alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Monica A. Duffy, Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Albany, for Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department.

Hyewon Han, Irvine, California, respondent pro se.

Motion by respondent for an order reinstating her to the practice of law following her suspension by May 2019 order of this Court (Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a, 172 AD3d 1706 [2019]; see Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.16; Rules of App Div, 3d Dept [22 NYCRR] § 806.16).

Upon reading respondent's affidavit with exhibits sworn to August 21, 2019, and upon reading the responsive correspondence by the Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department dated September 26, 2019, and having determined, by clear and convincing evidence, that (1) respondent has complied with the order of suspension and the Rules of this Court, (2) respondent has the requisite character and fitness to practice law, and (3) it would be in the public interest to reinstate respondent to the practice of law (see Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a [Stonner], 175 AD3d 799 [2019]; Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a [Dorsett], 174 AD3d 1219 [2019]), it is

ORDERED that respondent's motion for reinstatement is granted; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent is reinstated as an attorney and counselor-at-law, effectively immediately.

Garry, P.J., Egan Jr., Mulvey, Aarons and Pritzker, JJ., concur.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6880
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. LARRY BEVERLY GARLAND, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District Judge. (3:05-cr-00263-HEH) Submitted: August 21, 2008 Decided: August 27, 2008 Before WILLIAMS, Chief Judge, and KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Larry Beverly Garland, Appellant Pro Se. Angela Mastandrea-Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Larry Beverly Garland appeals the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Garland , No. 3:05-cr-00263-HEH (E.D. Va. Apr. 21, 2008). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
§ 520.43 Afoxolaner. ( a ) *Specifications.* Each chewable tablet contains 11.3, 28.3, 68, or 136 milligrams (mg) afoxolaner.
( b ) *Sponsor.* See No. 000010 in § 510.600(c) of this chapter.
( c ) *Conditions of use* — ( 1 ) *Amount.* Administer orally once a month at a minimum dosage of 1.14 mg/pound (2.5 mg/kilogram).
( 2 ) *Indications for use.* Kills adult fleas and for the treatment and prevention of flea infestations (*Ctenocephalides felis*); and the treatment and control of *Ixodes scapularis* (black-legged tick), *Dermacentor variabilis* (American dog tick), *Amblyomma americanum* (lone star tick), *Rhipicephalus sanguineus* (brown dog tick), and *Haemaphysalis longicornis* (longhorned tick) infestations in dogs and puppies 8 weeks of age and older, weighing 4 pounds of body weight or greater, for 1 month; and for the prevention of *Borrelia burgdorferi* infections as a direct result of killing *Ixodes scapularis* vector ticks.
( 3 ) *Limitations.* Federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian.
[78 FR 66264, Nov. 5, 2013, as amended at 79 FR 37619, July 2, 2014; 84 FR 8972, Mar. 13, 2019; 84 FR 39182, Aug. 9, 2019; 88 FR 55563, Aug. 16, 2023]
Editorial Note on Part 888
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 888 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 888.3043 Screw sleeve bone fixation device. ( a ) *Identification.* A screw sleeve bone fixation device is intended to be implanted in conjunction with a non-resorbable, metallic bone screw where the screw has lost purchase due to loosening, backout, or breakage. The device fits between the screw threads and surrounding bone and provides increased surface area to create an interference fit to restore stability of the implant construct.
( b ) *Classification.* Class II (special controls). The special controls for this device are: ( 1 ) In vivo performance testing under anticipated conditions of use must demonstrate: ( i ) The device provides sufficient stability to allow for fracture healing; and
( ii ) A lack of adverse biologic response to the implant through histopathological and histomorphometric assessment.
( 2 ) Non-clinical performance testing must demonstrate that the device performs as intended under anticipated conditions of use. Testing must: ( i ) Assess the stability of the device in a rescue screw scenario;
( ii ) Demonstrate that the device can be inserted and removed without damage to the implant or associated hardware;
( iii ) Demonstrate the device can withstand dynamic loading without device failure; and
( iv ) Characterize wear particle generation.
( 3 ) The device must be demonstrated to be biocompatible.
( 4 ) The device must be demonstrated to be non-pyrogenic.
( 5 ) Performance data must demonstrate the sterility of the device.
( 6 ) Performance data must support the labeled shelf life of the device by demonstrating continued sterility, package integrity, and device functionality over the established shelf life.
( 7 ) Labeling must include: ( i ) A detailed summary of the device technical parameters;
( ii ) Information describing all materials of the device;
( iii ) Instructions for use, including device removal; and
( iv ) A shelf life.
[87 FR 11294, Mar. 1, 2022]
##### 



Lifeway Foods, Inc.
  For Immediate Release
   Lifeway Foods Reports Record 1st Quarter 2006 Results
 -
    
    Sales Up 29%-
    
    Gross Profit Rises 34%-
    
    Operating Income Rises 52%
 Morton
Grove, ILMay 15
     This news release contains forward-looking statements. Investors are cautioned that actual results
may differ materially from such forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements involve
risks and uncertainties including, but not limited to, competitive pressures and other important
factors detailed in the Companys reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.




