alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LAMONT SHEPARD,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

R. PEREZ et al.,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 13-15985

D.C. No. 1:10-cv-00023-BAM

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Barbara McAuliffe, Magistrate Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted July 9, 2015

San Francisco, California

Before: GILMAN,** GRABER, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges. 

FILED

JUL 21 2015

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The Honorable Ronald Lee Gilman, Senior Circuit Judge for the U.S.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, sitting by designation.
Page 2 of 2

Even if Lamont Shepard did not abandon his failure-to-intervene claim

against Officer Garcia, and even if Shepard was not required to plead a separate

failure-to-intervene claim in addition to his claim for excessive force, see Lolli v.

Cnty. of Orange, 351 F.3d 410, 418 (9th Cir. 2003), any error in the district court’s

decision to grant Officer Garcia’s Rule 50(a) motion was harmless. A failure-tointervene claim requires an underlying constitutional violation. The jury, however,

found that the defendants who were directly involved did not use excessive force in

violation of the Eighth Amendment during the incident in question. Shepard does

not challenge that verdict. Thus, Shepard cannot prove that Officer Garcia failed

to intervene in violation of the Eighth Amendment.

The fact that Officer Garcia’s name was left on the verdict form even though

he had been dismissed from the case does not provide a ground for reversal. 

Shepard cites no authority supporting the proposition that such a ministerial

oversight may revive an otherwise invalid claim, and we are aware of none.

