From service at paypal.com  Mon Sep  5 22:06:04 2005
From: service at paypal.com (service at paypal.com)
Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2005 01:06:04 -0400
Subject: Security Validation -- Respond Now
Message-ID: <E1ECVem-0004iG-5e@polydora.webserversystems.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://snf.stanford.edu/pipermail/coral/attachments/20050906/74d0ee51/attachment.html>

From bmurray at snf.stanford.edu  Wed Sep  7 13:00:00 2005
From: bmurray at snf.stanford.edu (Bill Murray)
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 13:00:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: connection to ebeam
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.04.10509071029510.1629-100000@snf.stanford.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.04.10509071253050.2260-100000@snf.stanford.edu>

Paul,

I no longer have access to shades.  It's been years since I've looked at 
that machine.  It was in really bad shape then, and it's probably gotten 
worse.  I understand that James Conway has been taking care of shades 
for the last couple of years.  I'll check with John to see if ITSS has 
assumed responsiblity for the CAD platforms.  I wish I could be more helpful.

Bill

On Wed, 7 Sep 2005, Paul Jerabek wrote:

>  Hi Bill:
> we have lost a telnet connection from "shades" to Hitachi ebeam computer
> "beamer" and can't transfer Caprox files to the ebeam. Please advise.
> -Paul
> 



From shott at stanford.edu  Wed Sep  7 19:37:31 2005
From: shott at stanford.edu (John D Shott)
Date: Wed,  7 Sep 2005 19:37:31 -0700
Subject: connection to ebeam
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.04.10509071253050.2260-100000@snf.stanford.edu>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.04.10509071253050.2260-100000@snf.stanford.edu>
Message-ID: <1126147051.431fa3eb5037f@webmail.stanford.edu>


Paul:

I suggest that you start with Jason Conroy ... no more than a week or so
ago, shades was hacked in some fashion and it was determined that shades
should be moved to the "shadow" network ... which, I thought supposedly
only gave it access to stanford machines.  While I would have thought that
this wouldn't have affected the ability to get from shades to hitachi, the
move of the network connection coupled with the fact that machine had been
recently hacked (I can't remember what happened), makes me think that Jason
Conroy is your best first contact.  While I'm not 100% certain, I think taht
he is jconroy at teargarden.stanford.edu.

Good luck,

John



From nanotech at nsti.org  Thu Sep  8 10:46:43 2005
From: nanotech at nsti.org (NSTI)
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 10:46:43 -0700
Subject: Nanotech Courses & Industry Summit, Oct. 17-19, Washington DC
Message-ID: <SPARKLIST-6151228-2324650-2005.09.08-10.48.45--coral#snf.stanford.edu@spirit.sparklist.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://snf.stanford.edu/pipermail/coral/attachments/20050908/07def543/attachment.html>

From bmurray at snf.stanford.edu  Thu Sep  8 17:02:45 2005
From: bmurray at snf.stanford.edu (Bill Murray)
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 17:02:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: shades down (fwd)
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.04.10509081702380.19083-100000@snf.stanford.edu>



---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 15:43:42 -0700
From: Yuerui Lu <luckyyrl at gmail.com>
To: bmurray at stanford.edu
Subject: shades down

Dear Bill

The "Shades" machine in the computer room first floor is not working
properly to transfer the ebeam pattern file to the hitachi ebeam
machine. I have talked to Paul. Paul asked me to ask you for help.

I have some very urgent sample needing hitachi. Could you please help
me to check "Shade" and make it work? 

Sincerely,

Yuerui Lu



From nanotech at nsti.org  Tue Sep 13 08:28:07 2005
From: nanotech at nsti.org (NSTI)
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 08:28:07 -0700
Subject: Nanotech Industry Summit & Courses, Oct. 17-19, Washington DC
Message-ID: <SPARKLIST-6151228-2329141-2005.09.13-08.31.56--coral#snf.stanford.edu@spirit.sparklist.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://snf.stanford.edu/pipermail/coral/attachments/20050913/4dcd3e99/attachment.html>

