MLCommons/peoples_speech_v1.0 huggingface dataset:
i took a contract to bury the body of blasphemous bill mci when ever where ever or whatsoever the manner of death he died whether he die in the light of day or under the face moon in cabin or dance hall camp or dive follow and look to life found my tulis dead for bill was a day he kind of a cuss and his mind was mighty sot on a dinky patch with flowers and the grass in a civilized boat  and i hung that up on my cabin wall and i waited for bill to die and well years passed away but at last one day came a good chin with a story strange a long deserted line of traps way back in the big horn range of a little hut by the great divide in a white man stiff and still a lion nearby his lonesome self and i figured it must bill so i thought of the contract i'd made with him and i took down from the shelf the swell black box with the dinky silver plate he'd picked out for himself and i  worms riddled their purple heads out of the pale blue snow when the sofa pipe smoke breaks sudden off in the sky is weirdly lit and the careless feel of a bit of steel burns like a red hot spit when the mercury is a fruit of the ball and the frost stocks to kill well it was just like that that day that i set out to search for bill oh oh the awful hush that seemed to crush me down on for a grip on life that only the sourdough know north by the compass north i pressed river and peak and plain past like a dream i slipped the loose and i waked to dream again wall ice on the stove pipe ice on the bed ice gleaming over all sparkling ice in the dead man's face littering nice in his hair i seen his fingers ice and his art ice in his glassy and at last i spoke bill like his joke but still god dern his eyes a man had ought to consider his mates in the way he goes and dies have you ever stood in an arctic hut in the shadow of the do no good his arms and legs stuck out like pegs as if they was made a wood till at last i said it ain't no use he's froze to hard to thaw he's said sweep and i smoke my pipe and i meditate in the land of the midnight sun and i often wonder if they really was the awful things i do i sit and listen to the parson expounding on the law i often think about poor old bill and how hard he was t
diversity jurisdiction you know i'm not the trial attorney that chose to bring in federal court so i really can't comment on the why it's incredible court but but there is diversity of jurisdiction in this case it presents a little bit different than the last one that you h so there actually was quite a bit of prejudice once they kicked it out of this out of the federal court and stuck it into the state court but i think the brief really clearly points out all the arguments as to why the no local dispended rule only one circuit that decided it was jurisdiction with her court but if you take a close look at her and you read the last two pages it gives its reasoning behind the decision and they go on to say that this case is supreme court stepped in and said hey you know what there was subject matter jurisdiction when this case closed when there was a final judgment they disregarded the fact that there was a walk out of there at the time of removal and at the time of the judgment and they said that it was wa and they also pointed out the fact that the plaintiffs or the parties i should say never objected to it so then you get this her court they come in and they age they say hey there's this new problem on this program requires now in in also in this her case they come and they say well our case is different because in our case the plaintiffs did object so therefore it's not it's it doesn't fall within groups and that's the effect other than subject matter jurisdiction must be brought up within thirty days that's for the parties the second part which goes towards the ability to remand for lack of subject matter jurisdiction that's for the court t never ever be waived and the grubs case found that there was subject matter jurisdiction despite this and also if a tradition for removal stated on its face that there was a form sounded like it was more substantive but it wasn't subject matter jurisdiction so congress stepped in right after this this case heard the circuit and said hey this is  subject matter six could issue an order to show cause to the party to demonstrate why the case shouldn't be remanded i don't know i mean i can only tell you what you on the arm said which was that it is something when that order to show cause in our in our wrong in our own opinion absolutely and i searched he cured the jurisdiction of the fact that you think you're from the beginning but for a belief that there really were no substantial contents in california
a group they should avoid it but it wasn't always possible to avoid group i can't see why bruce good thing like that without some good reason apparent case against bruce jones was a strong one he was different from his classmates so no matter what happened bruce was suspected of the worst well i could a strong man what you say i lost all that like spelling now for sure that circumstances point to do bruce this is how it always seemed to work out bruce was in trouble even on the night of the class party roast was to become the topic of conversation wonder if bruce would want my blood after what i did to him what you did to him but he hit you didn't they yes but you don't know the whole story i had it coming i used to nail him all the time i think that song so he'd be sure to hear it you know what i mean well that day i walked by bruce was doing it again i guess it got under his skin and he just couldn't take it anymore golly that he didn't just dump you for no reason i don't think he knew what he was doing but i did and i told the principal the whole thing that the reason bruce is only on probation for that matter i am too funny i never stop to think there of these people must find the answer only through reexamination of his own feelings and attitudes or this is the problem of the individual more than of the group if bruce doesn't make it how i ever be able to face myself after all the things i've done to him things i'll never be able to apologize for bill was right in a way that doesn't really change any of the reasons why we didn't accept bruce into our group i now will they be able to understand why i have to help if i can i can't help thinking this is the right thing to do but it is a fast switch  same is it wasn't bruce at all i was the one neatly fitting people into categories because of where they go to church or what their father's day of what the color of their skin and you hear about other people president but you never feel guilty and he will live with you you're the one who's president what was it after all that made these people do the things they did was it a lack of understanding was
