alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 97-3498

___________ Charles Gordon Long, * * Appellant, * * v. * * Ann Barry, Individually and as * commissioner of the Department * of Health; Frank Wood, Individually * and as Commissioner of Department * of Corrections; Dana Baumgartner, * Appeal from the United States Individually and as Health Services * District Court for the Director of the Department of * District of Minnesota. Corrections; Robert D. Benson, * Individually and as Warden of the * [UNPUBLISHED] Minnesota Correctional Facility at * Stillwater; Angelito Ramos, Dr., * Individually and as Chief Medical * Officer of the Minnesota Correctional * Facility at Stillwater, jointly and * severally, * * Appellees. *

___________ Submitted: May 20, 1998 Filed: May 28, 1998

___________ Before FAGG, BEAM, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

___________The Honorable James M. Rosenbaum, United States District Judge for th e 1 District of Minnesota. The Honorable Franklin L. Noel, United States Magistrate Judge for the District 2 of Minn esota, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of th e parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). -2- PER CURIAM. Charles Lo ng filed this suit against a prison physician and four state priso n officials, alleging various constitutional and state law violations for the defendants ' refusal t o prescribe him narcotic-based pain medication while he was an inmate at a sta te correctional facility. Long now appeals from the district court & s grant o f 1 summary judgment to the fou r state prison officials on all counts, and from the district court & s partial dismissal for failure to state a claim and partial grant of summary

2 judgment as to the prison physician. Upon de novo review, we conclude the district court properly dismissed Long & s malpracti ce claim, and did not abuse its discretion in not deferring its ruling o n defendants & summary judgment motion or not allowing Long time to obtain expert witness testimony to support his malpractice claim. As to L ong & s claim that defendants violatedthe Hines v. Anderson , 439 F. Supp. 12 (D. Minn. 1977) ( Hines ), consen t decree which governs medical care at Minnesota & s maximum security prison, we agree with the district court that Long cannot enforce the consent decree in a 42 U.S.C

. § 1983 action. See DeGidio v. Pung , 920 F.2d 525, 534 (8th Cir. 1990) (declining to hold that Hines consent decree could be enforced through § 1983 action). If Long was instead att empting to invoke the power of the district court to hold defendants i n contempt for violations of the Hines decree, s ee Welch v. Spangler , 939 F.2d 570, 572 (8th Cir. 1991) (court has power to hold parties in contempt for violating consen t decree), his claim is moot as he is no longer incarcerated, cf. Smith v. Erickson , 961 F.2d 1387, 1388-89 (8th Cir. 1992), and he does not have standing to assert the rights-3-

of inmates who are currentl y incarcerated, cf. Martin v. Sargent , 780 F.2d 1334, 1337 (8th Cir. 1985). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
§ 95.309 Coordination procedures and other restrictions for operation in certain locations. The operator of a Personal Radio Service station may be required to coordinate operation in advance and/or may be subject to operating restrictions if the station is to be operated in certain locations, described in the following paragraphs in this section. ( a ) *In a Quiet Zone or near a protected FCC field office.* Rules for these locations are set forth in § 1.924 of this chapter.
( b ) *Near a U.S. border or in an area that is or may be subject to an international treaty or agreement.* Treaties and agreements may be viewed or downloaded from the FCC Web site: *http://www.fcc.gov/ib/sand/agree/*.
( c ) *At an environmentally sensitive site, or in a manner that may raise environmental concerns.* Rules for these locations are set forth in part 1, subpart I of this chapter (Procedures Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969).
( d ) *In an area administered by the United States Government.* For example, the Department of Defense may impose restrictions on a station transmitting on land under its jurisdiction. Before operating a station at such a point, the operator should consult with the commanding officer in charge of the land.
( e ) *Near the Arecibo Observatory.* Anyone planning to operate a Personal Radio Services station on the islands of Puerto Rico, Desecheo, Mona, Vieques, or Culebra in a manner that could pose an interference threat to the Arecibo Observatory must notify the observatory at least 45 days in advance of the planned operation, by mail or email, to the following address: Interference Office, Arecibo Observatory, HC3 Box 53995, Arecibo, Puerto Rico 00612; email: *prcz@naic.edu*. ( 1 ) To determine whether a planned operation could pose an interference threat to the Arecibo Observatory, operators may consult interference guidelines provided by Cornell University.
( 2 ) The notification must include the geographical coordinates of the station, if it is a fixed or base station.
( 3 ) After receipt of such notifications, the FCC will allow the Arecibo Observatory 20 days to comment on or object to the proposed operation. The operator must make reasonable efforts to resolve or mitigate any potential interference concern with the Arecibo Observatory. If the FCC determines that an operator has made reasonable efforts to protect the Observatory from interference, the operator may be allowed to operate the station.
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT NASHVILLE

