alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2016202EN.01016101.xml

| 7.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 202/161 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 202/161

---

Article 259

(ex Article 227 TEC)

(ex Article 227 TEC)

A Member State which considers that another Member State has failed to fulfil an obligation under the Treaties may bring the matter before the Court of Justice of the European Union.

Before a Member State brings an action against another Member State for an alleged infringement of an obligation under the Treaties, it shall bring the matter before the Commission.

The Commission shall deliver a reasoned opinion after each of the States concerned has been given the opportunity to submit its own case and its observations on the other party's case both orally and in writing.

If the Commission has not delivered an opinion within three months of the date on which the matter was brought before it, the absence of such opinion shall not prevent the matter from being brought before the Court.

---
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 230 (Friday, December 1, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 83953]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-26450]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; Amended 
Notice of Meeting

    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the National 
Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke Special Emphasis Panel, 
November 27, 2023, 10:00 a.m. to November 28, 2023, 05:00 p.m., 
National Institutes of Health, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive 
Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852 which was published in the Federal 
Register on November 13, 2023, FR Doc 2023-24961, 88 FR 77597.
    This notice is being amended to change the dates of this two-day 
meeting to December 14, 2023, and December 15, 2023. The meeting time 
remains the same. The meeting is closed to the public.

    Dated: November 28, 2023.
David W. Freeman,
Supervisory Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee 
Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-26450 Filed 11-30-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
#### State v. Tangonan

18256

9/09/96

Affirmed
PD. No

__ -____

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS

HENRY WILSON RICHARDS, JR.,

Appellant

vs.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

Seeking discretionary review of an opinion of the Court of Appeals for

the Fifth District of Texas at Dallas, Texas in Cause No. 05- 14 -00075- CR

STATE’S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE BRIEF

TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS: COMES NOW, The State of Texas , pursuant to Tex.R. App. P. 68.2(c) requesting an extension of time to file its Petition for Discretionary Review in the above-numbered and styled cause. In support thereof, the undersigned attorney representing the State would show the following: PD-0731-15 COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS Transmitted 6/15/2015 4:56:38 PM Accepted 6/18/2015 10:18:46 AM

ABEL ACOSTA CLERKOn May 20, 2015, the Court of Appeals for the Fifth District of

Texas at Dallas, Texas delivered an opinion reversing the judgment

of the trial court in the above

- numbered and styled cause. Presently, the State’s Petition for Di scretionary Review is due to be filed in this Honorable Court on or before June 19, 2015. However,

due to a caseload which includes three other cases in which the State’s brief is due to be filed in less than the next two weeks, the petition in the presen t case cannot be prepared for filing by the present due date. Therefore, the undersigned attorney requests a new filing date 30 days past the present due date of June 19 , or until July 19, 2015 , w hich is a Sunday, making July 20, 2015 the

date to file the petition.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true cop ies of the foregoing motion were served on Ms. Lisa McMinn, the State ’ s Prosecuting Attorney, and Michael Mowla, attorney for Appellant , by eFileTexas.gov and United States mail on June 15, 2015

. /s/Patricia Poppof

f Noble PATRICIA POPPOFF NOBLE
Navigate to Homepage
Search
Main navigation
  

        
              Explore the Capitol Campus
                          Art
                            Buildings & Grounds
                            Capitol Hill Facts
                            Visitor Resources
                            Our Blog
                            What We Do
                          Areas of Expertise
                            Programs & Ceremonies
                            Projects
                            Publications
                            Strategic Objectives
                            About Us
                          Who We Are
                            History of the AOC
                            News & Notices
                            Organizational Structure
                            Partnerships & Recognition
                            Work With UsSearch Breadcrumb
    Homecommentreply498Add new comment
Add new comment
        
                  Ann Serbick (n... (not verified)PermalinkOctober 12, 2017 - 4:51pmWhat are the names of the 2 ladies on either side of George Washington in the rotunda painting? I know the 13 other ladies are representing the first 13 colonies.
Thank you,
Ann Serbick
5th grade teacher
West Chicago, IL
ReplyYour name
Email Address
        The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Comment
About text formats
Plain text
  
  
      
          No HTML tags allowed.
                      Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
                      Web page addresses and email addresses turn into links automatically. Serve. Preserve. Inspire.

