MLCommons/peoples_speech_v1.0 huggingface dataset:
know as early as world war two right but my understanding from our case law is that something like that doesn't have to be corroborated there is a there's a case of ours  earlier point well i do think there's a dispute over whether it was well known so i think there has to be some i mean as according to the record there isn't any documentary evidence and if it was well known and why couldn't there be at least one exhibit showing here's here combine the bevan device with the s s r s s r to update it using modern electronic components in order to gain the commonly understood benefits of such adaptations such as decreased as increased the liability simplify the operation and reduced cost you have a sense for whether that's applicable to your case i don't know been able to use of the small ones of those on the side homes other things keep in mind that this technology that you just heard of carry around it's tearing around from your r v it's not like you can walk to a football game up in the stands and it is still so the role really the same the technology is all the same they all have the same parts there's a reflector there's all motor block speaking of the homeowners block that's been in existence is their business satellite dishes whether you put it in front o that technology i believe is accurately as said by that this rover goes back to world war two there were satellite antennas in world war two that came later when he testified about these components the dish that he was referring to also there were no dishes or there was no t v in world war two or two there are no satellite dishes so i have to i have to refer i'm not sure whether it's limited to satellite dishes or not with his testimony was this technology goes back to world war two and importantly none of his testimony was challenge was talking about motorized and thank you around for clarifying and then he goes on and says there was a standard book came out and in forty seven have the second world war and collected all of the research that particular book has drawing dennet of the front feet and that refute we can't tell exactly whether he was still talking about motorized and presumably was and that's when the scar jacked it to the book why didn't you get the book something of that his generalized idea that well i remember when not to use what he says he says there was a standard book which i didn't write because it was written before i even graduated from college corroborate under rooters rule of reason when you look at it is the testimony credible was the testimony challenge we know the testimony was not challenged there was no evidence counterevidence it's there proof that's one element one thing we require not to mention the federal rules of evidence on hearsay and foundation that are required to protect at a holder for policy reasons we don't want to set up a standard where you have to have an x and by the way experts have never been held by this court to require corroboration proper ation it's come in when there's been a single witness who's been asked to testify who's not an expert on events that he or she saw in this case it was contemporaneous
please come back as soon as the votes are over we go one more
and we have submitted a large portfolio which took us many years to prepare and if you have any questions i think it's very complete if you have any questions i'd be happy to answer them planning department just like to bring to your attention the there is a current conditional permit on the parcel and it has been renewed three different three different occasions at the last renewal i believe it was mentioned  for the next ten years should be adequate time for them to pursue a conditional permit and so that's what we're doing today it went to the planning commission on february tenth tw is are the allowed uses in s p r could i was just looking that up certainly the yes single family dwellings duplex dwellings green houses truck but there are small scale right types of business uses so the i think i believe if that's the property i'm thinking of that's right now as a court reporter is that the yes yeah right it's pretty close there to one main plaza rights right next door sort of in the shadow ok i guess my only concern or question to the department is are they ok with all those uses if they decide to change if the court reporter i don't think it's their business their rent to get out assuming they're leasing it out drawing out it's kind of i've been there before so it could be a house you could turn it into a house pretty quickly yeah you could so you're ok with the short term and all there being be sure coach thank you mr chairman i want to thank the applicants in the department and this is what again channeling mr holcombe of this is what we would like people who are doing the use that was in the
your interpretation of the statute about not reasonable during that entire twenty six year period and why their resources on did not engage in the  much better idea than i am this but from looking at the legislative history it looks to me as if congress simply overlooked the possibility that certain mines would have both types of coal are multiple types of coal and they were dealing with the assumption that a mine w lignite let me ask you a question right off the bat that that has been troubling me about this case i suppose that why dak used the old fashioned method of extractin the mine how can it make a difference to the outcome as to what the size of the particles is here we have small particles that would be impossible to separate when they get to the surface but presumably they were separated when they were down in the mine and in any event it's a combination is not of no chemical reactions just a combination of lignite and