November 14, 2000 Session

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. WILLIAM J. CLOUSE

Filed July 11, 2001

DAVID G. HAYES, J., concurring.

I join with Judge Ogle in concluding that the Appellant's double jeopardy rights were not

violated. I would also make the observation that, similar in purpose to the DUI statute, the stated

public policy purpose in enacting the Motor Vehicle Habitual Offender Act was to remove from the

highways those offenders who have "demonstrated their indifference to the safety and welfare of

others." Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-602(2).

Additionally, when the "no bail" policy position was instituted, the sentence of the habitual offender,

similar to the minimum mandatory sentence of the DUI offender, could not be suspended. Tenn.

Code Ann. § 55-10-616(c). For these and other reasons, the habitual motor offender and the DUI

offender were both viewed by the legislature and our courts as an immediate and common threat to

those traveling the public highways of this state. In State v. Pennington, 952 S.W.2d 420 (Tenn.

1997), our supreme court found, in part, that protection of the public by a brief period of pretrial

detention of a suspected DUI offender was reasonably related to a legitimate government purpose,

i.e., protection of the public. While concededly, the no bail policy position was ill-founded, this does

not compel, however, the conclusion that it was imposed solely to punish. In the absence of proof

of an intent to punish, a court should look to an alternative reason which may serve a legitimate

governmental purpose. Doe v. Norris, 751 S.W.2d 834, 839 (Tenn.1988). I find from the facts in

this case that it may reasonably be inferred that the basis of the policy was both the immediate

protection of the public and attendance of the habitual offender for trial. 

___________________________________ 

DAVID G. HAYES, JUDGE
I

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4938

To provide that members of the Armed Forces held as hostages in Iran

after the seizure of the United States Embassy in Tehran on November

4, 1979, shall be treated as having been prisoners of war during the

period that they were in a captive status.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AUGUST 11, 1994

Mr. BARRETT of Nebraska introduced the following bill; which was referred

to the Committee on Armed Services

A BILL

To provide that members of the Armed Forces held as hostages in Iran after the seizure of the United States

Embassy in Tehran on November 4, 1979, shall be treated as having been prisoners of war during the period

that they were in a captive status.

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

3 SECTION 1. PRISONER OF WAR STATUS FOR MEMBERS OF

4 THE ARMED FORCES WHO WERE HOSTAGES

5 DURING THE IRAN EMBASSY CRISIS.

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Any individual who, while a mem7 ber of the Armed Forces serving on active duty, was held
2

HR 4938 IH

1 in a captive status as a result of the seizure of the United

2 States Embassy in Tehran on November 4, 1979, shall

3 be treated for all purposes as having been in a prisoner

4 of war status during the period of that captivity and shall

5 (notwithstanding any other requirement in law or regula6 tion) be eligible for all rights and benefits (including the

7 Prisoner of War Medal) applicable to persons who were

8 held as prisoners of war.

9 (b) COORDINATION OF BENEFITS.—An individual

10 covered by subsection (a) who is eligible for any benefit

11 under a law providing benefits for persons held in captive

12 status is not eligible for the same or a substantially iden13 tical benefit by reason of having been (in accordance with

14 subsection (a)) in a prisoner of war status during the same

15 period of captivity.

Æ
§ 32.1191 Accounts receivable allowance—other. ( a ) This account shall be credited with amounts charged to Account 5302, Uncollectible Revenue—Other to provide for uncollectible amounts included in Account 1190, Other Accounts Receivable. There shall also be credited to this account amounts collected which previously had been written off through charges to this account and credits to Account 1190. There shall be charged to this account any amounts covered thereby which have been found to be impracticable of collection.
( b ) If no such allowance is maintained, uncollectible amounts shall be charged directly to Account 5302, Uncollectible Revenue—Other.
( c ) Subsidiary record categories shall be maintained in order that the entity may separately report the amounts contained herein that relate to affiliates and nonaffiliates. Such subsidiary record categories shall be reported as required by part 43 of this Commission's Rules and Regulations.
No. 10-10778.

