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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-7032

CURTIS RAY BROOKS,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

DIRECTOR OF THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et. al.,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema,

District Judge. (1:13-cv-00631-LMB-TRJ)

Submitted: September 24, 2013 Decided: September 27, 2013

Before NIEMEYER and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, 

Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Curtis Ray Brooks, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Curtis Ray Brooks seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order dismissing as successive his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006)

petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice 

or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not 

issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a 

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the 

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies 

this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would 

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional 

claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 

484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 

(2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural 

grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive 

procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a 

debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 

529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude 

that Brooks has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 

deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in 

forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 
3

presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 18 (Thursday, January 29, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 5172]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-1855]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of 
Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation 
Research Committee.
    Date: February 19-20, 2009.
    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Doubletree Hotel Washington, DC, 1515 Rhode Island Ave., 
NW., State Room, Washington, DC 20005.
    Contact Person: Katrin Eichelberg, PhD, Scientific Review 
Officer, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural 
Activities, NIAID/NIH/DHHS, 6700B Rockledge Drive, MSC 7616, 
Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-0818, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#650e000c060d000907001702250b0c040c014b0b0c0d4b020a13"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="4c2729252f2429202e293e2b0c22252d252862222524622b233a">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, 
Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, 
Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes 
of Health, HHS)

    Dated: January 22, 2009.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. E9-1855 Filed 1-28-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 152 (Monday, August 10, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39935-39936]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-18956]



[[Page 39935]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

[Transmittal Nos. 09-31]


36(b)(1) Arms Sales Notification

AGENCY: Department of Defense, Defense Security Cooperation Agency.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text 
of a section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification. This is published to 
fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated 21 
July 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. B. English, DSCA/DBO/CFM, (703) 
601-3740.
    The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of 
Representatives, Transmittals 09-31 with attached transmittal and 
policy justification.

    Dated: July 17, 2009.
Patricia L. Toppings,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
BILLING CODE 5001-06-M
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN10AU09.000


[[Page 39936]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN10AU09.001

[FR Doc. E9-18956 Filed 8-7-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-C
## GESTF Terrestrial Use Sites Data

for Oryzalin BiOp

**July 19, 2011** 

### GESTF Terrestrial Use-Sites Dataset • **Digital dataset**  **based on 2009 USDA** **** **NASS CDL Data**  • **Designed to be a nationally**  **consistent data**  **layer for use in GIS analyses**  • **Extensive documentation**  **/ metadata** • **Development methodology**  **totally transparent**  • **Submitted under**  **MRID 48309302**

### Benefits of CDL • **Intent of CDL data is to accurately map agriculture**  • **Provide acreage**  **estimates to the**  **Agricultural Statistics Board**  **for a state's major commodities**  • **Identifies different types of agriculture** 

### Terrestrial Use-Sites General Categories • **Food / Feed**  **(CDL)** • **Forestry (NLCD**  **/ GAP Analysis Program**  **/ CDL)** • **Turf (NLCD / CDL)** 

### Crop Use-Sites Categories

• **Grains** • **Hay/Forage/Silage** • **16 category classification based on EP**  **A use** **- site**  **categories** • **Row Crop** • **Corn/Soybeans** • **Berries** • **Fruit/Nuts** • **Vegetables** • **Rangeland** • **Fallow** • **Tree Plantations** • **Grass for Seed/Sod**  • **Other**

### Crop Use-Sites Categories

• **Grains / Row Crops**  • **Vegetables / Fruits** • **Fo ur**  **major double -**  **crop classifications** • **Vegetables / Fruits** • **Vegetables / Grains** • **Vegetables / Field Crops**

### Forestry Use-Sites Dataset • **Represents potential**  **pesticide use**  **sites for forestry**  **applications** • **Based on NLCD forestry**  **classes**

– **Deciduous Forest (Class 141)**
– **Evergreen Forest (Class 142)**
– **Mixed Forest (Class 143)**
– **Woodland (Class 63)** • **Provides information**  **on management requirements**  **and restrictions (GAP)** 

### Turf Use-Sites Dataset • **Represents potential**  **pesticide use**  **sites for residential**  **turf uses** • **Based on CDL residential/urban**  **classes**

– **Developed, Open Space (Class 121)** 
– **Developed, Low Intensity (Class 122)** 

### Additional Spatial Analyses? • **Would additional**  **spatial analyses**  **be useful?** 

– **Amount of agriculture (by type?) within**  **given distances of critical habitat.** 

– **Percent of area within given distances of**  **critical habitat**  **comprised of agriculture.**

– **Minimum / Mean / Maximum**  **distances of agriculture to critical**  **habitat.**

– **Other?**
Exhibit 35.1

SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2015-5 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017, (the Report), the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Santander Consumer USA Inc. (the Servicer), does hereby certify and
represent that:



| | 1. | A review of the activities and performance of the Servicer under the Sale and Servicing Agreement, dated as of October 21, 2015, among Santander Drive Auto Receivables LLC, Santander Consumer USA Inc., Santander
Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2015-5 and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association (the Agreement) during the period that is the subject of the Report has been made under my supervision.
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the period that is the subject of the Report.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC.By:

/s/ Sandra M. BroderickName:

Sandra M. BroderickTitle:

EVP Head of OperationsDate:

March 30, 2018By:

/s/ Andrew KangName:

Andrew KangTitle:

Executive Vice President Capital Markets and TreasurerDate:

March 30, 2018
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 146 (Friday, July 31, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 38175]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-18382]



[[Page 38175]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Navy


Meeting of the Ocean Research and Resources Advisory Panel

AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DOD.