snow by two minutes why isn't the same result as with the large chunks of this course appropriately focused that there is currently not a method post blacking method that could be used to you know i understand it but it just seems to me odd to say that a mixture that consists of large chunks is treated one way and a mixture that consists of small individual particles is treated another way when there's no difference other than the size of the chunks or particles well this court had said that what what needs to be looked at  test which is to be to human level so pony's were example that the product was actually fifty five percent lignite it's a mixture but fifty five we we learned that fifty five percent of it is  product that comes out of the ground it's not like night correct so you've got a one part test right is just to be to a level i know you're wondering it's what it's larger than that it's also a voice mineral matter of oh ok but certain way to set had wanted to say only if it's only late night not blended with anything else i mean would it have made more sense for congress to say that if they wanted the result that this binary result that you'd find well i think that i think it was requirement that it be predominantly lignite even though the bt you level was below eighty three hundred or not one well i mean it's suppose you get something which was predominant agency's interpretation of some regulations but not when it's a position taken in the course of litigation when does this position of the agency with respect to the mixtures
of his various claims straight he had made a number of claims going back i guess to ninety ninety three and then well ninety ninety three ultimately made a claim in two thousand but several different claims including one as to which there was a denial i guess in february two thousand and two regarding the back unless me an a statement of the case ultimately in march two thousand and three so it was unclear to me whether the the appeal that they were referring to in a little cryptic no on the piece of paper was an appeal from that the nile and state in the case at that point wouldn't he wouldn't isn't the problem at that point that he hadn't had a notice of disagreement which would have triggered the statement of the case which in turn would have given him a right of appeal but that's not that's not what your honor i that which is the normal kind of irregularity in the standing process what other kinds in regularity do you think fit within this the irregularity in presumption for  ok and what i'm having a hard time period is exactly what it is the legal rule that you think should be applied and what you not applied in this case to presumption are a letter was mailed in the first place i think that that would be evidence that would be rebuttal evidence right but you know so much of your case rests on the notion that there was a misinterpret fact that he's repeatedly calling we just again indicate not proceed and there could be other grounds if if the if the da knows that the deadline is approaching and is not respond to that request in a timely manner there could be an argument before the so i'm trying to understand exactly what the presumption of regularity entails and i think it just raises questions get to the heart of it which is is it only about mailing order is it also about receipt such as addressing arab had to be a that was a consequence of the delivery and it goes on to talk about and that's why i guess what i'm wondering is are there circumstances beyond a enjoyable indication of an the court or the board was working under the misimpression that  likelihood their certainty that it was a problem in delivery does that work to rebut the presumption of regularity this goes right back to the question of whether the court in saying that you need clear evidence that  tons of mean little posted no handwritten by him all the time and in fact verbal he told me at various points when i come home usually i've got a mailbox full of junk i don't go to come home there's nothing in it and the next day the mail me and sa i guess what i'm trying to get at is a regular eagle only to the v a s action or does it extend to other parties actions within the branch of the government like the post office i think that the like it doesn't include judge moore's post i don't think there'd be a well i don't think the better of the court was necessarily trying to contemplate every single situation that could come into play i think the only have the only issue that was really
in his petition for a view from the decision of the board finding him removal of manning convicted of an enemy found me i'm trying to figure out how we got sixteen months or twelve months prior show me in the record and explain it to me because it's basically that even though the california death forgery statutes and the and steadily forgery statutes basically the same way the california right because the fed that porter statutes in general don't have a separate s to do just as good first on says without reading the statute and i thought what your argument was going to be about is can you have to be here to defraud or order a fictitious bill without