#### Ellerby et al. *v.*United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
<html>
<head>
  <meta http-equiv="refresh" content="0;url=/welcome-cops" />
</head>
<body>
</body>
</html>
No. 11-5795.

#### Salazar-Mojica *v.*United States.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
§ 90.720 Channels available for public safety/mutual aid. ( a ) Part 90 licensees who meet the eligibility criteria of §§ 90.20(a)(1), 90.20(a)(2)(i), 90.20(a)(2)(ii), 90.20(a)(2)(iii), 90.20(a)(2)(iv), 90.20(a)(2)(vii), 90.20(a)(2)(ix), 90.20(a)(2)(xiii) or 90.20(a)(2)(xiv) are authorized by this rule to use mobile and/or portable units on Channels 161-170 throughout the United States, its territories, and the District of Columbia to transmit: ( 1 ) Communications relating to the immediate safety of life;
( 2 ) Communications to facilitate interoperability among entities eligible under §§ 90.20(a)(1), 90.20(a)(2)(i), 90.20(a)(2)(ii), 90.20(a)(2)(iii), 90.20(a)(2)(iv), 90.20(a)(2)(vii), 90.20(a)(2)(ix), 90.20(a)(2)(xiii) and 90.20(a)(2)(xiv); or
( 3 ) Communications on behalf of and by members of organizations established for disaster relief purposes having an emergency radio communications plan (*i.e.,* licensees eligible under § 90.20(a)(2)(vii)) for the transmission of communications relating to the safety of life or property, the establishment and maintenance of temporary relief facilities, and the alleviation of emergency conditions during periods of actual or impending emergency, or disaster, until substantially normal conditions are restored; for limited training exercises incidental to an emergency radio communications plan, and for necessary operational communications of the disaster relief organization or its chapter affiliates.
( b ) Any Government entity and any non-Government entity eligible to obtain a license under §§ 90.20(a)(1), 90.20(a)(2)(i), 90.20(a)(2)(ii), 90.20(a)(2)(iii), 90.20(a)(2)(iv), 90.20(a)(2)(vii), 90.20(a)(2)(ix), 90.20(a)(2)(xiii) or 90.20(a)(2)(xiv) is also eligible to obtain a license for base/mobile operations on Channels 161 through 170. Base/mobile or base/portable communications on these channels that do not relate to the immediate safety of life or to communications interoperability among the above-specified entities, may only be conducted on a secondary non-interference basis to such communications.
[62 FR 18936, Apr. 17, 1997, as amended at 81 FR 66544, Sept. 28, 2016]
Editorial Note on Part 97
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 97 appear at 63 FR 54077, Oct. 8, 1998.

§ 97.31 Cancellation on account of the licensee's death. ( a ) A person may request cancellation of an operator/primary station license grant on account of the licensee's death by submitting a signed request that includes a death certificate, obituary, or Social Security Death Index data that shows the person named in the operator/primary station license grant has died. Such a request may be submitted as a pleading associated with the deceased licensee's license. *See* § 1.45 of this chapter. In addition, the Commission may cancel an operator/primary station license grant if it becomes aware of the grantee's death through other means. No action will be taken during the last thirty days of the post-expiration grace period (*see* § 97.21(b)) on a request to cancel a license due to the licensee's death.
( b ) A license that is canceled due to the licensee's death is canceled as of the date of the licensee's death.
[75 FR 78171, Dec. 15, 2010]
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

                    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the National Advisory Council for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, September 8, 2006, 9 a.m. to September 8, 2006, 4 p.m., National Institutes of Health, Neuroscience Building, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Rooms C & D, Rockville, MD 20852, which was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on July 28, 2006, 71 FR 42860.                

This meeting is being amended due to the start time change for the Open session from 2 p.m. to 1:30 p.m. The meeting is partially Closed to the public.

Dated: August 28, 2006.