AFFIRMED.
27823

#### State v. Laride

Affirmed
```

[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 234 (Thursday, December 7, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 85336]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-26832]

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

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: December 7, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
November 27, 2023, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 25 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2024-76, CP2024-78.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2023-26832 Filed 12-6-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
24866

#### State v. Eklund

Affirmed
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      Exhibit 23


                         Consent of Independent Auditors

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
Form S-8 pertaining to the Quorum Health Group, Inc. Stock Option and Restated
Stock Purchase Plan (No. 33-38817), the Employee Stock Purchase Plan (No. 33-
44474), the Directors Stock Option Plan (No. 33-46542), the Directors Stock
Option Plan (33-89272), the Restated Stock Option Plan (No. 33-54868), the
Restated Stock Option Plan (No. 33-73288), the Restated Stock Option Plan (No.
33-89274), the Non-qualified Employee Stock Purchase Plan (No. 333-384), the
Restated Stock Option Plan (No. 333-24339), the 1997 Stock Option Plan (No. 333-
42619) and the Employee Stock Purchase Plan (No. 333-42649) of our report dated
August 9, 1999, except for Notes 10 and 14, as to which the date is August 20,
1999, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and the schedule of
Quorum Health Group, Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year
ended June 30, 1999.

                                                               /s/ Ernst & Young

Nashville, Tennessee
September 23, 1999
Breadcrumb

1. Home

2. Print 

3. Pdf 

4. Node 

5. Entity Print 

Science and Technology

Last Modified: 

Print

Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ) Science and Technology (S&T) provides

scientific and analytical support for PPQ regulatory decisions and program

operations. 

S&T is responsible for ensuring that PPQ has the information, tools, and technology

to make the most scientifically valid regulatory and policy decisions possible. S&T

also supports PPQ program operations by providing practical tools for plant pest

exclusion, detection, and management. Currently, PPQ S&T comprises

approximately 230 scientists, analysts, and support staff at 7 principal laboratories

and additional satellite locations. The Office of the Executive Director is

headquartered on North Carolina State University's Centennial Campus in Raleigh,

NC.

Organizational Structure 

(PDF, 505.03 KB)

View the organizational structure of PPQ's Science and Technology unit.

Laboratories and Programs 

This page offers a list of laboratories and programs where scientists evaluate risks

associated with the introduction of plant pests and develop methods to exclude,
detect, and manage invasive plant pests and weeds.

PPQ S&T Summary 

(PDF, 218.91 KB)

This document describes the work of Science and Technology's major laboratories

and programs.

National Clean Plant Network 

The National Clean Plant Network (NCPN) protects healthy U.S. agriculture by

providing "clean" plant propagative material free of targeted pathogens and pests.

Project Areas

Trade Issues and Risk Analysis: Assessing the potential impact of new invasive

plant pests to U.S. agriculture and the pest risks associated with imported plant

products.

Treatment Technology: Developing new treatment methods for plant products to

prevent movement of invasive pests through international trade.

Pest Detection: Developing tools and techniques to improve early detection of

exotic pests in surveillance programs.

Identification and Diagnostics: Developing and validating new technologies to

identify exotic pests and accrediting external laboratories to perform diagnostics for

high consequence pests.

Arthropod Pests: Developing methods to manage invasive arthropods.

Plant Diseases: Developing methods to manage invasive plant diseases.

Biological Control: Developing technologies that allow natural enemies to

effectively mitigate the impacts of invasive arthropods, weeds, and plant pathogens.

Contact Us

Wendy Jin
Associate Deputy Administrator

Email: wendy.jin@usda.gov

Phone: 919- 855-7400
Breadcrumb

1. Home

2. Print 

3. Pdf 

4. Node 

5. Entity Print 

Program Data Reports (Wildlife

Hazard Management at Airports)

Last Modified: 

Print
July 31, 2000

22730

#### State v. Montira

Affirmed
Breadcrumb

1. Home

2. Print 

3. Pdf 

4. Node 

5. Entity Print 

Shipping Specimens to NVSL-Ames

Last Modified: 

Print

Specimens can be sent by various methods. The most expeditious method depends

on the area of the country from which the shipment is being sent.

Prompt delivery is important, especially for samples from which live microbes are to

be isolated. Carriers that provide tracking information are recommended. Contact

individual carriers to obtain information on the type of shipments they will handle;

not all carriers accept biological substances.

Shipping Information

Address diagnostic sample submissions to:

National Veterinary Services Laboratories 

Attn: Sample Processing Department 

1920 Dayton Ave.

Ames, IA 50010 

Phone: 515-337-7514

Additional shipping information regarding the shipment of specimens for foreign

animal disease investigations is found in Veterinary Services (VS) Guidance 12001.
Questions about shipping?

Contact the NVSL-Ames shipping department at 515- 337-7530 or

nvslshipping@usda.gov.
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.                  

###### Federal Maritime Commission

          - [Docket No. 23-13]

                    Notice is given that a complaint has been filed with the Federal Maritime Commission (the “Commission”) by USL Auto Exporting Inc. (the “Complainant”) against Easy Shipping Corporation (the “Respondent”). Complainant states that the Commission has subject matter jurisdiction over the complaint and personal jurisdiction over the Respondent pursuant to the Shipping Act of 1984, as amended, 46 U.S.C. 40101*et seq.*

Complainant is a North Carolina limited liability company with a principal place of business in Charlotte, North Carolina.

Complainant identifies Respondent as a corporation existing under the laws of the state of Illinois with a principal place of business in Calumet Park, Illinois.

Complainant alleges that Respondent violated 46 U.S.C. 44102(c) regarding a failure to establish, observe, and enforce just and reasonable practices relating to receiving, handling, storing, and delivering property. Complainant alleges these violations arose from a misdeclaration in the shipping instructions; a failure to file a declaration for a returned container; and a failure to pay assessed fees.

An answer to the complaint must be filed with the Commission within 25 days after the date of service.

