alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
TO BE PUBLISHED



# ,i5uprrIttr &turf of 

# 7 rnfurkv

2015-SC-000660-KB

KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION MOVANT

V. IN SUPREME COURT

THOMAS MARGOLIS RESPONDENT KBA MEMBER NO. 93972

OPINION AND ORDER IMPOSING RECIPROCAL DISCIPLINE
Respondent, Thomas Margolis, was admitted to the practice of law in the Commonwealth of Kentucky on February 11, 2011. His bar roster address is P.O. Box 1163, Carbondale, Illinois 62903, and his member number is 93972. On September 21, 2015, the Supreme Court of Illinois found Respondent guilty of the following eleven violations of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct: 8.4(c) (conduct involving dishonesty, deceit, fraud, or misrepresentation); 8.4(d) (conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice); 1.2(a) (two counts) (failure to consult with client about settlement of a matter); 1.4(a)(1) (two counts) (failure to inform client of a decision to which the client's informed consent is required); 1.4(a)(2) (two counts) (failure to reasonably consult with a client about the means of representation); 1.4(a)(3) (two counts) (failure to keep client informed); 1.4(b) (failure to explain a matter to the client to the extent reasonably necessary for the client to make an informed decision). 

### In re:Thomas E. Margolis, Supreme Court No. M.R. 27546 (2014). The Supreme

Court of Illinois imposed a thirty-day suspension effective October 13, 2015. Pursuant to SCR 3.435(4), Respondent is subject to identical reciprocal discipline in the Commonwealth of Kentucky unless he proves by substantial evidence: (a) a lack of jurisdiction or fraud in the Illinois disciplinary action, or (b) that his misconduct warrants substantially different discipline in this Commonwealth. On. November 12, 2015, the Kentucky Bar Association (KBA) filed a petition for reciprocal discipline pursuant to SCR 3.435. On November 16, 2015, this Court ordered the following: Within twenty (20) days of the date of the entry of this order, Respondent is ordered to show cause why he should not be suspended from the practice of law for thirty (30) days, as consistent with an order of identical discipline from the Supreme Court of Illinois. Respondent failed to comply with the November 16, 2015, order. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED that Respondent, Thomas Margolis, KBA Member Number 93972, is suspended from the practice of law in the Commonwealth of Kentucky for a period of thirty days (30) days from the entry of this opinion and order. All sitting. All concur. ENTERED: June 16, 2016.

2
Affirm and Opinion Filed October 1, 2013 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-12-01476-CR 

JOSE FRANCISCO ORTEZ, Appellant 

V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. F01-52273-M 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Justices FitzGerald, Francis, and Myers 

Opinion by Justice Francis 

Jose Francisco Ortez appeals from the adjudication of his guilt for aggravated robbery 

with a deadly weapon. The trial court assessed punishment at imprisonment for seven years. On 

appeal, appellant’s attorney filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and 

without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). 

The brief presents a professional evaluation of the record showing why, in effect, there are no 

arguable grounds to advance. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel 

Op.] 1978). Counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant. We advised appellant of his right 

to file a pro se response, but he did not file a pro se response. 
‐2‐ 

 We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 

827 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (explaining appellate court’s duty in Anders cases). We agree the 

appeal is frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support 

the appeal. 

 We affirm the trial court’s judgment. 

Do Not Publish 

TEX. R. APP. P. 47 

131295F.U05 

/Molly Francis/ 

MOLLY FRANCIS 

JUSTICE 
‐3‐ 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

JOSE FRANCISCO ORTEZ, Appellant 

No. 05-12-01476-CR V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

 Appeal from the 194th Judicial District 

Court of Dallas County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 

F01-52273-M). 

Opinion delivered by Justice Francis, 

Justices FitzGerald and Myers participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. 

Judgment entered October 1, 2013 

/Molly Francis/ 

MOLLY FRANCIS 

JUSTICE
###### Editorial Note on Part 120

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 120 appear at 72 FR 50039, Aug. 30, 2007.