From nanotech at nsti.org  Thu Sep 15 12:46:31 2005
From: nanotech at nsti.org (Nano World News)
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 12:46:31 -0700
Subject: Nano World News September 2005
Message-ID: <SPARKLIST-6151228-2330569-2005.09.15-12.47.41--coral#snf.stanford.edu@spirit.sparklist.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://snf.stanford.edu/pipermail/coral/attachments/20050915/6a78c039/attachment.html>

From mtang at snf.stanford.edu  Fri Sep 16 06:35:36 2005
From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang)
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 06:35:36 -0700
Subject: SNF Lab Bins
In-Reply-To: <p06110404bf500631ccc3@[171.64.98.155]>
References: <42F8B90F.7010309@snf.stanford.edu> <p06110404bf500631ccc3@[171.64.98.155]>
Message-ID: <432ACA28.3050202@snf.stanford.edu>

Hi Mark --

No idea.  I've been using it without problems with the XP firewall on, 
so I don't think it's our server (and am using it now).  Have you used 
remote coral in the past, say, 9 months or so?  If not, I think there 
was a new Java version that was instituted about that time...  Barring 
that, I would have to refer you to the Coral guys, whom I've cc'ed on this.

Let me know if there's anything else I can not really help you with --

Mary

Mark Wistey wrote:

> Mary -
>
> I'm not sure who to send questions about Coral, so could you pass this 
> to the appropriate person(s)?  Thanks...
>
> I'm running Coral on Windows XP with the Windows firewall enabled, and 
> it says "javaw" is being blocked from accepting incoming connections.  
> Any idea why Coral is allowing incoming connections?
>                      - Mark



-- 
Mary X. Tang, Ph.D.
Stanford Nanofabrication Facility
CIS Room 136, Mail Code 4070
Stanford, CA  94305
(650)723-9980
mtang at stanford.edu
http://snf.stanford.edu




From shott at snf.stanford.edu  Fri Sep 16 06:50:01 2005
From: shott at snf.stanford.edu (John Shott)
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 06:50:01 -0700
Subject: Remote Coral ...
In-Reply-To: <432ACA28.3050202@snf.stanford.edu>
References: <42F8B90F.7010309@snf.stanford.edu> <p06110404bf500631ccc3@[171.64.98.155]> <432ACA28.3050202@snf.stanford.edu>
Message-ID: <432ACD89.7020102@snf.stanford.edu>

Mark:

Let me make sure I understand your question: I think that you are saying 
that Remote Coral works fine for you, but you are surprised that it is 
because your Windows XP machine is set up to block incoming connections 
from javaw ... and, as a result, you think that Remote Coral shouldn't 
work?  Is that correct?

We have worked very hard to make sure that Remote Coral initiates all 
network traffic and does not recevied any unsolicited incoming network 
traffic.  For example, when you want to make a reservation, your 
instance of Remote Coral sends a request to the reservation server of 
the form: "Member wistey would like to make a reservation on equipment 
raith from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. on Saturday, September 17, 2005".  Then, if 
the reservation is allowed there is a response to that request that is 
returned by the reservation server that says "Reservation successfully 
made.".  In that case, your machine initiates the request and then waits 
for the reply.  All but the most heavily locked down firewalls will 
allow a return response from a request that you initiated.  We've 
installed Remote Coral on about 850 different machines, many of which do 
have firewalls, and only found 3 or 4 machines (mostly at government 
labs ...) that have their firewalls so tightly locked down that it would 
block the "Reservation successfully made." request.

Or did I completely misunderstand the nature of your request and you 
want to know why Remote Coral does not work properly for you?

Talk to you later,

John




From service at amazon.com  Mon Sep 19 01:46:52 2005
From: service at amazon.com (service at amazon.com)
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 17:46:52 +0900 (JST)
Subject: Private Message From Amazon Accounts Management !!! 
Message-ID: <20050919084652.30ADA8FA71F@welcombritain.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://snf.stanford.edu/pipermail/coral/attachments/20050919/8d048ce8/attachment.html>

From service at fulton.com  Mon Sep 19 08:38:38 2005
From: service at fulton.com (Security update)
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 23:38:38 +0800 (CST)
Subject: Dear Fulton Bank Member
Message-ID: <200509191538.j8JFccM73757@ms1.shoes.ylc.edu.tw>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://snf.stanford.edu/pipermail/coral/attachments/20050919/f1a98548/attachment.html>

