alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 9479 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to establish a refundable 

credit for expenses incurred for in vitro fertilization. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 6, 2024 

Mrs. MILLER-MEEKS (for herself, Mr. LAWLER, and Mrs. CHAVEZ-DEREMER) 

introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 

Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to establish 

a refundable credit for expenses incurred for in vitro 

fertilization. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. IN VITRO FERTILIZATION CREDIT. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subpart C of part IV of sub5 chapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 

6 1986 is amended by inserting after section 36B the fol7 lowing new section: 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 9479 IH

1 ‘‘SEC. 36C. IN VITRO FERTILIZATION CREDIT. 

2 ‘‘(a) ALLOWANCE OF CREDIT.—In the case of an in3 dividual, there shall be allowed as a credit against the tax 

4 imposed by this subtitle an amount equal to so much of 

5 the qualified in vitro fertilization expenses of the indi6 vidual for the taxable year as do not exceed the excess 

7 (if any) of— 

8 ‘‘(1) $30,000, over 

9 ‘‘(2) the aggregate amount allowed as a credit 

10 to the taxpayer under this section for all prior tax11 able years. 

12 ‘‘(b) QUALIFIED IN VITRO FERTILIZATION EX13 PENSES.—For purposes of this section, the term ‘qualified 

14 in vitro fertilization expenses’ means amounts paid or in15 curred for medical care (as defined in section 213(d)) re16 lating to in vitro fertilization for the taxpayer (or the tax17 payer’s spouse, in the case of a joint return). 

18 ‘‘(c) DENIAL OF DOUBLE BENEFIT.—Any qualified 

19 in vitro fertilization expense which would (but for this sub20 section) be taken into account for purposes of any deduc21 tion (or any credit other than the credit allowed under 

22 this section) shall be reduced by the amount of the credit 

23 allowed under subsection (a) with respect to such ex24 pense.’’. 

25 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.— 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 9479 IH

1 (1) Section 6211(b)(4)(A) of the Internal Rev2 enue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting ‘‘, 36C’’ 

3 after ‘‘36B’’. 

4 (2) Section 1324(b)(2) of title 31, United 

5 States Code, is amended by inserting ‘‘, 36C’’ after 

6 ‘‘, 36B’’. 

7 (3) The table of sections for subpart C of part 

8 IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal Rev9 enue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting after the 

10 item relating to section 36B the following new item: 

‘‘Sec. 36C. In vitro fertilization credit.’’. 

11 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

12 this section shall apply to amounts paid or incurred after 

13 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

156°00'
77°00'

\. Crevasses
)

32.
Strider ¢-Pzp€n
Rock

78°15" 7
156°00'

Base from U.S. Geological Survey, 1972

NORTH

SOUTH

Compiled from U.S.N.0.0. Chart 1706 S, 1965,

ISOGONIC LINE DIAGRAM

PREPARED BY THE
ANTARCTIC RESEARCH CENTER, THE MUSEUM

TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY
UNDER THE AUSPICES OF THE

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

FISHER

1SLAND

=e
st
ye oe
\
\
\
\
\
i
\
i
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
:
\.
\
\
.
i
\
\
\
\
i
\
\
tig OO oe
\ Crevasses .
L
153° 152°
SCALE 1:250,000
5 0 5 10 15 20 Statute Miles
5 0 5 10 15 20 5 30 Kilometers
a
5 0 6 10 15 Nautical Miles
i

Lambert Conformal Conic Projection—Standard Parallels 76°40’ and 79°20"
CONTOUR INTERVAL 200 METERS—DATUM IS MEAN SEA LEVEL
Elevations and depths in meters

RECONNAISSANCE GEOLOGIC MAP OF THE ALEXANDRA MOUNTAINS QUADRANGLE,

MARIE BYRD LAND, ANTARCTICA

By

F. Alton Wade, Carl A. Cathey, and Jerry B. Oldham

1977

%

INTERIOR—GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, RESTON, VIRGINIA—1877—G76334 78°15"

150°00'