              Contact Us
                            Accountability
                            Hill Staff Resources
                            AOC Staff Resources
Utility
  

        
              Privacy Policy
                            Image Terms of Use
                            Inspector General
                            U.S. Botanic Garden
                            U.S. Capitol Visitor CenterFacebook
	Twitter
	Flickr
	YouTube
	Instagram
	Subscribe
Good Neighbor Environmental Board

Agenda

Tuesday, June 4, 2013

12pm – 4pm

Call-in: 866-299-3188, conference code: 2022330068

12:00 (EST) Welcome and Introductions

Mark Joyce, Associate Director

GNEB Acting Designated Federal Officer

Cynthia Jones-Jackson, Acting Director

U.S. EPA Office of Federal Advisory Committee Management and Outreach

Diane Austin, Chair

Good Neighbor Environmental Board

Board Members 

12:30 – 12:40 Overview of Agenda

Diane Austin, Chair

Good Neighbor Environmental Board

12:40 – 1:15 Defining Ecological Restoration

Greg Eckert, National Park Service

Keith Pezzoli, University of California, San Diego

Kevin Bixby, Southwest Environmental Center

1:15 – 2:00 Discussion of Key Issues

2:00 – 2:30 Discussion on Advice Letter and Report

2:30 – 3:40 Distribution of Work 

3:40 – 3:50 Other issues

Distribution of GNEB reports

Translation of 15th Report

3:50 – 4:00 Public Comments

4:00 Adjourn
January 18, 2002

23492

#### State v. Valmoja

Affirmed
#### State v. Gautier

24060

01/21/2003

Vacated and remanded for new trial
COURT OF CHANCERY

OF THE

STATE OF DELAWARE

J OHN W. N OBLE 417 S OUTH S TATE S TREET

V ICE C HANCELLOR D OVER

, D ELAWARE 19901

T ELEPHONE : (302) 739

- 4397

F ACSIMI LE : (302) 739

- 6179

October 3, 2014

Thad J. Bracegirdle, Esquire Seth J. Reidenberg, Esquire

Wilks, Lukoff & Bracegirdle, LLC Tybout, Redfearn & Pell

1300 North Grant Avenue, Suite 100 750 Shipyard Drive, Suite 400

Wilmington, DE 19806 W ilmington, DE 19801

Mr. Christophe Laudamiel DreamAir LLC

313 West 19th Street, Apt. 32 c/o Christophe Laudamiel, President

New York, NY 10011 210 11th Avenue, Suite 1002

cl@leschrist o phs.com New Yo rk, NY 10001

cl@dreamair.mobi

Paul D. Brown, Esquire

Chipman Brown Cicero & Cole , LLP

1007 North Orange Street, Suite 1110

Wilmington, DE 19801

Re: Matthew v. Laudamiel, et al.

C.A. No. 595 7

- VCN

Date Submitted: September 9 , 2014

Dear Mr. Laudamiel and Counsel :

Plaintiff Stewart Matthew has moved for reargument of that portion of the

Court’s Letter Opinion and Order of July 21, 2014, 1 that granted Fläkt Woods

1 Matthew v. Laudamiel , 2014 WL 3586594 (Del. Ch. July 21, 2014).Matthew v. L audamiel, et al.

C.A. No. 5957

- VCN

October 3 , 2014

Page 2

Group S.A.’s (“Fläkt Wo ods”) motion to compel discovery into Plaintiff’s scenting

activities after dissolution of Aeosphere. That requires the Court to consider

whether its decision was influenced by a misunderstanding of material fact or a

misapplication of law. 2 The Court di d not misunderstand Plaintiff’s claims or

, in a

material way, how he wanted to define the scope of discovery. Instead, the

question was the scope of discovery to which Fläkt Woods is entitled. 3 The

Court’s conclusion was driven by the liberal standard fo r discovery. It may be that

the discovery will not be useful, but that is not a conclusion that the Court can now

draw.