From Update at AccounteBay.com  Mon Sep 19 21:56:19 2005
From: Update at AccounteBay.com (Update Account eBay)
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 12:56:19 +0800 (CST)
Subject: Place or Update Credit Card on File
Message-ID: <200509200456.j8K4uJ261905@ms1.shoes.ylc.edu.tw>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://snf.stanford.edu/pipermail/coral/attachments/20050920/5eebfc28/attachment.html>

From wuxinhua9999 at vip.163.com  Thu Sep 22 02:35:52 2005
From: wuxinhua9999 at vip.163.com (=?GB2312?B?bG9uZ21pbmdodWk=?=)
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 17:35:52 +0800
Subject: =?GB2312?B?QW4gb3BlbiBsZXR0ZXIgdG8gQW1lcmljYW4gUHJlc2lkZW50IE1yLiBCdXNovrTWwsPAufrX3M2zsrzKss/Iyfq1xLmrv6rQxQ==?=
Message-ID: <0012733644$68257350$74228850@vip.163.com>

An open letter to American President Mr. Bush??????????????
Hello, my respectable President Mr. Bush: 
The fact that DuPont declined to fulfill the agreement has been presented to you for several 
times via president at whitehouse.gov; As a result, president at whitehouse.gov sent back three letters 
containing the following same contents on the behalf of Mr. President in Sep 2004:?Thank you for 
e-mailing President Bush. Your ideas and comments are very important to him.? My ?ideas and 
comments? are as follows: it is verified by Mr. Huang with adequate facts and irrefutable legal 
evidences that DuPont must disburse Mr. Huang patent fee, license fee or equivalent ?Utter 
Compensation? fee and DuPont?s persistent refusal to disburse these fees infringes upon the 
intellectual property rights of Mr. Huang. president at whitehouse.gov mentioned ?are very 
important to him.? I don?t dare to unduly surmise the meaning of ?very important? to Mr. 
President; However, according to my humble opinions, there exits the following ?important?: on 
the one hand, respectable Mr. President, the American Government led by Mr. President as well as 
the great American people bitterly hate the predation of the intellectual property rights of 
others through brazen means such as stealing, shameless acts; in contrast, DuPont is committing 
such brazen and shameless deals; on the other hand, the number of your country?s intellectual 
property rights in a variety of fields is far in excess of that of any nations in the world and 
suffers greatly from rights infringement. Therefore, your government always reserves no efforts 
in urging other nations to intensify the law enforcement strength to protect your country?s 
intellectual property rights. However, while your government reserves no efforts in urging the 
Chinese government to intensify the law enforcement strength to protect your country?s 
intellectual property rights and receives your ?more encouraged? praise(note), DuPont is 
infringing the intellectual property rights of Mr. Huang through various extremely brazen and 
shameless means, which constitutes an extremely bad signal to the governments and public of other 
nations in the world, a extremely ?good? model for current and potential thieves of 
intellectual property rights, an enormous damage to your government protection of your country?s 
intellectual property rights, and a tremendous humiliation to your country?s lofty status in the 
world. For the sake of the glory of the great American people and the reputation of a legion of 
American corporations, in order to safeguard your country?s lofty status in the world and 
protect the intellectual property rights of your country and other nations in the world, we 
humbly request you and your government to prevent DuPont?s such extremely brazen infringement 
and even seizure behaviors, and force DuPont to carry out it?s voluntarily promised obligations 
in the agreement. We firmly believe that the United State is not a country that shields and 
connives at rascals and the American government is not a government that shields and connives at 
rascals; Under the instruction of our respectable Mr. President and the American government, the 
rascal of DuPont shall be aware of shame and be able to turn into a normal corporation by giving 
up shameless behaviors. Due to the adequate evidences, the clear-cut rights and obligations of 
both parties of DuPont and Mr. Huang, and simple legal relations, the infringement of the 
intellectual property rights of Mr. Huang by DuPont can be absolutely prevented and DuPont will 
surely disburse Mr. Huang patent fee, license fee or equivalent ?Utter Compensation? fee as 
long as your government intensifies the law enforcement strength to protect intellectual property 
rights as well. 
With best regards!
Authorized agent: SXF 2005.09.17.23?59 ?note? 
It was reported by China?s sina website on Sep 14, 2005 that China?s president 
Jintao Hu met with American president Bush in New York on Sep 13, and 
President Bush expressed his encouragement by the Chinese government 
actions to intensify the law enforcement strength to protect intellectual property 
rights. 
                     