Geology mapped in 1911 by K. Prestrud; in 1940 by
F. A. Wade; in 1966-1967 by F. A. Wade, V. L. Yeats,
and L. V. Klimov

uae 77°00"

ST 5-8/10

78°

‘Sheet numbering system based on
International Map of the World

INDEX TO ADJOINING SHEETS:

U.S. ANTARCTIC RESEARCH PROGRAM
ALEXANDRA MOUNTAINS QUADRANGLE
ANTARCTIC GEOLOGIC MAP A-5

CORRELATION OF MAP UNITS

[kee | } CRETACEOUS,

Unconformity
LOWER PALEOZOIC
AND PRECAMBRIAN

DESCRIPTION OF MAP UNITS

BYRD COAST GRANITE—Biotite granite, leucogranite and alaskite, equigranular to
porphyritic, marginal foliation only, magmatic origin. Includes associated
pegmatites and aplites, and basic dikes. Intrudes pelitic sediments at Mt
Nilsen, Radiometric ages mainly 100+10 may.

| Papen | METAMORPHOSED PELITIC SEDIMENTS OF MT. NILSEN—Mostly
quartz-biotite-muscovite-almandine-plagioclase schists. Younger hydrothermal
minerals are principally quartz and potassium feldspar. Probably conelative with
‘Swanson Formation in Ford Ranges to the east

Contact

——4— Syniorm, showing plunge; drawn on foliation

20

at Strike and dip of beds

23? Strike and dip of foliation

REFERENCES

Prestrud, K., 1913, Eastern sledge journey, in
Amundsen, R.E.G., The South Pole: London, J.
Murray, v. 2, p. 204-261.

Shetelig, J., 1915, Report on rock specimens
collected on Roald Amundsen’s South Pole
Expedition: Norske Vidensk.-Akad., Oslo,
Mat.-Naturvidensk. KI., Skrifter, 1915, no. 4, p.
1-32.

Steward, Duncan, Jr., 1945, The petrography of
some intrusive rocks from King Edward VII and
Marie Byrd Lands, Antarctica: Am. Philos. Soc.,
Proc., v. 89, no. 1, p. 148-151.

Wade, F. A., 1945, The geology of the Rockefeller
Mountains, King Edward VII Land, Antarctica:
Am. Philos. Soc., Proc., v. 89, no. 1, p. 67-77.

_________ 1969, Geologic map of Antarctica, Sheet
18, Marie Byrd Land, in Craddock, Campbell,
and others, 1969-70, Geologic maps of
Antarctica: Am. Geog. Soc., Antarctic Map Folio
Ser., Folio 12, Pl. 17, 1 sheet, scale 1:1,000,000,
text on map (title: Geology of Maria Byrd Land).

For sale by Branch of Distribution, U.S. Geological Survey,
1200 South Eads Street, Arlington, VA 22202
RCRA CLUSTERS XVI AND XVII REVISED AUTHORIZATION APPLICATION

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

ADDENDUM TO PROGRAM DESCRIPTION (dated June 2008)

APPENDICES

I. REVISED ATTORNEY GENERAL'S STATEMENT (signed 6/23/08)

II. RCRA CLUSTERS XIV AND XV ADDENDUM TO PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

III. 2008 IDEQ ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE CHART

IV. THE 2008 ANNUAL RCRA GRANT WORKPLAN

V. EXISTING RCRA MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT (signed 8/2/01)

VI. IDAHO HANDLER COUNT ACTIVITY REPORT (dated 3113/08)

VII. IDAHO PERMITTING SIX QUARTER PLAN (dated 3/14/08)

VIII. HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT IN IDAHO-2007

IX. RCRA CLUSTERS XVI AND XVII REGULATORY SUMMARIES

X. IDAHO RULES AND STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS WASTE (as of 4/2/08)

XI. IDAHO HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT ACT (wI2004Cumul.P.S. incl.nochg)

XII. IDAHO ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND HEALTH ACT (w/2007Cumul.P.S.)

XIII. IDAHO PUBLIC RECORDS ACT (w/2007Cumul.P.S.)
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04

- 1 8

- 00 008

- CV

IN RE Maria Cecilia MARTINEZ

Original Mandamus Proceeding 1

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Irene Rios, Justice

Delivered and Filed: January 31, 2018

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED

On January 8, 2018, r elator filed a petition for writ of mandamus, and the real parties in

interest later filed a response. After considering the petition and response, this court is of the

opini on that relator i s not entitled to the relief sought. Accordingly, the petition for writ of

mandamus is DENIED. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 52.8(a).