The Plaintiff’s concerns with the Court’s application of law involved

mitigation. Again, the information sought may not be especiall y probative, but,

especially at the discovery stage, the scope must be allowed to acknowledge that

similar substitute employment or compensation arrangements

— i.e. , not just those

that are identical

— may be an appropriate measure. 4

2 See, e.g.

, Salgado v. Mobile Servs. Int’l, LLC , 2012 WL 2903970, at *1 (Del. Ch.

July 11, 2012).

3 It is not clear why Fl ä kt Woods’ discovery should be restricted by reference to

Mr. Laudamiel’s Answer to Plaintiff’s Fourth Amended Verified Complaint.

4 The necessary flexibility here makes drawing rigid lines difficult.Matthew v. L audamiel, et al.

C.A. No. 5957

- VCN

October 3 , 2014

Page 3

Accordingly, the Motion for Reargument is denied. 5

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Very truly yours,

/s/ John W. Noble

JWN/cap

cc: Register in Chancery

- K

5 It may be that Plaintiff will not value his subsequent employment efforts, but this

does not necessarily preclude Fl ä kt Woods from using this information to show an

offset or otherwise to rebut Plaintiff’s analysis.
## IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL A PPE ALS OF TEXAS NO. WR-84,073-01

EX P ARTE MARTIN P ENA, Appli cant
ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. 1379020-A IN THE 184TH DIS TRICT COURT

F ROM HARRIS COUNTY
Per curiam . O R D E R Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Cr i m i n al P ro cedur e, the cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of possession with the intent to deliver coca ine and sentenc ed to fiftee n y ear s’ imprison m en t
. He d i d not appea l his conviction. Applicant contends that his plea was involuntary and the State failed to disclose evidenc e in violation of Brady v. Maryland, 3 7 3 U. S
. 83 (1963). The trial court made finding s of fac t and conclude d that Applicant’s plea was involuntary and th e S t at e v i o lated Brady v. Maryland

. I t2

rec ommended that we g rant re lief. We order that this application be filed and se t for submi ssion to determine whe ther (1) the misconduct in Applicant’s ca s e s h o u ld be im puted t o the prosecution for purposes of Appli cant’ s Brady v. Maryland claim; (2 ) t h i s m i sconduct is exculpatory ; and (3) Applicant’s plea was involuntary beca

use of “impermissible conduct by state ag ents.” Brady v. United States, 397 U.S. 742, 757 (1970). The parties sha ll brief these issues. Oral a rg ument is not permitted. I t appea rs that Applicant is repr esente d by counsel. I f he is not, the trial court shall deter mine whether he is indige nt. I f he is indige nt and desires to be repr esente d by counsel, the trial court shall appoint an attorney to repr esent him. T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art 26.04. The trial court shall send to this Court, within 60 day s of the date of this order , a supplemental transcr ipt con t ai n i n g: a confirmation that Applicant is repr esente d by counsel; the order appointing counsel; or a statement that Applicant is not indigent. All brie fs shall be filed with this Court on or before 90 day s of t he date of this order.

Filed: Nove mber 18, 2015 Do not publish
76 P.3d 625

INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I

September 12, 2003

24170

#### Craig v. County of Maui

Affirmed
January 29, 2004

23465

#### State v. Schweitzer

Affirmed
August 15, 2007

28096

#### State v. Burns

Affirmed
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-5134

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

MARCEL BARNES, a/k/a Larry Kevin Brown,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District

Judge. (CR-94-52)

Submitted: July 19, 2006 Decided: August 1, 2006

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Marcel Barnes, Appellant Pro Se. Laura Marie Everhart, Assistant

United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Marcel Barnes appeals the district court’s order granting

his 28 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2000) motion and reducing his sentence

from life in prison to 360 months. We reject Barnes’ claim on

appeal that he can raise a challenge to his sentence under United

States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), in a § 3582(c)(2) motion.

See United States v. Moreno, 421 F.3d 1217, 1220-21 (11th Cir.