good morning and welcome to the twenty fourteen brendan's home run five k race here in the beautiful downtown belmont we're here with belmont media center covering this great event with the community and join us today on this beautiful father's day as we watch from the elite to the end of the line we've seen quite a a ray of runners there is quite a few women a lot of kids course the lead runners have long gone off there is our assistant police chief i'm rooting for him to win people with kids and here's our stroller division just entering the gate happy to be a part of it so you were out on the course yes i was a road marshal i've been organizing the road marshals for for many years and they came out today i brought some belmont teachers along with us to help represent the beat don't want to case association i brought the  out there today perfect doesn't get any better had you rounded us and of course the record out there said no no just chilling with my daughter and you ran with your daughter that's nice is very nice this is your how many times have you run this right i don't know i don't i'm not sure i've ever missed one he's never missed one that's terrific mark and i don't try to come every year it's a great charity isn't it it's a wonderful cause a wonderful day it's just a great feeling thanks for being here son i really appreciate it and here we sharpton race as well that's right yeah i was there i saw rector for the race was our first time voting out on again brian in case you were tremendous in all their support for us and it really was a wonderful day and i we're here supporting them in any way we can we want to build a good running community in belmont and really really great because thanks ladies and that's it for today here on a lovely father's day as we leave the brendan's home run it was a terrific race with a lot of people both from belmont and beyond this is growing to be quite a race we saw a lot of really good runners out here was terrific to talk to them we like to thank the grant family for everything they've done for this town right over my shoulder here is the grand field which is really one of the premier fields in the middle sex district thank them so much for doing so much for all of us it was a terrific day abbie bothers day to everyone and i'm on the track because i'm going to have to get running if i'm going to make this race next year th harnett i'm really high and
sure that our is our responsibility yet had some of these and we have gone ahead and decided that the public interest exception least a month i've been involved in but there was a clearly sound reason to do that and i'm just not sure here that i'm focusing on your argument as to that reason i know you wanted to give them insight but it seems to
which says that a preparer is reckless in not knowing of a rule or regulation if the preparer makes little or no effort to determine whether a brule or regulation exists and here's that regulation and therefore this penalty is not relationship with the taxpayers ross kalar and their companies and he admits that he was the return prepare for all nine of the returns at as set forth in the district court here's what do we do that i think you can still look at the pinion as a whole and look at the detail findings on willfulness and look at the court statements that rogers well fully roger conduct was well fall and not necessarily be bound by that those statements now our position is that the court found that roger's conduct just look at the facts and find willfulness i'm not saying ignore i'm saying interpret the court's opinion as him the court meaning what it said when it so there were some parts of the opinion where the court used the word criminal conviction the government will rely on that to collaterally a stop as if a defendant from denying the civil consequences of the same conduct however that doesn't mean it doesn't go the other way around and in fact the government is allowed to rely on a civil in order to stop a defendant in a criminal context so it's the criminal returns for many years and he helped set up the accounting system that these three companies followed he was intimately acquainted and familiar with the accounting systems and very familiar with how they instructed the book keeper of the companies who by the way was trained by a former employee of rogers so the the bookkeeper was instructed by rogers  to make alterations to the financial statements of the companies and in roger's own words these alterations were made and i quote to support the tax return as it w statements were generated and rogers and his staff would make alterations to these to support the tax returns so in some cases such as country club dues they were originally so in some cases even the general letters were altered and rogers and his staff instructed there were specific instances of rogers instructing the staff to make alterations to the general had some very important language which talks and that applies to well fullness and reckless and it applies to the situation here where mr rogers was saying oh well i just relied on what was given to me i just looked  sufficiently stated that the amount of the principal and that's it's on the form so again he's saying he didn't look at it but under the regs you are be required and then for a passive activity loss that's and the return for perry said and even then pickering said that was weak but here on page two or three the testimony is if it's a corporate return we are adjusting we suggest the corporation the corrections to the account balances and we get a new profit and loss to support the tax return as it then would appear what's going on here is that mr rogers is an account he is suggesting necessary corrections to the company's accounting which then in turn
builds according to a plan three centuries o that's my boy the one in the middle people tell me he looks like me he walks like his  for this city can be what it wishes to be it can produce whatever it wishes to produce writers of any kind waste of any beauty of any kind there is out of the mind what fortunes have been spent on the city's distinguished landmark and its history lives in stone we want them to go on with it for the sake of the door they've got to go on
discretion and determining adversely the claim and i think that's what the district court relied on to do that sort of a loss of sight and really the only case it