PER CURIAM

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. PR

- 06

- 004, styled In the Estate of Ignacia G. Gutier rez , pending in the

County Court at Law, Starr County, Texas, the Honorable Romero Molina presiding.
Editorial Note on Part 1206
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 1206 (formerly part 206) appear at 67 FR 19111, Apr. 18, 2002.

§ 1206.162 What are my reporting requirements under an arm's-length processing contract? ( a ) You must use a separate entry on form ONRR-2014 to notify ONRR of an allowance based on arm's-length processing costs that you or your affiliate incur(s).
( b ) ONRR may require you or your affiliate to submit arm's-length processing contracts, production agreements, operating agreements, and related documents.
( c ) You can find recordkeeping requirements in parts 1207 and 1212 of this chapter.
### §33102. Theft prevention standard for high theft lines

(a) General.—(1) The Secretary of Transportation by regulation shall prescribe a vehicle theft prevention standard that conforms to the requirements of this chapter. The standard shall apply to—

(A) covered major parts that manufacturers install in passenger motor vehicles in lines designated under section 33104 of this title as high theft lines; and

(B) major replacement parts for the major parts described in clause (A) of this paragraph.

(2) The standard may apply only to—

(A) major parts that manufacturers install in passenger motor vehicles having a model year designation later than the calendar year in which the standard takes effect; and

(B) major replacement parts manufactured after the standard takes effect.

(b) Standard Requirements.—The standard shall be practicable and provide relevant objective criteria.

(c) Limitations on Major Part and Replacement Part Standards.—(1) For a major part installed by the manufacturer of the motor vehicle, the standard may not require a part to have more than one identification.

(2) For a major replacement part, the standard may not require—

(A) identification of a part not designed as a replacement for a major part required to be identified under the standard; or

(B) the inscribing or affixing of identification except a symbol identifying the manufacturer and a common symbol identifying the part as a major replacement part.

(d) Records and Reports.—This chapter does not authorize the Secretary to require a person to keep records or make reports, except as provided in sections 33104(c), 33106(c), 33108(a), and 33112 1 of this title.

(Pub. L. 103–272, §1(e), July 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 1077.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 33102(a)(1) | 15:2022(a). | Oct. 20, 1972, Pub. L. 92–513, 86 Stat. 947, §602(a), (b), (c)(1)–(3), (5), (d)(2); added Oct. 25, 1984, Pub. L. 98–547, §101(a), 98 Stat. 2756. |
| 33102(a)(2) | 15:2022(c)(1)–(3), (5). | |
| 33102(b) | 15:2022(b). | |
| 33102(c) | 15:2022(d)(1). | Oct. 20, 1972, Pub. L. 92–513, 86 Stat. 947, §602(d)(1); added Oct. 25, 1984, Pub. L. 98–547, §101(a), 98 Stat. 2756; restated Oct. 25, 1992, Pub. L. 102–519, §302(1), 106 Stat. 3394. |
| 33102(d) | 15:2022(e). | Oct. 20, 1972, Pub. L. 92–513, 86 Stat. 947, §602(e); added Oct. 25, 1984, Pub. L. 98–547, §101(a), 98 Stat. 2756; Oct. 25, 1992, Pub. L. 102–519, §306(a), 106 Stat. 3397. |

Section

In subsection (a)(1), before clause (A), the words "in accordance with this section" are omitted as surplus.

