MLCommons/peoples_speech_v1.0 huggingface dataset:
antisubmarine rockets are ready submarines such as a nuclear powered pressure seek out their own kind  teamwork skill and courage are essential ingredients in this the most exacting of naval arch already submarine warfare today is advancing rapidly on all fronts with improved tactics and new equipment to find and destroy the elusive submarine the submarines traditional enemy is the destroyer these high speed sub hunters remain one of the most effective challenges to submarines threatening our sea lines of communication enterprise and forest are now turning to the wind to launch air craft each of these floating airfields as a spear of influence many hundreds of miles in diameter spears of influence which can be moved where needed these planes are visible evidence of how carrier aircraft supports directly and phidias forces over the beach or other combat troops farther inland similar to carrier catapult and arresting here is used to handle marine aircraft the gauge in support of the ground forces just after participating in twenty four hours of continuous fleet operations president kennedy leaves for washington and the affairs of state for the men of the navy and marine corps the exercise has been a brief but eventful interlude in a demanding schedule as they return to their jobs as they shoulder individually the heavy often lonely responsibility of preserving the peace they do sure to the support and confidence of their president and the one hundred eighty million people he represents where it was john f kennedy said on completing his review of the navy marine corps team as we leave the fleet today we are prouder than ever that we are citizens of the united states and supporters of these men who serve us so well
we're here today at robin wright in laughter and enchanted event for women we're going to be watching in on the opening ceremony as amethyst wildfire sets the intention for the day with her singing bowl  i work really hard to stay pure and clear and be a channel and part of my work is to stay grounded so that that big energy can come through and it was a blessing from spirit for this beautiful space and scene and well what i do with the bowls is i use the bowls to do sound healing work with individuals but i've been really called to do this group work where i go do concerts for people i do sound healing concerts and what i've discovered when i do that work is that i'm doing work on each individual in the audience as well as group work because everybody who comes together in a group has a purpose and a reason for coming together and often they come together for a group peeling for all kinds of things from past lives to current life thomas and the energy that comes through when the group is a tuning at the same time to that energy also serves to do land healing so it's living right up in bedford and next sunday i'm doing a concert at the holistic expo in nashua new hampshire at the holiday inn and then i'm doing another one in july there's a new england holistic practitioners and energy healers conference that's going to happen in the holiday so if people want to get more information about your services and about your upcoming concerts what would be the best contact information they could go right to my
that's i'm not quite sure why because he gave a sixty month sentence and the guidelines even if they were constitutional call for a higher range they know correct so you're only prospect would be to have the guidelines declared by this court to be unconstitutional well not exactly the district court judge sentenced under a pretty guideline regime which is what exists now although don't you risk your very serious prospect that you'll get a higher sense if you haven't you got sixty and they're going there and the guideline argument the guidelines were in constitutional and he said i'm going to send you but i'm not going to really i'm not going to consider these guidelines and here's the sense i think you should get based on your record you know you didn't say anything you know we can say we should just make him do it over again or just make him comply with do you have standing to challenge the constitutionality of the guidelines at this point i mean you can't have it both ways you can't say on the one hand that judge real was wrong in holding them unconstitutional reserve the rest of your time we'll hear from the government what you have done anything different if you knew the guidelines were not mandatory and this case the district court didn't believe in the guidelines and so i mean in that case the answer is obviously no i wouldn't have  right your honor because in this case it really is the opposite issue he's arguing the judge didn't consider the guidelines and in order to preserve that air below it would have been well your honor you should really no evidence why i consideration the guidelines would have helped him she did make some guidelines argument in the during the sentencing below and on appeal he doesn't really point to anything that he should he would the district judge does have the discretion to take into account all those things that are outlined in thirty five fifty three simply it's just that defendant needs to show prejudice in order to have the case go back for the sentencing ok i left probably your strongest argument but i'm still just a little uncomfortable with the idea of firming sentence where the judge expressly finds the constitution of the guidelines to be unconstitutional give me some comfort generally because ok thanks very much the case just argued will be submitted for