ACTION: Notice of open meeting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Ocean Research and Resources Advisory Panel (ORRAP) will 
hold its third regularly scheduled meeting of the year. The meeting 
will be open to the public.

DATES: The meeting will be held on Tuesday, August 11, 2009 from 9 a.m. 
to 5:30 p.m. and Wednesday, August 12, 2009 from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. 
Members of the public should submit their comments one week in advance 
of the meeting to the meeting Point of Contact.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in the offices of the Consortium of 
Ocean Leadership, 1201 New York Avenue, NW., 4th Floor, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Charles L. Vincent, Office of 
Naval Research, 875 North Randolph Street, Suite 1425, Arlington, VA 
22203-1995, telephone (703) 696-4118.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice of open meeting is provided in 
accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App. 2). 
The meeting will include discussions on coastal hazards, fishery 
management initiatives, ocean science policy, ocean observations, ocean 
mapping, education, and other current issues in the ocean science and 
resource management communities.

    Dated: July 24, 2009.
A.M. Vallandingham,
Lieutenant Commander, Judge Advocate General's Corps, U.S. Navy, 
Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. E9-18382 Filed 7-30-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3810-FF-P
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D18-3394

_____________________________

AARON FOLEY,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Clay County.

John H. Skinner, Judge.

May 31, 2019

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROWE, JAY, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Aaron Foley, pro se, Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Heather Flanagan Ross, 

Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

November 15, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,
Chief Justice

131765 Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. STACEY HELFER, Next Friend of Amber Stephen J. Markman, Seilicki, Minor, Justices Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 131765 COA: 265757 Macomb CC: 04-003161-NI CENTER LINE PUBLIC SCHOOLS and DEANNA LYNN MULRENIN, Defendants, Third-Party Plaintiffs-Appellants, and

MICHELLE SLOAT, Defendant, Third-Party Defendant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 20, 2006 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in lieu of granting leave to app eal, we REVERSE the judgment of the Court of Appeals, for the reasons stated in the Court of Appeals di ssenting opinion, and we REMAND this case to the Macomb Circuit Court for entry of an order granting summary disposition in favor
of the defendants.

t1108 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

November 15, 2006

Clerk
N OTE : This order is nonprecedential

. 

# United States Court of Appeals **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________
CTD NETWORKS, LLC, Plaintiff

- Appellant

v.

MICROSOFT CORPORATION, Defendant

- Appellee

______________________

2023

- 2429

______________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas in No. 6:22

- cv

- 01049

- XR, Judge Xavier Rodriguez.

______________________

ON MOTION

______________________

Before L OURIE
, D YK
, and R EYNA
, Circuit Judges

. D YK
, Circuit Judge

. O R D E R

This appeal arises out of the district court ’s final judgment dismissing CTD Networks, LLC ’s infringement claims against Microsoft Corporation

. C TD now move s to withdraw William P. Ramey of Ramey LLP and to substitute Erik N. Lund of Whitestone Law as counsel in this Case: 23-2429 Document: 33 Page: 1 Filed: 05/24/2024CTD NETWORKS
, LLC v. MI CROSOFT C ORPORATION 2

appeal. ECF No. 23. The parties separately submit a “stipulated agreement for voluntary dismissal” pursuant to Federal Rule of Appell ate Procedure 42(b) with each side to bear its own costs and attorney fees for this appeal. ECF No. 25. Ramey LLP, as “[f]ormer [c]ounsel for Appellant,”

move s to “maintain this appeal on the Court’s docket.” ECF No. 26 at 4. Microsoft opposes.

We grant the motion to withdraw and dismiss. While Ramey LLP opposes dismissal to protect its own interests against potential liability that could arise out of a sanctions motion pending before the district court, we have been shown no basis for allowing Ramey LLP to appeal when it is not a party and has not been sanctioned or otherwise the direct subject of a court order. See Nisus Corp. v. Perma

Chink Sys., Inc. , 497 F.3d 1316, 1319 (Fed. Cir. 2007); United States v. Carter , 995 F.3d 1214, 1218 (10th C ir. 2021) ( noting that “attorneys have standing to appeal only when . . . they are specific objects of the challenged order” (cleaned up)).

Accordingly

, I T I S O RDERED T HAT : (1) The motion to withdraw and substitute counsel

, ECF No. 23, is granted. Mr. Lund’s amended entry of appearance, ECF No. 2 4 , is accepted for filing.