---



##### 



Three Months Ended
    
    
    Year EndedMarch 31,
    
    
    December 31,2006
    
    
    2005
    
    
    2005Sales
    
    $
    6,003,023
    
    
    $
    4,656,860
    
    
    $
    20,131,654Cost of goods sold
    
    
    3,212,566
    
    
    
    2,577,956
    
    
    
    11,664,065Gross profit
    
    
    2,790,457
    
    
    
    2,078,904
    
    
    
    8,467,589Operating expenses
    
    
    1,384,085
    
    
    
    1,155,180
    
    
    
    5,066,227Income from operations
    
    
    1,406,372
    
    
    
    923,724
    
    
    
    3,401,362Other income (expense):Interest and dividend income
    
    
    86,235
    
    
    
    65,276
    
    
    
    323,365Interest expense
    
    
    (50,226
    )
    
    
    (7,442
    )
    
    
    (100,762
    )Gain (loss) on sale of marketable
securities, net
    
    
    (36,878
    )
    
    
    198,140
    
    
    
    445,327Gain on marketable securities
classified as trading
    
    
    512
    
    
    
    3,516
    
    
    
    13,773Total other income
    
    
    (357
    )
    
    
    259,490
    
    
    
    681,703Income before provision for
income taxes
    
    
    1,406,015
    
    
    
    1,183,214
    
    
    
    4,083,065Provision for income taxes
    
    
    511,352
    
    
    
    457,823
    
    
    
    1,534,592Net income
    
    $
    894,663
    
    
    $
    725,391
    
    
    $
    2,548,473Basic and diluted earnings per
common share
    
    
    0.11
    
    
    
    0.09
    
    
    
    0.30Weighted average number of shares
outstanding
    
    
    8,396,189
    
    
    
    8,432,653
    
    
    
    8,404,496COMPREHENSIVE INCOMENet income
    
    $
    894,663
    
    
    $
    725,391
    
    
    $
    2,548,473Other comprehensive income (loss),
net of tax:Unrealized gains (losses) on
marketable securities
(net of tax benefits)
    
    
    275,537
    
    
    
    (56,722
    )
    
    
    42,708Less reclassification adjustment
for gains (losses)
included in net income (net of taxes)
    
    
    (21,648
    )
    
    
    (115,226
    )
    
    
    (261,402
    )Comprehensive income
    
    $
    1,148,552
    
    
    $
    553,443
    
    
    $
    2,329,779
Cope Law Firm 

9284 Huntington Square, Suite 100 

North Richland Hills. Texas 76182 

(817) 498-2300 

(877) 993-3529 (toll free) 

(817) 581-1500 (facsimile) 

John J. Cope 

jcope(a'coQefirn1.co1n 

June 26. 2015 

Via E-File 

Clerk ofthe 12"‘ Court of Appeals 

1517 West Front Street, Suite 354 

Tyler, Texas 75702 

RE: Court of Appeals Number: 12—15—00169—CV 

Trial Court Case Number: 2012A-0662 

Style: Earl Anderson, Carrie Bell Scott, Sharon Anderson, Evance Anderson, Bill 

Burton, Willie Mae Anderson, and JerrjyJ. Anderson (Smith) v. Robert Louis 

Durham and Frank L. Zellers, 11] 

NOTICE OF ADDRESS CHANGE 

Please take notice that the address and Contact information for John .1. Cope attorney for 

appellee is: 

John J. Cope 

Cope Law Firm 

9284 Huntington Square 

Suite 100 

North Richland Hills, Texas 76182 

Phone: (817) 498-2300 

Fax: (817)581-1500 

Email: jc0pe@copefirm.com 

Please do not hesitate to Contact me with any questions or concerns. 

.l.lC/am 

cc: Lana Johnson via email: l1']atty4(matLnet

ACCEPTED

12-15-00169CV

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS

TYLER, TEXAS

6/29/2015 3:59:08 PM

CATHY LUSK

CLERK

 FILED IN 12th COURT OF APPEALS TYLER, TEXAS 6/29/2015 3:59:08 PM CATHY S. LUSK Clerk
# C_2016287EN.01001001.xml

| 8.8.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 287/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.8.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 287/10

---

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 2 June 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Symvoulio tis Epikrateias — Greece) — Kapnoviomichania Karelia AE v Ypourgos Oikonomikon

