in each fiscal year, the director of accounts and reports shall make transfers in equal amounts on July 15 and January 15 which in the aggregate equal $2,000,000 from the state economic development initiatives fund to the state water plan fund created by K.S.A. 82a-951, and amendments thereto. In state fiscal year 2019, the director of accounts and reports shall make transfers in equal amounts on July 15 and January 15 that in the aggregate equal $500,000 from the state economic development initiatives fund to the state water plan fund. No moneys shall be transferred from the state economic development initiatives fund to the state water plan fund on such dates during state fiscal year 2018 and state fiscal year 2020. No other moneys credited to the state economic development initiatives fund shall be used for: (1) Water-related projects or programs, or related technical assistance; or (2) any other projects or programs, or related technical assistance, which meet one or more of the long-range goals, objectives and considerations set forth in the state water resource planning act.
History: L. 1986, ch. 365, § 4; L. 1987, ch. 295, § 16; L. 1988, ch. 392, § 3; L. 1989, ch. 48, § 102; L. 1989, ch. 186, § 32; L. 1992, ch. 262, § 17; L. 1994, ch. 351, § 4; L. 1996, ch. 254, § 32; L. 2000, ch. 173, § 24; L. 2002, ch. 204, § 167; L. 2003, ch. 138, § 130; L. 2013, ch. 136, § 280; L. 2014, ch. 142, § 115; L. 2015, ch. 104, § 249; L. 2017, ch. 104, § 242; L. 2018, ch. 109, § 127; May 31.


Susan Behan v. Sonitrol Corporation et al.
Decision text below is the first available text from the court; it has not been editorially reviewed by LexisNexis. Publisher\'s editorial review, including Headnotes, Case Summary, Shepard\'s analysis or any amendments will be added in accordance with LexisNexis editorial guidelines.
[*1] Short Name:Behan v. Sonitrol Corp.
Judge (with first initial, no space for Sullivan, Dorsey, and Walsh):Scholl, Jane S., J.
plaintiff claims that the defendant Sonitrol Communications Corporation, a.k.a.
CUTPA (Tenth Count), against Sonitrol.
heard by the court on November 25, 2013.
material fact . . . but rather to determine whether any such issues exist . . .
matter of law, that a genuine issue of material fact exists . . . The presence .
Church v. Gauss, 302 Conn. 408, 421-2 (2011).
telephone service provider to Comcast.
count paragraph 9); and \"was caused by the defendant Sonitrol of Hartford . . .\"
unfair and deceptive trade practices or acts (Tenth count paragraphs 9, 15).
is, that the injury would not have occurred but for the actor\'s conduct . . .
conjecture [*7] and surmise.\" (Citations and internal quotation marks omitted).
would have summoned the police in time to capture or frighten away the burglar.
the loss would have been averted had the electrical alarm been in order.\' \"
(Citations omitted.) Id., pp. 20-22.
any way the plaintiff\'s damages is extremely speculative.
has not been sufficient facts shown for Chen\'s opinion.
simply as a fact which will make a difference in the result of the case.\"
(Citations and internal quotation marks omitted.) Buell Industries, Inc. v.
summary judgment. See, Barrett v. Danbury Hospital, 232 Conn. 242, 253 (1995).
quotation marks omitted.) Porter v. Thrane, 98 Conn.App. 336, 340 (2006).
question of fact as to the cause of the plaintiff\'s damages.
McCann Real Equities v. McDermott, 93 Conn.App. 486, 503-04 (2006).
as Sonitrol represented; etc. (Amended Complaint, Sixth Count, paragraph 9).
standard more exacting than that of a fair preponderance of the evidence . . .
omitted.) Kavarco v. T.J.E., Inc., 2 Conn.App. 294, 295-96 (1984).
provide signaling, monitoring and response for which it was intended.\"
or inducements not set forth in nay such documents.\" Id.
Zwrin, paragraph 9.m., August 9, 2012.
summary judgment is granted as to the Seventh and Ninth Counts.
others or of the consequences of the action . . . It is at least clear . . .
omitted.) Fricilli v. Westport, 264 Conn. 266, 277-78 (2003).
causation in fact.\" Boehm v. Kish, 201 Conn. 385, 390 (1986).
prevail on her claims of recklessness as well.
telephone lines, or that the plaintiff had switched telephone service providers.
granted as to the Eighth Count.
causation is also an element of proof of a CUTPA claim.
support a CUTPA claim in this case.
limitations set forth in §42-110g(f). See Fichera v. Mine Hill Corp., 207 Conn.
limitations bars the plaintiff\'s CUTPA action.
summary judgment is granted as to the Tenth Count.
claims limits any potential liability to \"one-half year\'s monitoring payments,\"
warranties beyond those on the face of this agreement.\" Id., paragraph 5.
responsibility . . .\" (Citation and internal quotation marks omitted.) Hanks v.
ambiguous to deny a summary judgment motion.\"
The motion for summary judgment is granted as to all counts against Sonitrol on the grounds that the plaintiff cannot prove causation but not on the other grounds cited by Sonitrol.