In subsection (a)(2), the text of 15:2022(c)(1)–(3) is omitted as obsolete because the standard has already been prescribed. See 49 C.F.R. part 541.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Section 33112 of this title, referred to in subsec. (d), was repealed by Pub. L. 112–141, div. C, title I, §31313(2), July 6, 2012, 126 Stat. 772.

1 See References in Text note below.
#### Sherman Abrams, Appellant, v Port Authority Trans-Hudson Corporation, Respondent.

[832 NYS2d 435]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Rolando T. Acosta, J.), entered October 23, 2006, which, in an action for personal injuries under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (45 USC § 51*et seq.),*denied plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiffs moving papers fail to make a prima facie showing that he was not comparatively negligent (see *McCabe v CSX Transp., Inc.,*27 AD3d 1150 [2006]). Deposition testimony tends to show that plaintiff knowingly stood near a coworker, idly and at times inattentive, while the coworker was in the process of moving awkward, 10-to-12-foot-long hoses, a job that plaintiff had been instructed to assist the coworker with. Plaintiffs moving papers do not explain why he did not assist the coworker, pay attention to the work the coworker was doing, or move a safe distance away. Concur—Saxe, J.P., Marlow, Buckley, Catterson and McGuire, JJ.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsReporter Concerns in 300 Mode-Related Incident Reports from NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting SystemA model has been developed which represents prominent reporter concerns expressed in the narratives of 300 mode-related incident reports from NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS). The model objectively quantifies the structure of concerns which persist across situations and reporters. These concerns are described and illustrated using verbatim sentences from the original narratives. Report accession numbers are included with each sentence so that concerns can be traced back to the original reports. The results also include an inventory of mode names mentioned in the narratives, and a comparison of individual and joint concerns. The method is based on a proximity-weighted co-occurrence metric and object-oriented complexity reduction.Document ID19960046983Acquisition SourceAmes Research CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsMcGreevy, Michael W.*(NASA Moffett Field, CA United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateJuly 1, 1996Subject CategoryAir Transportation And SafetyReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.15:110413A-962350NASA-TM-110413Accession Number96N32782Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 505-64-53Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19960046983.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
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 349 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 349

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a full deduction 
         for meals and lodging in connection with medical care.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 25, 2005

  Mr. Platts introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a full deduction 
         for meals and lodging in connection with medical care.

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

SECTION 1. FULL DEDUCTION FOR MEALS AND LODGING IN CONNECTION WITH 
              MEDICAL CARE.

    (a) In General.--Paragraph (2) of section 213(d) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to amounts paid for certain lodging away 
from home treated as paid for medical care) is amended--
            (1) by inserting ``meals and'' before ``lodging'' in the 
        heading,
            (2) by inserting ``meals and'' before ``lodging'' in the 
        text, and
            (3) by striking the last sentence.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to taxable years beginning after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsOn Approximate Factorization Schemes for Solving the Full Potential EquationAn approximate factorization scheme based on the AF2 algorithm is presented for solving the three-dimensional full potential equation for the transonic flow about isolated wings. Two spatial discretization variations are presented, one using a hybrid first-order/second-order-accurate scheme and the second using a fully second-order-accurate scheme. The present algorithm utilizes a C-H grid topology to map the flow field about the wing. One version of the AF2 iteration scheme is used on the upper wing surface and another slightly modified version is used on the lower surface. These two algorithm variations are then connected at the wing leading edge using a local iteration technique. The resulting scheme has improved linear stability characteristics and improved time-like damping characteristics relative to previous implementations of the AF2 algorithm. The presentation is highlighted with a grid refinement study and a number of numerical results.Document ID19970010813Acquisition SourceAmes Research CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsHolst, Terry L.*(National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateFebruary 1, 1997Subject CategoryAerodynamicsReport/Patent NumberNASA-TM-110435A-975739NAS 1.15:110435Accession Number97N15939Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 522-31-12Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19970010813.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
Building 141, Federal Circle • JFK International Airport