2005), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 1643 (2006). We have reviewed the

record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for

the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Barnes,

No. CR-94-52 (E.D. Va. Nov. 4, 2005). 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
EXHIBIT 31

           CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO RULES 13A-14 AND 15D-14 OF THE
      SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                 SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Gregory Ofiesh, certify that:

1. I have  reviewed  this  quarterly  report  on Form  10-QSB of  Franklin  Lake
Resources Inc.:

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly
report;

4. The small business issuer's other certifying officers and I are responsible
for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

     a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or cause such
     disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
     ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer,
     including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others
     within those entities, particularly during the period in which this
     quarterly report is being prepared;

     b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure
     controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about
     the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end
     of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and


Dated:  September 14, 2004

                                               By: /s/  Fr. Gregory Ofiesh
                                               -------------------------------
                                               Fr. Gregory Ofiesh
                                               President and CEO
                                               Acting Chief Financial Officer
THE VISUAL AIDS ON THE FOLLOWING 

PAGES ARE FOR REFERENCE ONLY AND 

NOT INTENDED FOR OFFICIAL USE.

TO PURCHASE OFFICIAL VISUAL AIDS PLEASE CONTACT 

THE SPECIALTY CROPS INSPECTION DIVISION’S 

EQUIPMENT AND FORMS DEPOT 

USDA, AMS, FVP, SCI

831 MITTEN ROAD, ROOM 200

BURLINGAME, CA 94010

PHONE: 650-552-9073

FAX: 650-552-9147

EQUIPMENT CATALOG
PEARS AFFECTED BY PEAR PSYLLA

Left: Moderately scattered

Right: Heavily concentrated

C-1

PEAR PSYLLA

MAY 1990 (Previously January 1964)
D’ANJOU PEARS

Well Formed

Lower Limit

U.S. Extra No. 1

Fairly Well Formed

Lower Limit

U.S. No. 1

Not Seriously Misshapen

Lower Limit

U.S. No. 2

These photographs illustrate shape of D’Anjou pears with folded or slanted stem end.

PR-CP-2

SHAPE

MAY 1990 (Previously October 1967)
PEARS

SLIDE 134 -- PSYLLA
PEARS

SLIDE 135 -- PSYLLA
PEARS

SLIDE 238 – ANJOU RUSSETING
PEARS

SLIDE 239 – ANJOU RUSSETING
PEARS

SLIDE 240 – ANJOU RUSSETING
PEARS

SLIDE 241 – ANJOU RUSSETING
PEARS

SLIDE 242 – ANJOU RUSSETING
PEARS

SLIDE 243 – ANJOU RUSSETING
PEARS

SLIDE 245 – ANJOU SHAPE
PEARS

SLIDE 246 – ANJOU SHAPE
Navigate to Homepage
Search
Main navigation
  

        
              Explore the Capitol Campus
                          Art
                            Buildings & Grounds
                            Capitol Hill Facts
                            Visitor Resources
                            Our Blog
                            What We Do
                          Areas of Expertise
                            Programs & Ceremonies
                            Projects
                            Publications
                            Strategic Objectives
                            About Us
                          Who We Are
                            History of the AOC
                            News & Notices
                            Organizational Structure
                            Partnerships & Recognition
                            Work With UsSearch Breadcrumb
    HomeExplore the Capitol CampusThe Art Collection
Cortez and Montezuma at Mexican Temple
        
                  The Basics
      
Artist
      
Constantino Brumidi

Location
      
Capitol Rotunda

The Spaniard Hernando Cortez, conqueror of Mexico, enters the Aztec temple in 1519. He is welcomed by Emperor Montezuma II, who thought Cortez was a god. The calendar stone and idols are based on sketches that artist Constantino Brumidi made in Mexico City. (1520)

About the Frieze of American History

The frieze in the Rotunda of the United States Capitol contains a painted panorama depicting significant events in American history. Thomas U. Walter's 1859 cross-section drawing of the new dome (constructed 1855-1863) shows a recessed belt atop the Rotunda walls with relief sculpture.