#### § 120.175 Coastal barrier islands.

SBA and Intermediaries may not make or guarantee any loan within the Coastal Barrier Resource System.
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

FORT LAUDERDALE DIVISION

CASE NO. 20-61249-CIV-DIMITROULEAS

JHON SARMIENTO, Individually and 

on behalf of all others similary situated,

Plaintiff,

vs.

SCHEAR CONSTRUCTION, LLC, a 

Florida Limited Liability Company, 

Defendant.

/

NOTICE OF ENTRY OF PARTY

Plaintiff, JHON SARMIENTO, on behalf of himself and those similarly situated, gives 

notice gives notice of the entry of ANGEL FERNANDEZ, as an Opt-in Plaintiff in the instant case. 

Plaintiff hereby requests that ANGEL FERNANDEZ be added to the docket as an additional party.

DATED this 27th of July, 2020.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ ANDREW R. FRISCH______

ANDREW R. FRISCH

MORGAN & MORGAN, P.A.

8151 Peters Road., 4th Floor

Plantation, Florida 33324

Telephone: (954) WORKERS

Facsimile: (954) 327-3013

E-mail: AFrisch@forthepeople.com

Trial Counsel for Plaintiff

Case 0:20-cv-61249-WPD Document 9 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/27/2020 Page 1 of 2
2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this 27th day of July 2020, I electronically filed the foregoing with 

the Clerk of the Court by using the CM/ECF system which I understand will send a notice of 

electronic filing to all parties of record.

/s/ ANDREW R. FRISCH

Andrew R. Frisch

Case 0:20-cv-61249-WPD Document 9 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/27/2020 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:20-cv-22514-KMW Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/18/2020 Page 1 of 10
Case 1:20-cv-22514-KMW Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/18/2020 Page 2 of 10
Case 1:20-cv-22514-KMW Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/18/2020 Page 3 of 10
Case 1:20-cv-22514-KMW Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/18/2020 Page 4 of 10
Case 1:20-cv-22514-KMW Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/18/2020 Page 5 of 10
Case 1:20-cv-22514-KMW Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/18/2020 Page 6 of 10
Case 1:20-cv-22514-KMW Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/18/2020 Page 7 of 10
Case 1:20-cv-22514-KMW Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/18/2020 Page 8 of 10
Case 1:20-cv-22514-KMW Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/18/2020 Page 9 of 10
Case 1:20-cv-22514-KMW Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/18/2020 Page 10 of 10
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****U.S. exports and importstransshipped via Canada and Mexico**
 
1999 | 2000
 
SuDoc Number:TD 11.28:
Item Number:0235-B-01 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000544258
 
February 20, 2020
- Skip to global NPS navigation
    - Skip to this park navigation
    - Skip to the main content
    - Skip to this park information section
    - Skip to the footer section

National Park Service**Search

# **OpenMenu**CloseMenu

## Explore This Park

## Explore the National Park Service

## Exiting nps.gov

Yucca House
National MonumentColorado
### §140. Adjournment

(a) Any district court may, by order made anywhere within its district, adjourn or, with the consent of the judicial council of the circuit, pretermit any regular session of court for insufficient business or other good cause.

(b) If the judge of a district court is unable to attend and unable to make an order of adjournment, the clerk may adjourn the court to the next regular session or to any earlier day which he may determine.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 897; Pub. L. 88–139, §1, Oct. 16, 1963, 77 Stat. 248.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Based on title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §§16, 146, 182 (Mar. 3, 1911, ch. 231, §§12, 73, 101, 36 Stat. 1088, 1108, 1122; June 12, 1916, ch. 143, 39 Stat. 225; Feb. 20, 1917, ch. 102, 39 Stat. 927; June 13, 1918, ch. 98, 40 Stat. 604; Feb. 26, 1919, ch. 54, 40 Stat. 1184; May 29, 1924, ch. 209, 43 Stat. 243; June 5, 1924, ch. 259, 43 Stat. 387; Jan. 10, 1925, chs. 68, 69, 43 Stat. 730, 731; Feb. 16, 1925, ch. 233, §1, 43 Stat. 945; May 7, 1926, ch. 255, 44 Stat. 408; Apr. 21, 1928, ch. 395, 45 Stat. 440; Mar. 2, 1929, ch. 539, 45 Stat. 1518; June 28, 1930, ch. 714, 46 Stat. 829; May 13, 1936, ch. 386, 49 Stat. 1271; Aug. 12, 1937, ch. 595, 50 Stat. 625).

