alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 47 (Friday, March 9, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 14441]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-5734]


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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Proposal Review Panel for Physics; Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meeting.

    Name: LIGO Annual Review Site Visit at Hanford Observatory for 
Physics, <greek-i>1208.
    Date and Time: Wednesday, April 11, 2012; 8 a.m.--6:30 p.m.; 
Thursday, April 12, 2012; 8 a.m.--5:30 p.m.; Friday, April 13, 2012; 
8 a.m.--11 a.m.
    Place: LIGO site at Hanford, WA.
    Type of Meeting: Partially Closed.
    Contact Person: Thomas Carruthers, Program Director, Division of 
Physics, National Science Foundation, (703) 292-7373.
    Purpose of Meeting: To provide an evaluation of the project 
construction for implementation of the AdvLIGO project to the 
National Science Foundation.
    Agenda:

Wednesday, April 11, 2012

8 a.m.-8:15 a.m. Open--Sign In
8:45 a.m.-9:15 a.m. Closed--Executive Session
9:15 a.m.-11:45 a.m. Open--Welcome, LIGO status, Reporting Metrices
11:45 Lunch
12:45 p.m.-2:45 p.m. Open--S6 Science run, performance, risk 
reduction
3:15 p.m.-4:30 p.m. Data Management, LIGO Australia, LSC status
5 p.m. Closed--Executive Session

Thursday, April 12, 2012

8 a.m.-8:15 a.m. Open--Sign in
9 a.m.-10 a.m. Closed--Executive Session
10:15 a.m.-11:45 Open--Review of AdvLIGO MREFC, EPO, diversity
11:45 a.m. Lunch
12:45 p.m.-4:15 p.m. Open--Project discussions, tour
5 p.m. Closed--Executive Session

Friday, April 13, 2012

8 a.m.-10:30 a.m. Closed--Executive Session report writing
10:30 a.m.-11 a.m. Closed--Executive Session--closing address

    Reason for Closing: The proposal contains proprietary or 
confidential material, including technical information on personnel. 
These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b (c) (2) (4) and (6) of 
the Government in the Sunshine Act.

    Dated: March 6, 2012.
Susanne Bolton,
Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 2012-5734 Filed 3-8-12; 8:45 a.m.]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
# L_2006308EN.01001801.xml

| 8.11.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 308/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.11.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 308/18

---

COUNCIL COMMON POSITION 2006/755/CFSP

of 7 November 2006

concerning the temporary reception by Member States of the European Union of certain Palestinians

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 15 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 14 November 2005, the Council adopted Common Position 2005/793/CFSP (1) concerning the temporary reception by Member States of the European Union of certain Palestinians, which provided for an extension of the validity of their national permits for entry into, and stay in, the territory of the Member States referred to in Common Position 2002/400/CFSP (2) for a further period of 12 months. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 14 November 2005, the Council adopted Common Position 2005/793/CFSP (1) concerning the temporary reception by Member States of the European Union of certain Palestinians, which provided for an extension of the validity of their national permits for entry into, and stay in, the territory of the Member States referred to in Common Position 2002/400/CFSP (2) for a further period of 12 months.

| (2) | On the basis of an evaluation of the application of Common Position 2002/400/CFSP, the Council considers it appropriate that the validity of those permits be extended for a further period of 12 months, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

On the basis of an evaluation of the application of Common Position 2002/400/CFSP, the Council considers it appropriate that the validity of those permits be extended for a further period of 12 months,

HAS ADOPTED THIS COMMON POSITION:

Article 1

The Member States referred to in Article 2 of Common Position 2002/400/CFSP shall extend the validity of the national permits for entry and stay granted pursuant to Article 3 of that Common Position for a further period of 12 months.

Article 2

The Council shall evaluate the application of Common Position 2002/400/CFSP within six months of the adoption of this Common Position.

Article 3

This Common Position shall take effect on the day of its adoption.

Article 4

This Common Position shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 7 November 2006.