the way it's in between he chooses to step over the snow pile he splits and he falls that's correct ok so when he fell he was in the process of completing his activities doing what he was supposed to do so you're his own personal convenience you say the case for the new emphasis of quite a bit was the case in which the employee took a certain route leaving the employment but the person was already off the clock and they were leaving the premises he's working here his convenience he's still doing the care whether he walks around the bus or walks in between them and this not now he's still in the process is it out of performing an act that's part of his job realm of being a compensable risk and then transform it into a situation he's acting solely for his own personal can you beat me inside the way you're saying that personal convenience mean really not reacting in the employee's interest when he does interest of them for he was still on the clock he was of leaving the premises whether or he wasn't going to play tennis with my no stepping in the snow but he was in the process of completing his job duties even though he stepped in the snow certainly stepping in the snow was a not a part of his assigned duties but i like to play with him that's when he was in the process though of fulfilling his responsibilities that is perverse in one area to the other to check the fool did you prepare this free i or someone else oh are you aware of the rule that requires the arbitrator's decision
juror number twenty three was as soon as she needed or i guess it was on monday morning was separated from the other jurors that's correct what happened was that the euro came in the morning before so how would your under those circumstances how would jerde twenty three have had the opportunity to talk to the other jurors about that before she was separated from them on monday morning well that's  quite neatly not whether there was contamination but whether there was opportunity or there was no i was not showing it in this matter because she was immediately taken she came in inform the marshals and then was taken aside so there was no letters after she was excused to in this case i mean and the jury is rigged with regard to counsel's argument that there was talk or discussion among the jurors there was actually no evidence  yes it was this incident in which regarding alternate juror number sixty turning and making a statement in a whisper which even the juror number eight stated she couldn't even hear him because she was full and it was such a low voice you can even he an alternate juror number sixty again we have an issue it was cut off before there was any any contamination of the jury what we have is a judge called in talk to a number sixty and you follow the pattern he discussed with number
been working over the last few years on trying to get some things that will bloom in august and they are coming there right now there are a lot more buds than blooms but in another two weeks i think i'll have a lot of color again but it's interesting there's a lot of blue and lavender early in the season and pink and white and now i'm finding that everything almost everything that comes out is going to be yellow so there's another thing to work on as finding i understand that they sold all the tickets had to turn people away because they had there was a team at one of the homes and they were afraid they'd run out of tea and food but it was i think one hundred sixty tickets they sold and of the place where are we actually what do we see on the horizon well where we are is on pleasant valley road just beyond underhill center right across the way the road from casey's hill and view but we settle for this in the summer and can see all the way around in the winter gardens always have a history so when you started to what was it here was it a farm what did you find you we found very dense woods like what's behind you and spent quite a lot of time just cutting trees and clearing the land peter and i were both working full time at the time and so we'd come home in the summer at night and work until dark and  how did it develop so that you have all the trees cut and you are and there we were and we thought we're not going to mow all this is bad for us bad for the environment there are better things to do with our time so we made some vegetable gardens and left the rest pretty wild and then we started making little flower gardens here and there to kind of create some reason to not go any further out we cut the big field once a year and it's actually turned into a field we come across the home and think now where can this go this is a very nice bed also so what kind of plans for do we have here we have a mix that one of the things i love is down there it's  just spread like crazy it's called cause mia and i saw it i saw it in somebodies garden and looked for it and found it but last year hiking in cornwall in england it was growing wild all over the place and i think me she makes some suggestions but basically i find things i like and then bring them home and figure out where to put them so here you have a corner of it all for lease yazid the good time for the lately so it's a good go oh i have the vision i have i have some in the shade that are that are about and maybe that high but that one yeah it's huge i can't i can't control it but i don't yeah that loves that spot too is way bigger than any of the other man i ruined my garden so dear brings me to the question of how you are gardening how how do you plan it i plan it by buying something bringing it home height oh i saw that it is narrow leaves and why the only border color match and then the the dark smoke bush over here in contrast with that with the grey but it means moving stuff around all the time since i don't
this in this case the way it is and there is sufficient evidence to support the commission position thank you thank you counsel down so you may respond mission found the claim his credibility was quote unquote affected by his denial of prior back pain clearly indicated in the records medication that the medical records history indicated he did prior ba had prior complaints in some of the treating physician was for the condition better alone even if the doctor never gave him my medication what's the difference do you see the doctor or not you did ok and it was for now there's no medical evidence that that some kind of effect directly related to the injury cause also mentioned the problem or indicated that you prosecution was soft that was a worry in this second report it still stands that