Annex:
 Heartfelt thanks for your reading my E-mail and your mail of attention to this matter. I 
would like to make some replenishment concerning the matter, for you to judge and decide. 
I Abstract
1. At the request of Du Pont, Mr. Huang has for 10 times submitted written technical 
materials to Du Pont from April 1993 to 1994, for expert group of Du Pont to conduct feasibility 
analysis. 
2. On February 22, 1995, Dr Robert F Sklar, Technology Transfer Licensing Manager of DuPont 
arrived in Shanghai in China, to ?sign many agreements? with Mr. Huang. Mr. Huang insisted 
DuPont examines samples first before signs any agreement. However, as samples were still in the 
process of purification at the time, no agreements were signed then. 
3. On March 28, 1995, Mr. Huang sent the first batch of samples to Du Pont by post. 
4. On September 7, 1995, Mr. Huang received ?Biological Evaluation Agreement? (1995 
Agreement) sent by Du Pont, requiring Mr. Huang to sign this agreement and again provide samples. 
Mr. Huang signed the agreement and sent second batch of samples as requested by DuPont. 
 DuPont admit in Article 5 of the ?1995 Agreement? that Mr. Huang will be entitled to claim 
patent and licensing fees. DuPont states in Article 8 of the ?1995 Agreement? that Mr. Huang 
may not cooperate with any universities or enterprises in any form before and after signing of 
this agreement (for this reason, Mr. Huang has refused cooperation request of several companies).
5. On September 10, 1998, DuPont sent a letter to Mr. Huang, asking for third batch of 
samples. 
6. In 1999, DuPont carried out a month-long insecticide screening on the third batch of 
samples (in fact, it has carried out weeds killing test and mould killing test in the meantime), 
and required to keep all these tests a secret. 
7. On June 8, 2000, DuPont sent a letter saying it was not interested in samples provided by 
Mr. Huang, and refused to pay Mr. Huang patent and licensing fees.
8.The mail signed by DuPont on June 2th, 2005, threaten  Mr.Huang ,and prevent Mr.Huang send the 
E-mail. 

 ??????????????
?????????????
?????????????????president at whitehouse.gov?????president at whitehouse.gov?? 
2004?9??????????????????????Thank you for e-mailing President Bush. Your 
ideas and comments are very important to him.????ideas and comments?????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????president at whitehouse.gov??are very important to him.?
?very important??????????????????????????????important? ?
1.???????????????????????????????????????????????
??????????????????????????
2.???????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????
???????
????????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????
?????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????
?? 
??????? 
??????SXF   2005.09.17.23?59

???
??sina?2005.09.14.????9?13???????????????????????????????
????????????????????????
(???                       
 
  ?? 
  1. ?1993?4???1994??????????????????10????????????????
??????
  2. 1995?2?22?????????????Sklar?? ?E.I.DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY Robert  
F. Sklar Ph. D. Manager,Technology Transfer Licensing)?????????????????????
??????????????????????????????????????  
  3 1995?3?28????????????????  
  4. 1995?9?7????????????BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION AGREEMENT?1995???)???????
??????????????????????????????????????????1995????
?5??????????????????????????????????1995?????8?????
????????????????????????????????????? ???? 
  5. 1998?9?10??????????????????
  6 1999????????????????Insecticide Screening??????????????????
?????????????????????
  7. 2000?6?8?????????????????,?????????????????  
8.2005.06.02. ???????????????-??????????E-mail
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://snf.stanford.edu/pipermail/coral/attachments/20050922/62b95b99/attachment.html>

From nanotech at nsti.org  Thu Sep 22 16:52:34 2005
From: nanotech at nsti.org (Nanotech 2006)
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 16:52:34 -0700
Subject: NSTI Nanotech 2006 - Announcement and Call for Papers
Message-ID: <SPARKLIST-6151228-2335311-2005.09.22-16.59.39--coral#snf.stanford.edu@spirit.sparklist.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://snf.stanford.edu/pipermail/coral/attachments/20050922/f2dbe148/attachment.html>

From mtang at snf.stanford.edu  Tue Sep 27 14:39:16 2005
From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 14:39:16 -0700
Subject: [Fwd: Re: Gowning Room Cleanup]
Message-ID: <4339BC04.50407@snf.stanford.edu>

Hi guys --

Can you help?