Section consolidates section 16 with the third sentence of section 146, and the final proviso in the third paragraph of section 182, all of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed.

Said section 16 of title 28 provided for adjournment by the marshal, or clerk, on written order of the judge, in case of inability of the district judge to attend at the commencement of any regular, adjourned or special term, or any time during such term. Said sections 146 and 182 thereof, related to the district courts of Colorado and Oklahoma, only, and contained special provisions for adjournment. Subsection (b) omits the requirement of written order where the judge is unable to make such order.

The revised section broadens these provisions, and vests discretionary power in the court, by order made anywhere within the district, to adjourn any term of court "for insufficient business or other good cause." To establish uniformity, the special provisions relating to Colorado and Oklahoma were omitted.

Other provisions of said sections 146 and 182 of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., are incorporated in sections 85 and 116 of this title.

The provision of subsection (a) authorizing the district court, with the consent of the judicial council of the circuit, to pretermit any term of court for insufficient business or other good cause, is inserted to obviate the expense and inconvenience of convening and adjourning a term for which no need exists.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1963—Subsecs. (a), (b). Pub. L. 88–139 substituted "session" for "term".
§ 4710.5 Closure to livestock grazing. ( a ) If necessary to provide habitat for wild horses or burros, to implement herd management actions, or to protect wild horses or burros, to implement herd management actions, or to protect wild horses or burros from disease, harassment or injury, the authorized officer may close appropriate areas of the public lands to grazing use by all or a particular kind of livestock.
( b ) All public lands inhabited by wild horses or burros shall be closed to grazing under permit or lease by domestic horses and burros.
( c ) Closure may be temporary or permanent. After appropriate public consultation, a Notice of Closure shall be issued to affected and interested parties.
Editorial Note on Part 120
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 120 appear at 72 FR 50039, Aug. 30, 2007.

§ 120.1015 Risk Rating System. ( a ) *Risk Rating.* SBA may assign a Risk Rating to all SBA Lenders and Intermediaries on a periodic basis. Risk Ratings are based on certain risk-related portfolio performance factors as set forth in notices or SBA's SOPs and as published from time to time.
( b ) *Rating categories.* Risk Ratings fall into one of two broad categories: Acceptable Risk Ratings or Less Than Acceptable Risk Ratings.
[73 FR 75519, Dec. 11, 2008, as amended at 85 FR 14781, Mar. 16, 2020]
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsConcurrent Image Processing Executive (CIPE). Volume 3: User's guideCIPE (the Concurrent Image Processing Executive) is both an executive which organizes the parameter inputs for hypercube applications and an environment which provides temporary data workspace and simple real-time function definition facilities for image analysis. CIPE provides two types of user interface. The Command Line Interface (CLI) provides a simple command-driven environment allowing interactive function definition and evaluation of algebraic expressions. The menu interface employs a hierarchical screen-oriented menu system where the user is led through a menu tree to any specific application and then given a formatted panel screen for parameter entry. How to initialize the system through the setup function, how to read data into CIPE symbols, how to manipulate and display data through the use of executive functions, and how to run an application in either user interface mode, are described.Document ID19900019034Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsLee, Meemong*(Jet Propulsion Lab., California Inst. of Tech. Pasadena, CA, United States)*Cooper, Gregory T.*(Jet Propulsion Lab., California Inst. of Tech. Pasadena, CA, United States)*Groom, Steven L.*(Jet Propulsion Lab., California Inst. of Tech. Pasadena, CA, United States)*Mazer, Alan S.*(Jet Propulsion Lab., California Inst. of Tech. Pasadena, CA, United States)*Williams, Winifred I.*(Jet Propulsion Lab., California Inst. of Tech. Pasadena, CA, United States)*Kong, Mih-Seh*(Jet Propulsion Lab., California Inst. of Tech. Pasadena, CA, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateMarch 15, 1990Subject CategoryComputer Programming And SoftwareReport/Patent NumberNASA-CR-186848NAS 1.26:186848JPL-PUBL-88-32-REV-1-VOL-3Accession Number90N28350Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 889-20-41-17-62CONTRACT_GRANT: NAS7-918Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19900019034.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
#### Beverly Rosenzweig, Respondent, v. David Rosenzweig, Appellant.