(Case C-81/15) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - General arrangements governing excise duty - Directive 92/12/EEC - Manufactured tobacco moving under an excise duty suspension arrangement - Liability of the authorised warehousekeeper - Whether Member States may make the authorised warehousekeeper jointly and severally liable for the payment of sums corresponding to the financial penalties imposed on those engaged in smuggling - Principles of proportionality and legal certainty))

(2016/C 287/12)

Language of the case: Greek

Referring court

Referring court

Symvoulio tis Epikrateias

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Kapnoviomichania Karelia AE

Applicant:

Defendant: Ypourgos Oikonomikon

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Council Directive 92/12/EEC of 25 February 1992 on the general arrangements for products subject to excise duty and on the holding, movement and monitoring of such products, as amended by Council Directive 92/108/EEC of 14 December 1992, read in the light of the general principles of EU law, in particular the principles of legal certainty and proportionality, must be interpreted as precluding national legislation — such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which permits, inter alia, the owners of products moving under excise duty suspension arrangements to be declared jointly and severally liable for payment of sums corresponding to the financial penalties imposed in the event of the commission of an offence during the movement of those products under excise duty suspension, where the owners are linked to the perpetrators of the offence by a contractual relationship making them their agents — under which the authorised warehousekeeper is declared jointly and severally liable for payment of those sums, with no possibility for him to escape that liability by providing proof that he had nothing whatsoever to do with the acts of the perpetrators of the offence, even if, under national law, that warehousekeeper was neither the owner of those products at the time when the offence was committed nor linked to the perpetrators of that offence by a contractual relationship making them his agents.

---

(1)  OJ C 138, 27.4.2015.

1

---
# United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit

No. 15–1550

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Appellee,

v. EFRÉN IRIZARRY-COLÓN,
Defendant, Appellant.

**ERRATA SHEET**
The opinion of this Court issued on February 8, 2017, is amended as follows:
On page 13, line 18, the words "United States" are replaced with "United States."
#### § 1.1052-3 Basis of property established by the Internal Revenue Code of 1939.

Section 1052(c) provides that if property was acquired after February 28, 1913, in a transaction to which the Internal Revenue Code of 1939 applied and the basis thereof was prescribed by section 113(a) (6), (7), (8), (13), (15), (18), (19) or (23) of such Code, then for purposes of subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, the basis shall be the same as the basis prescribed in the Internal Revenue Code of 1939. In such cases, see section 113(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939 and the regulations thereunder.
# C_2014061EN.01001801.xml

| 1.3.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 61/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 61/18

---

Action brought on 6 January 2014 — Banco Mare Nostrum v Commission

(Case T-16/14)

2014/C 61/32

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Banco Mare Nostrum SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: J.L. Buendía Sierra, E. Abad Valdenebro, R. Calvo Salinero, A. Lamadrid de Pablo and A. Biondi, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision in so far as it categorises the measures which, according to that decision, together constitute the ‘Spanish Tax Lease System’ as new State aid that is incompatible with the internal market; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision in so far as it categorises the measures which, according to that decision, together constitute the ‘Spanish Tax Lease System’ as new State aid that is incompatible with the internal market;

| — | in the alternative, annul Articles 1 and 4 of the contested decision, which identify the investors in the Economic Interest Groupings (EIGs) as beneficiaries of the alleged aid and as the sole addressees of the order for recovery; |
| --- | --- |

—

in the alternative, annul Articles 1 and 4 of the contested decision, which identify the investors in the Economic Interest Groupings (EIGs) as beneficiaries of the alleged aid and as the sole addressees of the order for recovery;

| — | in the alternative, annul Article 4 of the contested decision, in so far as it orders recovery of the alleged aid; |
| --- | --- |

—

in the alternative, annul Article 4 of the contested decision, in so far as it orders recovery of the alleged aid;

| — | annul Article 4 of the contested decision, in so far as it makes a determination as to the lawfulness of the private contracts between the investors and other entities; and |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Article 4 of the contested decision, in so far as it makes a determination as to the lawfulness of the private contracts between the investors and other entities; and

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs of these proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs of these proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are those put forward in Case T-700/13 Bankia v Commission.

Bankia

Commission

---
Editorial Note on Part 864
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 864 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 864.9320 Copper sulfate solution for specific gravity determinations. ( a ) *Identification.* A copper sulfate solution for specific gravity determinations is a device used to determine whether the hemoglobin content of a potential donor's blood meets the required level (12.5 grams per 100 milliliters of blood for women and 13.5 grams per 100 milliliters of blood for men).
( b ) *Classification.* Class I (general controls). The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to § 864.9.
[45 FR 60647, Sept. 12, 1980, as amended at 65 FR 2310, Jan. 14, 2000]
Editorial Note on Part 862
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 862 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 862.1205 Cortisol (hydrocortisone and hydroxycorticosterone) test system. ( a ) *Identification.* A cortisol (hydrocortisone and hydroxycorticosterone) test system is a device intended to measure the cortisol hormones secreted by the adrenal gland in plasma and urine. Measurements of cortisol are used in the diagnosis and treatment of disorders of the adrenal gland.
( b ) *Classification.* Class II.
Editorial Note on Part 872
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 872 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 872.1810 Intraoral source x-ray system. ( a ) *Identification.* An intraoral source x-ray system is an electrically powered device that produces x-rays and is intended for dental radiographic examination and diagnosis of diseases of the teeth, jaw, and oral structures. The x-ray source (a tube) is located inside the mouth. This generic type of device may include patient and equipment supports and component parts.
( b ) *Classification.* Class II.
# C_2014448EN.01000701.xml