Thanks,

Mary

-- 
Mary X. Tang, Ph.D.
Stanford Nanofabrication Facility
CIS Room 136, Mail Code 4070
Stanford, CA  94305
(650)723-9980
mtang at stanford.edu
http://snf.stanford.edu

-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: "Eric Guyer" <eguyer at stanford.edu>
Subject: RE: Gowning Room Cleanup
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 13:47:56 -0700
Size: 2284
URL: <http://snf.stanford.edu/pipermail/coral/attachments/20050927/3055b665/attachment.mht>

From exe9999927 at sohu.com  Thu Sep 29 22:58:45 2005
From: exe9999927 at sohu.com (=?GB2312?B?bG9uZ21pbmdodWk=?=)
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:58:45 +0800
Subject: =?GB2312?B?QW4gb3BlbiBsZXR0ZXIgdG8gQW1lcmljYW4gUHJlc2lkZW50IE1yLiBCdXNoICC+tNbCw8C5+tfczbOyvMqyz8jJ+rXEuau/qtDF?=
Message-ID: <0012484360$14376025$82845138@sohu.com>

An open letter to American President Mr. Bush  ??????????????
Hello, my respectable President Mr. Bush: 
The fact that DuPont declined to fulfill the agreement has been presented to you for several times via president at whitehouse.gov; As a result, president at whitehouse.gov sent back three letters containing the following same contents on the behalf of Mr. President in Sep 2004:?Thank you for e-mailing President Bush. Your ideas and comments are very important to him.? My ?ideas and comments? are as follows: it is verified by Mr. Huang with adequate facts and irrefutable legal evidences that DuPont must disburse Mr. Huang patent fee, license fee or equivalent ?Utter Compensation? fee and DuPont?s persistent refusal to disburse these fees infringes upon the intellectual property rights of Mr. Huang. president at whitehouse.gov mentioned ?are very important to him.? I don?t dare to unduly surmise the meaning of ?very important? to Mr. President; However, according to my humble opinions, there exits the following ?important?: on the one hand, respectable Mr. President, the American Government led by Mr. President as well as the great American people bitterly hate the predation of the intellectual property rights of others through brazen means such as stealing, shameless acts; in contrast, DuPont is committing such brazen and shameless deals; on the other hand, the number of your country?s intellectual property rights in a variety of fields is far in excess of that of any nations in the world and suffers greatly from rights infringement. Therefore, your government always reserves no efforts in urging other nations to intensify the law enforcement strength to protect your country?s intellectual property rights. However, while your government reserves no efforts in urging the Chinese government to intensify the law enforcement strength to protect your country?s intellectual property rights and receives your ?more encouraged? praise(note), DuPont is infringing the intellectual property rights of Mr. Huang through various extremely brazen and shameless means, which constitutes an extremely bad signal to the governments and public of other nations in the world, a extremely ?good? model for current and potential thieves of intellectual property rights, an enormous damage to your government protection of your country?s intellectual property rights, and a tremendous humiliation to your country?s lofty status in the world. For the sake of the glory of the great American people and the reputation of a legion of American corporations, in order to safeguard your country?s lofty status in the world and protect the intellectual property rights of your country and other nations in the world, we humbly request you and your government to prevent DuPont?s such extremely brazen infringement and even seizure behaviors, and force DuPont to carry out it?s voluntarily promised obligations in the agreement. We firmly believe that the United State is not a country that shields and connives at rascals and the American government is not a government that shields and connives at rascals; Under the instruction of our respectable Mr. President and the American government, the rascal of DuPont shall be aware of shame and be able to turn into a normal corporation by giving up shameless behaviors. Due to the adequate evidences, the clear-cut rights and obligations of both parties of DuPont and Mr. Huang, and simple legal relations, the infringement of the intellectual property rights of Mr. Huang by DuPont can be absolutely prevented and DuPont will surely disburse Mr. Huang patent fee, license fee or equivalent ?Utter Compensation? fee as long as your government intensifies the law enforcement strength to protect intellectual property rights as well. 
With best regards!
Authorized agent: SXF 2005.09.17.23?59 ?note? 
It was reported by China?s sina website on Sep 14, 2005 that China?s president 
Jintao Hu met with American president Bush in New York on Sep 13, and 
President Bush expressed his encouragement by the Chinese government 
actions to intensify the law enforcement strength to protect intellectual property 
rights. 
                     