Jamaica, NY 11430 ● (718) 656-2650 ● FAX: (718) 656-6082

September 2, 2011

United States of America

Department of Transportation

Federal Aviation Administration

Washington, DC 20591

To Whom It May Concern,

North American Airlines (NOCA172S) hereby requests relief in the form of an Exemption to the

requirements of 14 CFR 121.689(a)(6), which states (in part) a requirement to specify Minimum 

Required Fuel Supply in pounds or gallons. The aircraft Fuel Quantity Indicating Systems 

(FQIS), flight planning systems, and weight and balance program used by the carrier all utilize 

kilograms as a unit of measure. Providing the Minimum Required Fuel Supply (MFR) in 

kilograms on the flight release will ensure that all data related to the flight will be in a common 

unit of measure, thereby eliminating the possibility of an unintentionally incorrect fuel load. 

It is the stated duty of the holder of an Air Carrier Certificate under 49 U.S.C. to “provide service 

with the highest possible degree of safety in the public interest”. Requiring fuel information to be 

provided in pounds or gallons when the aircraft fuel system, weight and balance program, and all 

fueling operations are performed in kilograms introduces inconsistent information into the 

system. This situation creates a risk of the aircraft departing with an incorrect fuel load, a risk 

that is mitigated entirely by the use of a common unit of measure across the weight process. 

North American Airlines intends to utilize the benefit of this proposed Exemption throughout our 

operating system, and respectfully requests permission to do so during operations conducted 

outside the United States to maintain consistency across the operation. Approval of the requested 

exemption would be consistent with the latitudes applicable to Flag and Domestic Operations 

prescribed by 14 CFR 121.687(a)(5), and also with the latitude granted to a previous petitioner 

via Exemption 10273. 
Building 141, Federal Circle • JFK International Airport

Jamaica, NY 11430 ● (718) 656-2650 ● FAX: (718) 656-6082

Please contact me if you should have any questions and thank you for your assistance with our 

request.

Sincerely,

Captain David P. Currier

Vice President - Operations

North American Airlines

Building 141, Federal Circle

JFK International Airport

Jamaica, NY 11430

(718) 907-2151

dcurrier@flynaa.com

C: Insp. A.J. Mount (NY FSDO15); C. Hewitt; A. Travia; D. McDannell; R. Calascibetta; 

J. Wehrenberg
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Lee Roy Waterman, Appellant.

[833 NYS2d 807]—

Appeal from a judgment of the Wayne County Court (Dennis M. Kehoe, J.), rendered December 20, 2005. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts) and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts).

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of two counts each of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (Penal Law § 220.39 [1]) and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (§ 220.16 [1]). We reject the contention of defendant that he was denied effective assistance of counsel. The alleged errors in defense counsel’s representation set forth by defendant in support of his contention are mere disagreements with defense counsel’s trial tactics, and defendant has failed to establish “the absence of strategic or other legitimate explanations” for defense counsel’s alleged shortcomings *(People v Rivera,*71 NY2d 705, 709 [1988]). Viewing the evidence, the law and the circumstances of this case, in totality and as of the time of the representation, we conclude that defendant received meaningful representation *(see generally People v Baldi,*54 NY2d 137, 147 [1981]).

Defendant further contends that County Court erred in admitting in evidence testimony concerning his flight from the police when they attempted to arrest him because the arrest was not close in time to the commission of the crimes. We reject that contention. “The limited probative force of flight evidence . . . is no reason for its exclusion” *(People v Yazum,*13 NY2d 302, 304 [1963], *rearg denied*15 NY2d 679 [1964]). Moreover, “[a]mbiguities or explanations tending to rebut an inference of guilt [arising from evidence of flight] may be introduced as a part of the defense rather than to render the evidence [of flight] inadmissible” *(People v Fama,*212 AD2d 542, 543 [1995], *lv denied*86 NY2d 734, 87 NY2d 901 [1995]). Defendant’s remaining contentions concerning alleged errors by the court have not been preserved for our review *(see*CPL 470.05 [2]), and we decline to exercise our power to review them as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice *(see*CPL 470.15 [6] [a]). Present—Scudder, P.J., Centra, Lunn, Peradotto and Pine, JJ.