(2) The appeal is dismissed , and all remaining motions are denied. Case: 23-2429 Document: 33 Page: 2 Filed: 05/24/2024CTD NETWORKS
, LLC v. MI CROSOFT C ORPORATION 3

(3) Each side shall bear its own costs.

May 24 , 2024 Date F OR THE C OURT Case: 23-2429 Document: 33 Page: 3 Filed: 05/24/2024
#### § 25.2505-0 Table of contents.

This section lists the table of contents for §§ 25.2505-1 and 25.2505-2.

## § 25.2505-1 Unified credit against gift tax; in general.

(a) General rule.

(b) Applicable rate of tax.

(c) Special rule in case of certain gifts made before 1977.

(d) Credit limitation.

(e) Effective/applicability date.

## § 25.2505-2 Gifts made by a surviving spouse having a DSUE amount available.

(a) Donor who is surviving spouse is limited to DSUE amount of last deceased spouse.

(1) In general.

(2) No DSUE amount available from last deceased spouse.

(3) Identity of last deceased spouse unchanged by subsequent marriage or divorce.

(b) Manner in which DSUE amount is applied.

(c) Special rule in case of multiple deceased spouses and previously-applied DSUE amount.

(1) In general.

(2) Example.

(d) Date DSUE amount taken into consideration by donor who is a surviving spouse.

(1) General rule.

(2) Exception when surviving spouse not a U.S. citizen on date of deceased spouse's death.

(3) Special rule when property passes to surviving spouse in a qualified domestic trust.

(e) Authority to examine returns of deceased spouses.

(f) Availability of DSUE amount for nonresidents who are not citizens.

(g) Effective/applicability date.

[T.D. 9725, 80 FR 34290, June 16, 2015]
[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:****Pain control : support forpeople with cancer**
 
PDF | Mobi | epub
 
SuDoc:HE 20.3152:P 16/2012
Item Number:0507-G-02 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000920690
 
December 13, 2017
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 149 (Wednesday, August 5, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 39076]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-18692]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding 
Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for 
approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 
1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 225), and all other 
applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company 
and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the 
power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the 
banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, 
including the companies listed below.
    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings 
required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the 
Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The applications also will be available 
for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested 
persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated 
in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the 
acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether 
the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards 
in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, 
nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States. 
Additional information on all bank holding companies may be obtained 
from the National Information Center website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these 
applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the 
offices of the Board of Governors not later than August 27, 2009.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (Glenda Wilson, Community 
Affairs Officer) P.O. Box 442, St. Louis, Missouri 63166-2034:
    1. St. Jacob Bancshares, Inc.; to become a bank holding company by 
acquiring 100 percent of the voting shares of State Bank of St. Jacob, 
both of St. Jacob, Illinois.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, July 31, 2009.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. E9-18692 Filed 8-4-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
III

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 197

To promote clean air and to prevent the import of ‘‘dirty’’ gasoline into

the United States.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 25 (legislative day, FEBRUARY 22), 1994

Mr. BAUCUS (for himself, Mr. FORD, Mr. WARNER, Mr. BREAUX, and Mr.

WOFFORD) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on Finance

RESOLUTION

To promote clean air and to prevent the import of ‘‘dirty’’

gasoline into the United States.

Whereas the ‘‘Clear Air Act Amendments of 1990’’ (CAAA

1990) is legislation critical for preserving American

health and environment;

Whereas the reformulated gasoline program is a key provision

of the CAAA 1990;

Whereas the integrity of the clean fuels requirement of the

CAAA necessarily involves EPA verification of data submitted;

Whereas the EPA must be able to verify with certainty the

foreign submitted data substantiating 1990 baseline

standards of foreign refiners of reformulated gasoline;
2

SRES 197 IS

Whereas the final reformulated gasoline rule issued by EPA

on December 15, 1993, recognizes the difficulty EPA has

verifying the baseline of gasoline produced abroad and attempts to protect the integrity of the clean fuels requirement in the CAAA 1990;

Whereas foreign refiners might be entitled to claim that the

December 15 EPA rule denies them national treatment

obligations owed them by the United States under the

General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT);

Whereas the GATT provides a recognized exception to GATT

obligations of ‘‘national treatment’’ by virtue of a measure’s importance to protecting human, animal or plant

life or health; and

Whereas the reformulated gasoline EPA rule can be reasonably found to fall within this GATT article XX exception:

Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that the

2 reformulated gasoline rule should stand as previously pro3 mulgated; and that the United States Trade Representa4 tive should vigorously defend the reformulated gasoline

5 rule under the GATT; and that if the United States re6 opens the reformulated gasoline rule, the new proposed

7 rule to permit foreign refineries to use their own 1990

8 baselines should be subject to rigorous and extensive pub9 lic notice and comment to ensure that it does not con10 sequently result in an increase in the levels of ozone over

11 the current reformulated gasoline rule, and does not result
3

SRES 197 IS

1 in discrimination against domestic refiners of reformu2 lated gasoline.

Æ