For the Council

The President

E. HEINÄLUOMA

---

(1)  
  OJ L 299, 16.11.2005, p. 80.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 138, 28.5.2002, p. 33. Common Position as last amended by Common Position 2004/493/CFSP (OJ L 181, 18.5.2004, p. 24).

2

---
State of New York

Supreme Court, Appellate Division

Third Judicial Department

Decided and Entered: March 17, 2016 520560 

________________________________

In the Matter of COREY DAVIS,

Petitioner,

v

ANTHONY J. ANNUCCI, as MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT

Acting Commissioner of 

Corrections and Community 

Supervision,

Respondent.

________________________________

Calendar Date: January 19, 2016

Before: Garry, J.P., Egan Jr., Rose and Lynch, JJ.

__________

Michael Cassidy, Prisoners' Legal Services of New York,

Plattsburgh, for petitioner.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Martin A.

Hotvet of counsel), for respondent.

__________

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this

Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Franklin County)

to review a determination of respondent finding petitioner guilty

of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Following an assault on an inmate in a prison bathroom by

several inmates, petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report

with assaulting an inmate, violent conduct, creating a

disturbance, possessing a weapon and gang activity. At the tier

III disciplinary hearing, confidential testimony was submitted in

camera positively identifying petitioner as one of the attackers

and related confidential documents were received into evidence. 

Petitioner was found guilty of all charges except the gang
-2- 520560 

activity charge and a penalty was imposed. The determination was

upheld on administrative appeal and petitioner thereafter

commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding.

The misbehavior report together with the confidential

testimony and documents considered by the Hearing Officer in

camera provide substantial evidence to support the finding of

guilt (see Matter of McCain v Fischer, 104 AD3d 1009, 1009

[2013]). Contrary to petitioner's contentions, we are satisfied

that the Hearing Officer was able to independently assess the

credibility and reliability of the confidential information given

the details provided regarding the attack, as well as the in

camera testimony of one of the confidential sources who the

Hearing Officer concluded had been truthful and believable (see

Matter or Clark v Annucci, 128 AD3d 1254, 1254-1255 [2015];

Matter of Rosario v Annucci, 127 AD3d 1477, 1478 [2015]). 

Petitioner's denial that he was involved in the attack created a

credibility issue to be resolved by the Hearing Officer (see

Matter of Perkins v Annucci, 129 AD3d 1421, 1421 [2015]). 

Moreover, the charges of which he was found guilty were not

dependent upon the gang activity charge, which the Hearing

Officer found had not been substantiated; there was nothing

inconsistent about finding him guilty of participating in the

attack and possessing a weapon but not guilty of gang activity

(see Matter of Jackson v Goord, 8 AD3d 852, 853 [2004]). We have

considered petitioner's remaining contentions and find that they

lack merit.

Garry, J.P., Egan Jr., Rose and Lynch, JJ., concur.
-3- 520560 

ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without

costs, and petition dismissed.

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger

Clerk of the Court
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

DAVID SCOTT DITTBRENNER,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 605 MAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 11th day of January, 2018

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.
# L_2007076EN.01003501.xml

| 16.3.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 76/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.3.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 76/35

---

Corrigendum to Directive 2006/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2006 on machinery, and amending Directive 95/16/EC

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 157 of 9 June 2006
  )

On page 34, Article 25, first subparagraph:

for:

‘Directive 98/37/EC is hereby repealed.’,

read:

‘Directive 98/37/EC is hereby repealed as from 29 December 2009.’

---
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

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), 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:*                         National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Special Emphasis Panel; Autism Center of Excellence: Network.                    

*Date:*                         March 30, 2012.                    

*Time:*                         8 a.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         Hyatt Regency Bethesda, One Bethesda Metro Center, 7400 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.                    

*Contact Person:*                         David H. Weinberg, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Division of Scientific Review, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, 6100 executive blvd., Room 5B01, Rockville, MD 20852, 301-435-6973,                         *David.Weinberg@nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National Institutes of Health, HHS) 

Dated: March 2, 2012.