the winter
and repair shop in the hundreds of deadly anti personnel bombs
four there's a confusing footnote that says plaintiff is no longer pursuing infringement allegations against itself as an echo sixty five system or echo forty four are indeed the system and disputes any allegation case and you're basically arguing that yes there is good roger pointed out there's a statement that you made in your we don't have a row one from a different court on that issue w issue that the on the court below found that the claims were not supported by the earliest allocation we would ask of the court look at the expressive language of the patents and that is a basic bracket having at least one course there's no dispute that all of those sort of claims are invalid if not entitled to the two thousand and nine after cation filing provisional application that's the figure forty one issue it absolutely is an incomplete did not explicitly argue that the washer and body months in the two thousand and nine application were inadequate because they only disclose use of bracket seven hundred the district court arguments against it and have an opportunity to respond having been satisfied no your honor i don't think so they had the opportunity to respond at that hearing that they could have raised issue with the district court ruling below and this issue was barely in front of the court as to whether embodiments were claimed with out of it that you know require washer we call them the washer listen bottom that's covered by the claims or not disclose and the that it was purporting to solve one of those problems was the washer to air water to get into the assembly through the hole in the top of the flash the other problem was implied that the washer could deteriorate by being exposed to the elements and so the in order for you to prevail in knocking out all the claims on the written description and you need to agree with you that the nine application doesn't support  expert declaration if the district court was wrong with respect to crimes of them perhaps see expert declaration does raise a genuine issue material no i would disagree with that your honor because the decorations of water getting into the assembly that is using the washer and every application down the line in the chain was more and more precise about the washer being an important and essential and that's a serious aspect of these an issue fact about what a person of skill in the air will take from the text of the two thousand application and each of the following disclosures which got more and more precise as time went on it up to the two thousand and twelve after cation where the title of the if and invalidating proposition here based on the genus species theory was something that the judge no doubt picked up after having read trunks which you cited for a plain vanilla proposition you don't have to you don't have to put up enough evidence to when the guts of the jury in our system fair enough your honor but there must be enough evidence to get to the jury and here they are about that's something that you know the issues
that's that's his problem i mean is that that's because he came here was timelash he didn't have to come here so we've already said in van that that's not a relevant consideration the fact that he can no longer go back at the time he came to this country he had time left on his mission but it seems to me you've got a case where he was there for ten years he was employed he and he got married he had two cancer he ran  the deciding factor should be that if you could remain in mexico he had to leave he was not able to locate permission to remain there legally and if he remained here decision what's important is where you from the resettled prior to your arrival into the united states and of the church that in this case he was and the issue of whether he could go back at this point is relevant and he did when he came to the united states initially he could have gone people from persecution when a flight from that country and permit settlement has been used to say in this case they're not in flight from persecution their lives somewhere else and it appears they've got a residency there so there's no basis for us to now again that would be something that would be within the discretion you know the part of homeland security and i don't know what they would do at that point but you know it would be something before the court and me it's not the all issue of
explicitly that all other documents are to be you know available for inspection yes and they have to if they were itemized clearly if they're made available easily this is a document between the plan scription i feel deeply quickly because i want to say your honor that even going even assuming that we look at both documents and that the amendment provision whatever the group insurance contract is this document this is the group insurance distinct document if you amend this document then that amendment will not affect prior claims it does not say if you meant any of the documents that comprise the entire group contract i think it's the words they use the words group contra if they had if they had put the limitation and afterwards we talked about this in the district court about the question of health and welfare plans not being invested as opposed to pension plans and by you would be making precisely the opposite argument in that situation trying to argue that this one features company wrote the second plan as well as the first plane and s p d they put in there a limitation saying this does not apply to individuals who are already disabled they didn't they gave it to my  that we believe this is a very the issues are very well briefed i have not much to add but that i believe that this is purely a case of