isn't like that what you did
says that faced with the task of interpreting the interplay between two sections that specific language should take priority over general are you claiming that there is an intervening change in the law that meets the miller versus gary standard for us as a panel to declare a prior three judge decision to be over though by the supreme court because i don't see s d no your honor i'm not claiming that well they were bound by that decision for purposes of these proceedings are winning yes you are ok and i have to tell you as a citizen and a trustees avoidance of a part of the lean in or is to your benefit and i'm wondering whether or not that argument runs into an obstacle with the language  before the district court could rule on our bill the trustee sold the house so it could no longer be abandoned and it became one of the other provisions i'm sure and all right thank you so mr jenkins you had a few minutes thank you your honor  we do not the less we get some encouragement from one or more members of this panel to do so we do not intend to file a petition for a rehearing on god we do intend to file a petition for certiorari and we know that's a long shot
afternoon gentlemen i'd like to begin by stating this sure and even come to this point of me having to appeal this case because the the motion was filed late as i proceed day before no no the st was not no it was not it was and it was revised two days later as well and there's also witnesses downstairs in the pro se clinic that were there with me that day looking at it all day seeing that the paperwork was not on time the next day we saw there was found that one twenty eight pm there was no version to be filed at all that day now continuing there's also issues  that we haven't even done anything like that and we have factual issues between the parties all through all four of their expert witnesses claim that either i was not wearing the seat belt or i was not wearing it properly but it's clearly stated in the police report and checked off that not only was a seatbelt on the lap portion of the belt was on all four of their experts of using the testimony of more vehicle claim and travis parents exact quotes are the motor was running but the airbags had the ploy and he could not remove the key so he shut off the car and called nine on this phone he said th were other cars that were stopped and mr michael was sitting on the passenger side seat after hitting the wall now they're all stating the experts are stating that i was either not wearing my seat belt or i was not or not wearing a properly because this statement that i was on the other side of the car but if he actually took the whole context of what he stated he also stated the which clearly we were in agreement it didn't about the ploy they just don't like they did they believe that they should have not the ploy meanwhile the facts state that they should have deployed because of the angle of the hit and how fast i was gong police report it's really gotten to the point i mean i have pictures that could prove anyone could look at these pictures and say the airbag should have deployed the evidence of the actual ambulance report the police reports clearly state where the car was hit that the airbags didn't deploy that they see problems on properly there's also i mean evidence of i don't know if i'm allowed to mention this because it's under a protective seal but general motors but there's paperwork that shows testing on the seat belts that were cancelled testing on the airbag centers that were canceled
what do you folks think you're doing anyway do you tell i i heard it over the radio how is it he'll be all right he's resting now he was terribly better take this back jamie we didn't know it was your dad jamie well i doubt if we'd known leave me alone take it jamie you keep it i don't want anything more to do it now look jamie don't get smart don't forget you could have been along instead of one of us could've been one of our happening like last night and the statute was broken in a theatre state and all that but we're all going to suffer for it i didn't have anything to do with it either and don't look at us we didn't kick over any statues you've got to help us jamie what do you expect me to do we're going over to the city council meeting right now and see if they will listen to our side before they do anything about it mr macpherson said we could go excuse us from school and he said you could go with us but all of them leave me out of everything your plan all i want to do is min anybody who stands up to you and pretty soon everyone else is laughing at him and you think you won well i don't care if you laugh or not it will be funny if the city council does what they're talking about i wouldn't advise any of you to go to that meeting if i were i'm sorry yes do you have some facts to give us that we don't already have i don't know what you call them facts or not but well everybody keeps talking about teenagers if we were a bunch of freaks or something or just wasting time on wasted too much time already we've invited mr macpherson