all that and now you know i'm talking about the brand you can really your mind can really you know be stable and stagnant when you're working a nine to five job an office with a bunch of old ladies well you're rich yeah and there's only one thing we need to better ok see i want it yeah ok but no debbie real butter because i borrowed it from i'll give you the money ok bye bye issues and i really like you know things be a lot different but i don't know why but last year i was a lot more into it than i am this year you know the reason you become active in something like that is because you think that maybe you can change it and you know right now i question that you know i really question it right now i think i'm more maybe selfish but i think i'm more interested you know and getting myself together  marijuana well i think it's a good thing all the further away she stays the better you know it's easy to get and i think you have to kind of stupid to really get busted you know i'm just chancing happens but it's really weird that when i get stoned i can't think like i forget things like in the middle of the forget what i'm talking about i can communicate with people there's a different level sometimes which is really a trip a lot of people can function really well on grass but i'm not one of those people
this is ms karen kingsley youthful gifted attractive a successful freelance architect who still finds time to serve the children of her community as a volunteer crossing  we learn the kids playing with matches and smoking cigarettes carelessly more house by than anything else yes lots of buyers are caused by carelessness at home and electrical fire you dangerous too if you were aware that danger you could have afforded it you know something as simple as a can of baking soda bread on that fire would have given you precious moment to think you're right tasty woman do you know the danger dr salut kevin aware alert ally that's right now let's review what's meant by the danger dodger motto being aware of and knowing the dangers that surround us and being alert involved planning ahead to avoid those dangers knowing what to do is what keeps us alive getting an early warning can save lives many people use smoke detectors in their homes to warn them of a fire before it has a chance to spread and that's an excellent  but knowing what to do after the alarm is doubt it is even more important phone immediately and have the fire emergency never take right to your telephone always sleep with a flashlight near at hand in case of a power failure i know several ways to get out of a how to fire spot the door good for your cabin you know that should be part of every family fires a vital plan along with regular home fire drills to make sure that that plan is a good one is taking the door off his old refrigerator this is a lot of work but it sure is worth it don't want a little kid get stuck inside the skating will dad gets home from give me the one thing everyone needs to know about guns is there every gun is a loaded gun to dangerous things like a gun how are we going to avoid the more innocent looking things around our home to harm us almost as much toys certainly don't look as deadly as a gun but left scattered around on a flight stairs they can be just as dangerous falls are the most common cause of home injuries be sure the hallways and stairwells are well lighted tommy hundreds of boys and girls are badly injured every year and falls around the house the could be avoided picking up your own fighting and helping a younger brother or sister to pick up their can save a life that life could be your own or that of someone you love golly step out onto a dry area while reaching are especially dangerous just last week for example harry tried to hang a plan to tell you to reach the hook he had to use a step ladder but the one she chose was a little too short he cleaning products and pain to be stored on high shelves well out of the reach of small children we all need to learn to read labels more carefully tommy looking for key words like danger caution exactly right labels are important but appliances don't have labels to warn of the lexical shock always get permission from your parent before using any electrical tool or appliance and as a safety precaution always stand in a dry place when touching anything electrical worn wiring can cause severe electrical shock or fire it should be repaired or replace
discretion standard there were that factual premise was untrue and i think it is that it seems to ignore our mandate from our prior decision we said look at this again i think i mean my concern is even if we find agree that it was clear error to find close claim construction that there was any reasonable position here even if that's a baseline that there oppose claim construction conduct was unreasonable  the repeated filing of patent infringement actions for the sole purpose of forcing settlements with no intention of testing the merits of one's claims is relevant to the courts exceptional case determination any idea where the settlements were of comparable value to the ones here ordered the court to look at it all again under the new standards under marketing and it worked didn't do that it's just wholesale adopting these actual findings and i'm not going to change the outcome  aware of these facts and was trying to get it right i take the court's opinion in face value that he didn't carefully consider so as you have this record and looked at this post quite a construction issue and said i think that there is still a reasonable has to be done with the legal standard changes when the burden of proof changes and his refusal to do that was clearly erroneous we do not think that this court has to read and for another determination or failure to determine the facts we think