contract construction i believe that the it's very clear as judge white found that there was at all times the provision in the group insurance contract which dealt with the issue of amendments and how they are to be construed and it's a neutral provision even if we even if we  all of the issues of contract construction where all the limitations are exceptions must be clearly set forth in this time replant description as required by respect this is not one of the this is not a provision of limitation this is simply well i don't think that there's really much of a problem if you want to do that frankly though i believe that a risk certainly is very specific and has numerous provisions talking about what the agreements are supposed to look like and which ones tense how you it depends how that's done if we look at the way in which the insurance co provisions have been applied and actually if we look at the fact that they don't seem to have ever been  the the group insurance policy will usually trump it if it is more favorable to the beneficiary and i don't think that's inconsistent frankly i think that's what a risk would require and i think that's what state law would require same document the same type of document which was later amended or the same doc and which was amended at a later point the issue that we're dealing with here is what do you do with an amended plan how is that construed and that specific issue is only addressed in the group insurance contract and both plans have identical provisions for referring you back to the group insurance contract or anything for
in two instances in this case the first being that the court considered evidence in the context of the summary judgment motion that was not before the court the court therefore amended in advisory appellate request for a kid continuance of the summary judgment motion pursuant to f r c p fifty six and properly presented that request with supporting documentation and declarations by discovery i need to undertake the positions the documents exact is that you're saying that that is my understanding and that is my understanding of what our declaration stated to our course carbury did you tell supervisor for the defendant and in that position he advised that he had literally a truckload of documents that could be related to this case that we were previously unaware of and we get by the court that we needed to take a few of his conduct by defense counsel in failing to hear through the spirit of the discovery act is following in the state case as it did in the federal case and we are now before the court in oakland with a motion to compel that's why i just want to say that with regard to the issue of the quest for the continuance the court considered the writings of myself in opposing counsel with regard to the pertinence of these documents and found in favor of the defen couldn't provide any nexus to how these documents related to anything we didn't rely upon in our motion we simply in the context of providing everything on something came up at a deposition that our best one was that it was  from oh this was a different issue and so in that context we said well here's you know here all the people who are available these days that it's apples and oranges and again that the you can't just kind of show off the last minute and say i want to do more discovery and not  claims other than the promotional quite right the argument that we were talking about in terms of the need for further discovery was relating to the title seven case to these other issues one of the documents relate to situation that would have allowed for mr taylor with his senior position to get promoted over and above other people who we were promoted even though they were lower down on the scale which is by our tip of the you know agreement between ammunition we were going to present with the counter that in addition to the deposition indicated there were other documents that may lead to ignorance of the residents regarding that issue so i'll leave it at that i agree that there this is a gray area here in that there's pluses and minuses on both sides but back to the back to the other issue i think is very clear that the court said that the workplace harassment and the hostile work environment were not part of the underlying case and couldn't even in the most liberal interpretation of the complaint be expected to come in in this case and informal or not it was never the proper bringing of these causes of action before the court and therefore it improperly ruled on
under both the fifth and sixth amendment to the united states constitution any fact necessary to punishment must be alleged in the indictment and proving to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt and united twenty years in custody the government alleged no date of deportation in this case and thus the maximum penalty is two years in custody because a district court judge enhanced the sentence to wel recommitted structural air deportation in this case but stepping back many going back to the problems with the indictment in this case that's a pretty it's been clear that the indictment must contain an allegation of every fact which is legally essential to the punishment to be hard conviction they didn't do that their failure to do that and violated mr wagram else's business rights to notice to present and to a finding beyond a reasonable doubt of the data deportation we don't have that in this case because the government though the defendant did not admit to it and even though the judge did not specifically find this particular date he doesn't have to make factual finding a particular finding in a record when the defendant doesn't those protections are present in the grand jury and that is what makes the grand jury different now the sentencing hearing is too late that's the second point the sentencing hearing is too late to find that well the probation report so there's three  removals that's exactly what this court just disagreed with