harry friends for the high school and he can tell us anything these kids can tell us no no no i can't that's why when a student came to me today i asked him to say be willing to come down here and put their case before you and i think you should hear what they have to say this is bill still well the head of the student council and shaklee would captain of our football team and sally lawrence here as a senior class president and jamie jamie dad was the one who got her class not mr meyer izing mr macpherson bright and i think the students are right two teenagers are all delinquent only a few are involved in these criminal acts that we're all concerned about if these teenagers who represent all of the rest have the courage to come here then i think we should not only listen to them but i think we should invite them to have a stamp out of this vandalism i say let's let them talk we don't want to punish all teenagers for the trouble if you are causing but something has to be done you know how seriously juvenile delinquency problem has become we have to take some action to prevent this sort of thing from happening again now if you have some suggestions to offer we're willing to listen to you what can we do and what can you do to prevent given all the land can say you tell us
good morning our first case this morning is sinclair allison versus claims capture measure what is this the something more but we get an awful lot of guidance from above that you need something more then into the medical malpractise insurance or cage that declaration went on to say that they did that mainly because they think it's more efficient so if we ask ourselves underwater more have we preempted all practical use inquiry it talks about preemption that it also talks about is that trio words well understood conventional routine why isn't what's going on here that they're the abstract idea is the collecting and transferring information relevant to deciding how to define an intangible namely a legal application there are a couple ways to transfer electronically or not with where do you get the notion that i think gedge diaper referred to and asked about that the content of credentialing information even before this was in fact gathered by medical malpractise insurance
it can be like this i'm day out why meeting people is the thing i like most about my job i think it's fun having new people come into the office all the time it was as simple as that for rules meaning that the it was pleasant because she enjoyed people and greeted them with a smile for fabric meeting the public was tireless and unpleasant because their attitude was cold table go here i'll do like everything else is ready why don't you go in and sit down and rest for a few minutes frank i think i will if you really don't mind what you need is some good hot to make you feel better i know i'm tired but it's more of a raft a reflection of myself i don't see how it could be after all what do they expect i've got my work to do i can't stop and pass the time of day with every person who wants to start up a  in the days that followed barbara did her best to acquire a genuine interest in people where she found the smile their effect is only for their genuine she carefully practiced first basic rule in meeting the public it wasn't easy she made some mistakes of course she learned too that it's a mistake to argue with th well all right that's fine
for me airs like looking in the air and seen how i feel that a lot of people will say that i like you know crazy funny randal's witty and that regards to hair is usually more of the european sampling since i was very difficult of women of color to really be able to be comfortable with our hair and to do the things that we like to do with our hair when we have this competition of when we look at a magazine or when we look at a billboard or what we see on t v and what beauty is how you use the find in that way media plays a very large role in how we perceive ourselves and how we perceive  not only ourselves all what what beauty is and what beauty mean i think media is responsible for a lot of women young lady little girls in ability to have a really positive self same in regards to their hair and within their own body image and beauty i cut my hair because i needed to make a point prove a point to my daughter and to my close friends of the people around me around where character had nothing to do with my integrity or who i am who i represent everyone and i believe it was really important for me for her to see that lesson and what better way than for me to show her myself not just point out in the magazine or point out things that we happened to run across i'm a woman with short hair out in the community or as we're shopping at the mom or anything but i wanted her to see that i really
rob obviously not my client she's then during the trial been active the scene of the crime with the family which obviously is pretty unusual procedure but even this defendant's well the hours him he placed on the door and then they take a print off the door run the print and it turns up to be in the defendant that's pretty her identification was awful  truck store clerk was a witness that only only ever state the result might be different because this is the ideal first witness of witness who was not wearing their glasses and could not identify anybody with any certainty it can only make a big i didn't think usually the fellas but that was not the sole evidence against the first you have the testimony of a police officer observe the defendant were in the exact same building as robert within minutes of the robbery she observed him close range for a period of time and was about was going to approach and ask what are you doing there which is called where the robber was shown on the film placing his head the expert testimony was that he and fred at this location would not last long and that there was no or if i recall right it was a clear placed there by the robbery at the time of the robbery plus you have the fact that the jury was shown three different videos which the trial court in ruling on the motion for directed very said no you can't identify