Jennifer S. Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2012-5702 Filed 3-7-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
**EXHIBIT 31.2****CERTIFICATIONS**I, Charles M. Handy, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Cogdell Spencer Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in lightof the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this quarterly report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presentedin this quarterly report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under the Company’s supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly duringthe period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this quarterly report the Company’s conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the periodcovered by this quarterly report based on such evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this quarterly report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recentfiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report)that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on the Company’s mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditorsand the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.        Date:   November 14, 2006 By:  /s/Charles M. Handy   Name:  Charles M. Handy   Title:  Chief Financial Officer   
27
#### Joseph Anderson et al., Appellants, v State of New York, Respondents.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (McDermott, J.), entered September 9, 1989 in Albany County, which, *inter alia,*granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint as time barred.

In their complaint, plaintiffs allege that defendants’ seizure of cigarettes under the authority of Tax Law § 1846 was unconstitutional insofar as the cigarettes were Indian property and therefore protected from tax under US Constitution, article I, § 8. Such a challenge was not to the constitutionality of the statute itself but rather was "an attack on another kind of governmental act * * * mounted in constitutional terms” *(SJI Realty Corp. v City of Poughkeepsie,*133 AD2d 682, 683; *see, Matter of Overhill Bldg. Co.*v *Delany,*28 NY2d 449, 458). As such, Supreme Court properly determined that the four-month Statute of Limitations applicable to CPLR article 78 proceedings governed the case (CPLR 217; *see, Solnick v Whalen,*49 NY2d 224). Given that the seizure took place on February 25, 1988 and suit was not commenced until January 1989, the action was properly dismissed as time barred.

Order affirmed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Weiss, Yesawich, Jr. and Harvey, JJ., concur.
#### Kirk Douglas BYRD, Appellant, v. STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee.

No. F-85-558.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma.

May 6, 1987.

*572Johnie O’Neal, Asst. Public Defender, Tulsa, for appellant.

Michael C. Turpén, Atty. Gen., Mary F. Williams, Asst. Atty. Gen., Oklahoma City, for appellee.

OPINION

BUSSEY, Judge:

The appellant, Kirk Douglas Byrd, was convicted of the' crime of Robbery with Firearms in the District Court of Tulsa County in Case No. CRF-84-916 and was sentenced to five (5) years imprisonment, and he appeals. We affirm.

Briefly stated the facts are that on January 4, 1984, Jeffery Davis and Alec White-house were inside Davis’ apartment when they heard a knock at the door. Davis answered the door and opened it to let in a woman whom he had recently met, and three men jumped from around the corner and forced their way inside. The men, one of whom was later identified as appellant, identified themselves as police officers, and the woman identified Davis as the one who had “ripped her off.” The three men, armed with guns, threatened Davis, and then appellant and one of the men went upstairs. Meanwhile, Whitehouse who was upstairs came to the top of the stairs, and Davis yelled to him to “stash it.” (Davis had his money spread out on the bed in his room). After Whitehouse encountered the men who had come upstairs, he was forced to lay on the floor. Subsequently, the men went into Davis’ bedroom where they found his money and they stuffed the money in their shirts. While the two men were upstairs, Davis overcame the man downstairs and ran out the door toward the apartment complex office. When he reached the office he informed the manager that he was being robbed, and she contacted the police.

Several months after the robbery Davis saw appellant in a bar, and after a conversation with appellant, he contacted the police. Subsequently, appellant was arrested.

In his sole assignment of error, appellant contends that the trial court erred in failing to give his requested instruction on the offense of Assault and Battery with a Dangerous Weapon. We disagree.

The appellant was charged with the offense of Robbery with Firearms in the information. Although the crime of Assault and Battery with a Dangerous Weapon may have occurred, appellant was not charged with the offense, and it is not a lesser included offense of the crime of Robbery with Firearms. Therefore, the trial court properly refused appellant’s proffered instruction. *Lovick v. State,*646 P.2d 1296 (Okl.Cr.1982). This assignment of error is without merit.