Anna Snouffer,

Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 06-7436 Filed 9-5-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
I

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 5017

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to make annual grants to the Center

for Maritime and Underwater Resource Management at Michigan State

University for a pilot project relating to management and development

of maritime and underwater cultural resources.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AUGUST 21, 1994

Mr. STUPAK introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries

A BILL

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to make annual grants

to the Center for Maritime and Underwater Resource

Management at Michigan State University for a pilot

project relating to management and development of maritime and underwater cultural resources.

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

3 SECTION 1. ANNUAL GRANTS FOR PILOT PROJECT.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Interior,

5 subject to the availability of appropriations, shall make an6 nual grants of up to $250,000 for each of fiscal years

7 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, and 2000 to the Center for Mari-
2

•HR 5017 IH

1 time and Underwater Resource Management at Michigan

2 State University, for a pilot project to plan, design, imple3 ment, and evaluate innovative approaches to management

4 and development of maritime and underwater cultural

5 resources.

6 (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There

7 are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of the

8 Interior $250,000 for each of fiscal years 1996, 1997,

9 1998, 1999, and 2000 for making annual grants under

10 this section.

Æ
RE: Clean Power Plan for Existing Sources 

Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0602 

I strongly support EPA's proposed rules limiting carbon emissions from existing 

power sources. 

It is important to me that the final rule for the Clean Power Plan explicitly list a 

carbon tax as an option for states to comply with the rule. Ideally this should be a 

revenue neutral carbon tax, with all revenues returned on an equitable basis to 

households as monthly dividends. 

Among economists, a carbon tax is widely accepted as the most economically 

efficient and cost-effective way to reduce carbon emissions. In a time when state 

budgets are tight, the most cost-effective option must be on the table as a 

mechanism for complying with the new rules. 

Though directed at reducing COG emissions, carbon taxes can also help states earn 

compliance for other fossil fuel byproducts regulated by the EPA such as 

particulates, mercury, NOx and SOx emissions. 

When a carbon tax is revenue-neutral, it can also yield a "double dividend": 

boosting the economy while also cutting carbon emissions. 

Modeling studies for California, Massachusetts, and Washington State have shown 

that a revenue neutral carbon tax will have a positive impact on the economy at the 

state level while also reducing carbon pollution. (http://etr-us.org/remi-studies/) 

At the national level a revenue-neutral carbon tax would have a correspondingly 

greater positive impact (http://citizensclimatelobby.org/wpcontent/uploads/2014/06/REMI-carbon-tax-report-62141.pdf) 

These modeling studies are supported by the practical experience of British 

Columbia, Canada, which shows that a sub-national jurisdiction that adopts a 

revenue-neutral carbon tax can lead in both economic indicators and carbon 

emissions reductions. 

The EPA should issue clear guidance on the administration, implementation, price, 

and escalation rate for a carbon tax that would satisfy the requirements of EPA's 

new rule. 

Thank you for the work you're doing to make our world a better place. 

Chris Hoffman 

1280 Fairfield Drive 

Boulder, CO 80305 

hoopandtree@aol.com 

303-494-8096 (home) 

303-513-3621 (work / cell)
§ 32.2006 Nonoperating plant. ( a ) This account shall include the company's investment in regulated property which is not includable in the plant accounts as operating telecommunications plant. It shall include the company's investment in telecommunications property held for sale. (Note also Account 1406, Nonregulated Investments.)
( b ) Subsidiary records shall be maintained to show the character of the amounts carried in this account.
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the RegistrationStatements on Form S-8 (No. 33-71018, 33-74728, 33-95178, 333-09913, 333-27951, 333-62125, 333-81401, 333-94837, 333-47140, 333-56316, 333-61786, 333-83064, 333-98031, 333-103214, 333-106646, 333-108266, 333-111915 and 333-117599) and theRegistration Statements on Form S-3 (No. 333-106515) of Mercury Interactive Corporation of our report dated March 14, 2005 relating to the financial statements, management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financialreporting and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K. 

 

/s/    PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERSLLP

 

San Jose, California 

March 14, 2005
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-7281
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ROBERT W. LEGARE, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at A lexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CR-93-212-A, CA-97-567-AM) Submitted: December 11, 1997 Decided: December 31, 1997 Before HALL and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Fred Warren Bennett, CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. Leslie Bonner McClendon, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court'sopinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Legare , Nos. CR-93-212-A; CA-97-567-AM (E.D. Va. June 4 & 16, 1997). 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.

DISMISSED
- De