Annex:
 Heartfelt thanks for your reading my E-mail and your mail of attention to this matter. I would like to make some replenishment concerning the matter, for you to judge and decide. 
I Abstract
1. At the request of Du Pont, Mr. Huang has for 10 times submitted written technical materials to Du Pont from April 1993 to 1994, for expert group of Du Pont to conduct feasibility analysis. 
2. On February 22, 1995, Dr Robert F Sklar, Technology Transfer Licensing Manager of DuPont arrived in Shanghai in China, to ?sign many agreements? with Mr. Huang. Mr. Huang insisted DuPont examines samples first before signs any agreement. However, as samples were still in the process of purification at the time, no agreements were signed then. 
3. On March 28, 1995, Mr. Huang sent the first batch of samples to Du Pont by post. 
4. On September 7, 1995, Mr. Huang received ?Biological Evaluation Agreement? (1995 Agreement) sent by Du Pont, requiring Mr. Huang to sign this agreement and again provide samples. Mr. Huang signed the agreement and sent second batch of samples as requested by DuPont. 
 DuPont admit in Article 5 of the ?1995 Agreement? that Mr. Huang will be entitled to claim patent and licensing fees. DuPont states in Article 8 of the ?1995 Agreement? that Mr. Huang may not cooperate with any universities or enterprises in any form before and after signing of this agreement (for this reason, Mr. Huang has refused cooperation request of several companies).
5. On September 10, 1998, DuPont sent a letter to Mr. Huang, asking for third batch of samples. 
6. In 1999, DuPont carried out a month-long insecticide screening on the third batch of samples (in fact, it has carried out weeds killing test and mould killing test in the meantime), and required to keep all these tests a secret. 
7. On June 8, 2000, DuPont sent a letter saying it was not interested in samples provided by Mr. Huang, and refused to pay Mr. Huang patent and licensing fees.
8.The mail signed by DuPont on June 2th, 2005, threaten  Mr.Huang ,and prevent Mr.Huang send the 
E-mail. 

 ??????????????
?????????????
?????????????????president at whitehouse.gov?????president at whitehouse.gov?? 2004?9??????????????????????Thank you for e-mailing President Bush. Your ideas and comments are very important to him.????ideas and comments????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????president at whitehouse.gov??are very important to him.?
?very important??????????????????????????????important? ?
1.?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
2.???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????
?????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
?? 
??????? 
??????SXF   2005.09.17.23?59

???
??sina?2005.09.14.????9?13???????????????????????????????????????????????????????
(???                       
 
  ?? 
  1. ?1993?4???1994??????????????????10????????????????
??????
  2. 1995?2?22?????????????Sklar?? ?E.I.DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY Robert  
F. Sklar Ph. D. Manager,Technology Transfer Licensing)???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????  
  3 1995?3?28????????????????  
  4. 1995?9?7????????????BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION AGREEMENT?1995???)?????????????????????????????????????????????????1995?????5??????????????????????????????????1995?????8?????????????????????????????????????????? ???? 
  5. 1998?9?10??????????????????
  6 1999????????????????Insecticide Screening???????????????????????????????????????
  7. 2000?6?8?????????????????,?????????????????  8.2005.06.02. ???????????????-??????????E-mail?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://snf.stanford.edu/pipermail/coral/attachments/20050930/f27d2b84/attachment.html>

From nanotech at nsti.org  Fri Sep 30 06:20:18 2005
From: nanotech at nsti.org (NSTI)
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 06:20:18 -0700
Subject: Nano Summit & Course Deadline Today
Message-ID: <SPARKLIST-6151228-2341222-2005.09.30-06.21.29--coral#snf.stanford.edu@spirit.sparklist.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://snf.stanford.edu/pipermail/coral/attachments/20050930/9bad62d9/attachment.html>