Accordingly, the judgment and sentence is AFFIRMED.

BRETT, P.J., and PARKS, J., concur.
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.                  

###### Postal Regulatory Commission

# DATES:

*Time and Date:*                         Wednesday, March 14, 2012, at 11 a.m.                    

# Place:

Commission Hearing Room, 901 New York Avenue NW., Suite 200, Washington, DC 20268-0001.

# Status:

                        Part of this meeting will be open to the public. The rest of the meeting will be closed to the public. The open session will be audiocast. The audiocast may be accessed via the Commission's Web site at                         *http://www.prc.gov.*                         A period for public comment will be offered following consideration of the last numbered item in the open session.                    

# Matters to be Considered:

The agenda for the Commission's March 14, 2012 meeting includes the items identified below.

# Portions Open to the Public:

1. Report on legislative activities.

2. Report on status of Commission dockets.

3. Report from the Office of the Secretary and Administration.

4. Report on analytical tools used by Commission staff.

5. Report on international activities and inbound international mail revenues and costs.

6. Strategic overview of the military postal service. 

Chairman's public comment period.

# Portion Closed to the Public:

7. Discussion of pending litigation.

# Contact Person for More Information:

                        Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel, Postal Regulatory Commission, 901 New York Avenue NW., Suite 200, Washington, DC 20268-0001, at 202-789-6820 (for agenda-related inquiries) and Shoshana M. Grove, Secretary of the Commission, at 202-789-6800 or                         *shoshana.grove@prc.gov*                         (for inquiries related to meeting location, access for handicapped or disabled persons, the audiocast, or similar matters).                    

By the Commission.

Dated: February 29, 2012.

Shoshana M. Grove,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2012-5294 Filed 2-29-12; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
#### The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John Patrick LOBATO, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 82CA1307.

Colorado Court of Appeals, Div. I.

Feb. 21, 1985.

Rehearing Denied March 7, 1985.

Certiorari Denied Aug. 19, 1985.

Duane Woodard, Atty. Gen., Charles B. Howe, Chief Deputy Atty. Gen., Richard H. Forman, Sol. Gen., Robert M. Petrusak, Asst. Atty. Gen., Denver, for plaintiff-ap-pellee.

David F. Vela, Colorado State Public Defender, Barbara S. Blackman, Acting Chief Appellate Deputy Public Defender, Denver, for defendant-appellant.

PIERCE, Judge.

Defendant, John Patrick Lobato, appeals from the sentence imposed upon the judgment of conviction entered following his plea of guilty to criminal attempt to commit escape, under § 18-2-101, C.R.S. (1978 Repl. Vol. 8). We vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing.

Defendant walked away from the Williams Street Community Corrections Facility, where he was serving a two-year term for second degree burglary and theft. Upon defendant’s guilty plea to the charge of criminal attempt to commit escape, a class 5 felony, the trial court imposed a sentence of two years and one day based on § 18-l-105(9)(a)(V), C.R.S. (1984 Cum. Supp.).

We agree with defendant that the court erroneously concluded that § 18 — 1— 105(9)(a)(V), C.R.S. (1984 Cum.Supp.), required imposition of a sentence in excess of *624the presumptive range. In *People v. Martinez,*703 P.2d 619 (Colo.App.1985), we held that upon conviction for the crime of attempted escape under § 18-8-208.1, C.R.S. (1978 Repl. Vol. 8), the trial court may sentence within the presumptive range. The same rationale applies to criminal attempt to commit escape under § 18-2-101, C.R.S. (1978 Repl. Vol. 8). Therefore, here, the trial court failed to exercise its discretion in determining whether to impose a sentence within the applicable presumptive range.

The sentence is vacated, and the cause is remanded for resentencing in accordance with the principles announced herein.

SMITH and BABCOCK, JJ., concur.