Present — Carswell, Acting P. J., Johnston, Adel, Sneed and MaeCrate, JJ. [See *ante,*p. 671.]
#### In the Matter of Belmont Paper Box Co., Inc., v. John Stephen.

Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Untermyer, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.
###### Editorial Note on Part 120

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 120 appear at 72 FR 50039, Aug. 30, 2007.

#### § 120.891 Certifications of disbursement and completion.

Before the Debenture is issued, the interim lender must certify the amount disbursed. The CDC must certify that the Project was completed in accordance with the final plans and specifications (except as provided in § 120.961).
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 5002 Considered and Passed Senate (CPS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 5002

 To allow for alternatives to animal testing for purposes of drug and 
                    biological product applications.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 29, 2022

Mr. Paul (for himself, Mr. Booker, Mr. Braun, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Marshall, 
 Ms. Collins, Mr. King, Mr. Padilla, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Tuberville, Mr. 
 Lujan, and Mr. Scott of Florida) introduced the following bill; which 
      was read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To allow for alternatives to animal testing for purposes of drug and 
                    biological product applications.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``FDA Modernization Act 2.0''.

SEC. 2. ALTERNATIVES TO ANIMAL TESTING.

    (a) In General.--Section 505 of the Federal Food, Drug, and 
Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (i)--
                    (A) in paragraph (1)(A), by striking ``preclinical 
                tests (including tests on animals)'' and inserting 
                ``nonclinical tests''; and
                    (B) in paragraph (2)(B), by striking ``animal'' and 
                inserting ``nonclinical tests''; and
            (2) after subsection (y), by inserting the following:
    ``(z) Nonclinical Test Defined.--For purposes of this section, the 
term `nonclinical test' means a test conducted in vitro, in silico, or 
in chemico, or a non-human in vivo test that occurs before or during 
the clinical trial phase of the investigation of the safety and 
effectiveness of a drug, and may include animal tests, or non-animal or 
human biology-based test methods, such as cell-based assays, 
microphysiological systems, or bioprinted or computer models.''.
    (b) Biosimilar Biological Product Applications.--Item (bb) of 
section 351(k)(2)(A)(i)(I) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 
262(k)(2)(A)(i)(I)) is amended to read as follows:
                                            ``(bb) an assessment of 
                                        toxicity (which may rely on, or 
                                        consist of, a study or studies 
                                        described in item (aa) or 
                                        (cc)); and''.
                                 <all>
```
# Dziennik Urzędowy C 297A/29 l

| | ISSN 1725-5228 |
| --- | --- |
| Dziennik Urzędowy
  Unii Europejskiej | C 297A |
| | |
| Wydanie polskie | Informacje i zawiadomienia | Tom 4829 listopada 2005 |

ISSN 1725-5228

Dziennik Urzędowy

Unii Europejskiej

C 297A

Wydanie polskie

Informacje i zawiadomienia

Tom 4829 listopada 2005

---

| Powiadomienie nr | Spis treśći | Strona |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | III   Powiadomienia |
| | Komisja |
| 2005/C 297A/1 | Ogłoszenie o naborze na stanowisko Przewodniczącego Wspólnotowego Urzędu Odmian Roślin (grupa zaszeregowania A*14) (art. 29 ust. 2 Regulaminu pracowniczego) — COM/2005/10015 | 1 |