specifically pitching tents they answer is not the record fails to support pallies post hoc claim that these were ten based arrests this court would be sufficient to defeat their claims per each of those cases with the respect each of those charges they had no d officers here could lawfully exclude them a st amendment discrimination claims that perform their arrest argument that dispersal order here reflected a reasonable time place or manner restriction it was content neutral and better applied to everyone without regard to speech who was narrowly tailored to the significant governmental interest in keeping the causes they bend open to the public and it was it left open and alternative channels of communication the plug in fact there their argument on that point keeps changing they say they had a property interest group and the district court rejected that they changed it to an interest that rd party beneficiary and their  pursed for the st time arguing that they had a st amendment liberty interest but they couldn't be can't they can't bootstrap their th amendment argument when there was a ballot time place or manner restriction  both will reserve decision on a nice day
to play to the sharp departure from conventional thinking when it created a method for making an l c d display that no longer require much front mounted screwups that meant it was set forth in the two three c p two three seven patent which revolutionized the use of l c d screens in laptop computers and allowed laptop makers to create a much larger l c d display area in the same footprint of existing laptop display case it towards rejection of the two three also say that you look to the claim language into the specification to see if the inventor was referring to a single one or i think the question was why you can change the claims to include sr even if you think the point is wrong obviously this is wrong on the problem so why didn't you just correct claim like i think we thought it was sufficiently submitted to the specification then the language was specifically clear a if you sit only teaches the one end and master nori might be with you know the pattern that issue here was specifically designed to avoid front mounted screws to see the the pat taking a screw and connecting it to the already joint synched up mass inori is a front mounted screw device only reason that you have a tight support screw in there is the front mounted screws creat flexing deformation that's why one when you're doing the hard looking at mansoor is not lead to getting rid of the front money screws nothing in the screw that wasn't used with a front mounted device it's a leap of logic for the board to say that the combination of mass inori and c'mon i want to ordinary skill in the art would have positive person to i think too based on those decisions your owners we think that the combination relied upon by the board the elements that those references themselves did not teach the claimed owners of the invention and there was no support for the combination i mean the concept of driving connecting multiple pieces of metal or plastic it's probably the case here with screws that go through two or three different pieces there around for years and years and years the and yet we don't see any reference in the board's opinion in any part outside of this precise setting is there any reason that the two references like you said this is really about connecting three elements you know in the dead same way that you would you've already connected to the exact cause the question is can you  references must surely know once it's k s r allows you to use common sense to come to the conclusion of why you combine the references but it doesn't allow you to add what's not s it's not enough just to say that you can extrapolate from the prior art to something that isn't found somewhere else in the prior to be combined but supposing that for example a mass of nori which has three sides screws on each side obvious but in this case all things are not the same mansion or still relies on the main function of connecting the its power its l c d display together by using front mounting screws and to the extent that
lived in or about august of two thousand and fourteen there were concerns about performance and hugs response or management's response to the plaintiff's request for a reasonable accommodation in we would argue that it's not that you know where in the record her response was or where the record shows that she responded well your honor by august twenty point two mean she had had ongoing litigation over but these accommodations that were offered in response to each of the three requests were reasonable and that's what matters  this is about an employee a longtime employee who had a very comfortable arrangement work with very little input from her supervisors she works independently well she didn't need lots of supervision and she certainly didn't managed by her new supervisor she wanted to continue to work independently she wanted the freedom to continue having four day weekend without having to take sick leave for anyone this is not a case where an employee ma that and there are some items that stand out st of all in this case we can look at a written job description after the october two thousand and twelve restructuring to figure out what management and finally unlike indolent news you're going to have disciplinary issues that arose after the restructuring and even if he was able to perform somewhat in the initial period there after which is the and those are contested in this action music and doesn't appeal the retaliation claims she had before the district court the that is yet them had disciplinary problems and that her performance declined after the restructuring and we can take again from