| 15.12.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 448/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.12.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 448/7

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel București (Romania) lodged on 24 September 2014 — SC Star Storage SA v Institutul Național de Cercetare Dezvoltare în Informatică (INCDI)

(Case C-439/14)

(2014/C 448/09)

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Referring court

Curtea de Apel București

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: SC Star Storage SA

Applicant:

Defendant: Institutul Național de Cercetare Dezvoltare în Informatică (INCDI)

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Are the provisions in the third subparagraph of Article 1(1) and Article 1(3) of Directive 89/665 (1), as amended by Directive 2007/66 (2), to be interpreted as precluding a rule under which a ‘good conduct guarantee’ must be lodged as a prerequisite for being granted access to procedures for reviewing the decisions of contracting authorities, such as the rule laid down in Article 271a and Article 271b of [Ordonanța de urgență a Guvernului] (Emergency Ordinance) No 34/2006?

1

2

---

(1)  Council Directive 89/665/EEC of 21 December 1989 on the coordination of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of review procedures to the award of public supply and public works contracts (OJ 1989 L 395, p. 33).

1

(2)  Directive 2007/66/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2007 amending Council Directives 89/665/EEC and 92/13/EEC with regard to improving the effectiveness of review procedures concerning the award of public contracts (OJ 2007 L 335, p. 31).

2

---
J~~tED STq r

~

S 

z UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

o ~ Q WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 

z 2 

0 

PROS ~G~\ 

APR 1 1 20?1 

OFFICE OF 

AIR AND RADIATION 

J. R. Stroble 

Director, National TRU Program 

Carlsbad Field Office 

Department of Energy 

P.O. Box 3090 

Carlsbad, NM 88221 

Dear Mr. Stroble: 

We received your letter dated Apri18, 2011, requesting the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency's (EPA's) concurrence on the draft expansion certification memo the 

Carisbad Field Office (CBFO) plans to issue to the Central Characterization Project (CCP) at the 

Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). We concur with the draft expansion certification 

memo to include containers from Nuclear Fuel Services (NFS) burial trench soils (S4000) in 

waste stream OR-NFS-CH-SOIL per our approval of March 23, 2011 (See EPA Air pocket No. 

A-98-49, II-A4-144). 

In accordance with EPA regulations at 40 CFR 194.8 (69 FR 42571-42583), on 

August 21, 2008, EPA approved the CH TRU waste characterization program at ORNL (See 

EPA Air pocket No. A-98-49, II-A4-103). The addition of the NFS waste was made in 

accordance with that and subsequent EPA approvals. 

The EPA limitations applicable to the characterization of CH TRU retrievably-stored 

debris waste are appropriately included in Attachment 4 of the draft expansion certification 

memo. The waste characterization equipment, procedures and processes mentioned in the 

ORNL draft expansion certification memo are consistent with EPA's existing approvals at the 

site. 

Thank you for providing us with an opportunity to review the draft expansion 

certification memo for ORNL CCP. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me at 

202-343-9422. 

Sincerely, 

~ 

Edward Feltcorn 

Center for Waste Management and Regulations 

Internet Address (URL) o http://www.epa.gov 

Recycled/Recyclable o Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Postconsumer, Process Chlorine Free Recycled Paper 
cc: (Electronic Distribution) 

Norma Castaneda, CBFO NTP 

Court Fesmire, CBFO NTP 

Martin Navarrete, CBFO QA 

Dennis Miehls, CBFO QA 

Raymond Lee, EPA
Editorial Note on Part 868
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 868 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 868.2320 Uncompensated thorpe tube flowmeter. ( a ) *Identification.* An uncompensated thorpe tube flowmeter is a device intended for medical purposes that is used to indicate and control gas flow rate accurately. The device includes a vertically mounted tube and is calibrated when the outlet of the flowmeter is open to the atmosphere.
( b ) *Classification.* Class I (general controls). The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to the limitations in § 868.9.
[47 FR 31142, July 16, 1982, as amended at 61 FR 1119, Jan. 16, 1996; 66 FR 38794, July 25, 2001]