Powiadomienie nr

Spis treśći

Strona

III   Powiadomienia

Komisja

2005/C 297A/1

Ogłoszenie o naborze na stanowisko Przewodniczącego Wspólnotowego Urzędu Odmian Roślin (grupa zaszeregowania A*14) (art. 29 ust. 2 Regulaminu pracowniczego) — COM/2005/10015

1

| PL | |
| --- | --- |

PL

---

III Powiadomienia

Komisja

| 29.11.2005 | PL | Dziennik Urzędowy Unii Europejskiej | CA 297/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.11.2005

PL

Dziennik Urzędowy Unii Europejskiej

CA 297/1

---

OGŁOSZENIE O NABORZE NA STANOWISKO PRZEWODNICZĄCEGO WSPÓLNOTOWEGO URZĘDU ODMIAN ROŚLIN

(grupa zaszeregowania A*14)

(art. 29 ust. 2 Regulaminu pracowniczego)

COM/2005/10015

(2005/C 297 A/01)

Wspólnotowy Urząd Odmian Roślin zamierza zatrudnić Przewodniczącego.

Kandydaci muszą posiadać obywatelstwo jednego z Państw Członkowskich Unii Europejskiej.

Przewodniczący zostanie powołany przez Radę na podstawie listy kandydatów, którą przedstawi Komisja po zasięgnięciu opinii Rady Administracyjnej Urzędu. Wynagrodzenie i warunki zatrudnienia urzędników Wspólnot Europejskich należących do grupy zaszeregowania A*14 są ustanowione w Regulaminie pracowniczym. Wspólnotowy Urząd Odmian Roślin oraz Komisja prowadzą politykę równych szans.

Zakres obowiązków, formularze zgłoszeniowe oraz instrukcje dotyczące składania podań można znaleźć w Internecie pod następującym adresem:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/personnel_administration/working_senior_mgt_en.htm

lub

http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/plant/propertyrights/index_en.htm

Termin przyjmowania podań upływa dnia 31 grudnia 2005 r. (patrz: szczegółowe informacje w instrukcjach dotyczących podań).

---
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Health Physics Questions and Answers - Question 146

**Question 146:** The term "not present," which is defined in paragraph 5 of the Note (concerning mixtures of radionuclides) following Appendix B of the old Part 20, is not defined in the corresponding "Note" in the revised Part 20. Does this definition from the old Part 20, which indicates when a radionuclide may be considered as not present in a mixture, continue to apply in the revised Part 20?

**Answer:** No. Nothing in the old Part 20 (§§20.1-20.601) applies in the revised Part 20 (§§20.1001-20.2401). This definition of "not present" is not included in the revised Part 20; however, 10 CFR 20.1204 (g) stipulates the conditions under which licensees may disregard certain radionuclides in a mixture when determining internal dose. See the answer to the related Question 121 for clarification of 10 CFR 20.1204 (g).

(References: Appendix B, 10 CFR 20.1204)

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, November 07, 2017
Editorial Note on Part 134
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 134 appear at 72 FR 50042, Aug. 30, 2007.

§ 134.318 NAICS appeals. ( a ) *General.* The regulations at §§ 121.402, 121.1102, and 121.1103 of this chapter also apply to NAICS code appeals.
( b ) *Effect of OHA's decision.* If OHA grants the appeal (changes the NAICS code), the contracting officer must amend the solicitation to reflect the new NAICS code. The decision will also apply to future solicitations for the same supplies or services.
( c ) *Summary dismissal.* OHA may summarily dismiss a NAICS appeal either on the Judge's own initiative or on motion by a party. A summary dismissal may be with or without prejudice, and may be issued before the date set for close of record. Grounds for summary dismissal include: premature appeal, withdrawn appeal, settlement, cancellation of the procurement, and contract award.
[75 FR 47442, Aug. 6, 2010, as amended at 85 FR 66199, Oct. 16, 2020]