Eventually it was painted in true fresco, a difficult and exacting technique in which the pigments are applied directly onto wet plaster. As the plaster cures the colors become part of the wall. Consequently, each section of plaster must be painted the day it is laid. The frieze is painted in grisaille, a monochrome of whites and browns that resembles sculpture. It measures 8 feet 4 inches in height and approximately 300 feet in circumference. It starts 58 feet above the floor. Serve. Preserve. Inspire.

              Contact Us
                            Accountability
                            Hill Staff Resources
                            AOC Staff Resources
Utility
  

        
              Privacy Policy
                            Image Terms of Use
                            Inspector General
                            U.S. Botanic Garden
                            U.S. Capitol Visitor CenterFacebook
	Twitter
	Flickr
	YouTube
	Instagram
	Subscribe
#### Cabrera v. Umeno

17152

3/28/96

Affirmed
Tabte 6bl

5

9

10

t3

19

17

18

20

2T

25

24

23

26

27

29

37

31

33

34

36

39

40

4t

42

45

46

47

48

51

s0

53

55

54

36.640/o

28.44%

s8.16%

13.40%

73.25%

2458%

49.73%

2.22%

46.23%

32.58%

sL.8L%

9459%

69.46%

80.65%

46.O7%

6659%

6.s3%

7t.oz%

38.7t%

BO.5L%

70.52%

36.6s%

42.97%

98.OO%

t6.O0o/o

3.O5%

38.69%

44.63%

33.72%

60.66%

9.7t%

97.44%

44.92%

Prepared bY:

Ma rket Administrator's Office

MinneaPolis, M innesota

November 2009

Percentoge oÍ Mítk in Competitíve Area

Herfîndoht-Hirschmon lndex of '50 or Less

December 2008

AR

CT

DE

GA

IA

IL

IN

KS

KY

MA

MD

ME

MI

MN

MO

NC

NE

NH

NJ

NY

OH

OK

OR

PA

SC

SD

TN

TX

VA

VT

WA

WI

WV

1. For each state, the total milk pooled on Federal orders, from counties meeting the criteria divided by total milk

pooled on Federalorders' Page 1 of 1
Navigate to Homepage
Search
Main navigation
  

        
              Explore the Capitol Campus
                          Art
                            Buildings & Grounds
                            Capitol Hill Facts
                            Visitor Resources
                            Our Blog
                            What We Do
                          Areas of Expertise
                            Programs & Ceremonies
                            Projects
                            Publications
                            Strategic Objectives
                            About Us
                          Who We Are
                            History of the AOC
                            News & Notices
                            Organizational Structure
                            Partnerships & Recognition
                            Work With UsSearch Breadcrumb
    HomeExplore the Capitol CampusThe Art Collection
George Washington's Houses Plaque
        
                  The Basics
      
Materials
    Bronze on Granite

Year
    1932

Location
      
Upper Senate Park

U.S. Capitol Grounds

This plaque was a gift of the District of Columbia, placed during George Washington Bicentennial in 1932 at the Capitol Plaza fountain terrace.

Text of the Plaque:

HERE WERE THE LOTS ACQUIRED ON
OCTOBER 3, 1798
BY GENERAL GEORGE WASHINGTON
AND ON WHICH HE BUILT
TWO BRICK DWELLINGS
FROM DESIGNS BY DR. WILLIAM THORNTON
A DWELLING REMODELED FROM THE TWO
DWELLINGS WAS OWNED AND OCCUPIED BY
ADMIRAL CHARLES WILKES
THE FAMOUS EXPLORER

After serving as private homes to successive owners, the houses became hotels and were in greatly altered condition when they were razed in 1913.
          
    
      Image Gallery
    
    George Washington's Houses Plaque in Senate Parks
    George Washington's Houses Plaque in Senate Parks

      Previous Image
        Next Image

          George Washington's Houses Plaque in Senate Parks
      George Washington's Houses Plaque in Senate Parks Serve. Preserve. Inspire.

              Contact Us
                            Accountability
                            Hill Staff Resources
                            AOC Staff Resources
Utility
  

        
              Privacy Policy
                            Image Terms of Use
                            Inspector General
                            U.S. Botanic Garden
                            U.S. Capitol Visitor CenterFacebook
	Twitter
	Flickr
	YouTube
	Instagram
	Subscribe