                    The full text of the complaint can be found in the Commission's electronic Reading Room at                     *https://www2.fmc.gov/​readingroom/​proceeding/​23-13/​.*                     This proceeding has been assigned to the Office of Administrative Law Judges. The initial decision of the presiding judge shall be issued by December 4, 2024, and the final decision of the                           ( print page 85289)                        Commission shall be issued by June 18, 2025.                

Alanna Beck,

Federal Register Alternate Liaison Officer, Federal Maritime Commission.

[FR Doc. 2023-26904 Filed 12-6-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6730-02-P
ANIMAL CARE AID

Questions? Email us at CenterforAnimalWelfare@aphis.usda.gov 

The U.S. Department of Agriculture is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

Animal Care

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 

Credit: Dog illustration at upper right created by Cristiano Zoucas from the Noun Project AC-18-003 • Issued June 2018

Preventive Care for Periodontal 

Disease (PD) in Dogs

More than 80% of 

dogs over the age 

of 2 years have 

some degree of PD. 

Preventive care and 

treatment aims to 

slow the progression 

of the disease.

This Animal Care Aid is part of a series developed to provide information about PD in dogs. Identifying and treating problems early is the best way 

to maintain your dogs’ health. For more information, refer to the other topics covered in the series (“Monitoring PD in Dogs” and “Canine PD”).

PRACTICAL TIP

For best results, 

combine two or more types 

of preventive care.

COMMON PREVENTIVE CARE OPTIONS

Outlined below are examples of types of preventive care that 

caretakers can use between dental cleanings at the veterinary clinic.

BRUSHING

PROS

l The “gold standard” 

l Most effective method

l Inexpensive

CONS

l Requires training of the

dog to accept it

l Time-consuming—may not be

practical with a large number of dogs

CHEW ITEMS

PROS

l Effective when used

consistently, such

as daily 

l Provides enrichment

to the dog

CONS

l Risk of broken teeth

l Risk of gastrointestinal obstruction

l Some products are expensive

RINSE or GELS

PROS

l Effective when used

consistently, such

as daily

CONS

l Must apply directly to the gums

l Tastes bad

l Hasn’t been shown to be effective

when added to water

l May not be safe during pregnancy

(containing chlorhexidine)

DENTAL DIETS

PROS

l The abrasives in the

kibble work to clean

the teeth 

l Size and hardness

increase chewing 

l Effective when fed as

main diet

CONS

l May be too

hard or large for toy breeds

l Not nutritionally complete for

pregnant or lactating dogs

DID YOU KNOW?

Anesthesia-Free Dentistry 

(i.e., hand-scaling, scraping 

tartar off teeth) does NOT 

slow or prevent PD. In fact, 

it may increase the risk and 

severity of PD: 

l	 Removes tooth enamel, 

leaving a rough surface for

bacteria to grow and tartar

to build up quickly

l Does not allow for

cleaning under the

gum line

l Very likely to be painful

and stressful to the dog 

l Increases the risk of bites

or injuries to the caretaker

FOR MORE INFORMATION

Veterinary Oral Health Council, www.vohc.org 

American Veterinary Dental College, www.avdc.org

We encourage dog owners to consult with 

their veterinarian to develop the best plan 

for their dogs. 

Remember:

PREVENTIVE CARE

aims to slow the

development of PD

by removing the 

plaque and tartar 

from the teeth BUT 

does not replace 

the need for regular

veterinary exams and

professional veterinary

dental cleanings

under anesthesia.
#### Sophie Augenstein et al., Respondents, *v.*Samuel Schafran et al., Defendants, and Alexander Muss et al., Appellants.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department,

November 24, 1958.

*Tropp & Steinbock*(I. *Sidney Worthman*of counsel), for appellants.

*Cusack, McLaughlin & O’Rourke (Francis J. McLaughlin*of counsel), for respondents.

*Per Curiam.*

The accident upon which this action for personal injuries and loss of services is predicated occurred on September 26, 1953. The action was commenced on October 9, 1956 and issue was joined on December 10, 1956. Nothing further was done by the plaintiffs other than to serve a bill of particulars pursuant to an order of preclusion and to place this case on the calendar *subsequent*to the making of this motion. The only reason presented for the delay is the failure of the defendants’ attorneys to respond to a telephone call made on an unspecified date *“*to see if a settlement could be arrived at.” This does not constitute a substantial excuse for the failure to prosecute, nor does the service and filing of a note of issue *after*this motion was made excuse past neglect. *(Nigro*v. *City of New York,*3 A D 2d 987; *Giovannucci*v. *Brooklyn & Richmond Ferry Co.,*278 App. Div. 861.)

Moreover, the affidavit of merits by the female plaintiff is perfunctory; it does not adequately establish the wrong charged or other circumstances which would demonstrate merit of her claim. On a motion such as this, the plaintiff *“*has a substantial burden to excuse or justify delay and to establish by evidentiary *180facts the merits of the cause of action.” *(Gallagher*v. *Claflington, Inc.,*7 AD 2d 627, 628.)

The order denying motion to dismiss action for failure to prosecute should be unanimously reversed on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, with $10 costs and taxable disbursements to the defendants-appellants, and the motion granted, without costs.

Concur — Pette, Di Giovanna and Brown, JJ.

Order reversed, etc.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### APPEAL 

### O F 

### F LORIDA 

### S ECOND 

### D ISTRICT TIMOTHY J. HUTTON, Appellant,
v. JILL A. HUTTON, Appellee. No. 2D23-964
November 15, 2023 Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.130 from the Circuit Court for Sarasota County; Maria Ruhl, Judge. Timothy J. Hutton, pro se. No appearance for Appellee. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. SILBERMAN, LaROSE, and ATKINSON, JJ., Concur. Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                            9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          2,846,434
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                                  0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                1,656,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                        0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     1,679,950
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          1,651,259
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            1,657,740
<LOANS>                                        37,912,057
<ALLOWANCE>                                       503,014
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 37,409,043
<DEPOSITS>                                     40,725,287
<SHORT-TERM>                                            0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                               355,664
<LONG-TERM>                                       315,652
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           1,863,495
<PREFERRED>                                             0
<COMMON>                                                0
<OTHER-SE>                                      4,026,742
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 47,286,840
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 3,554,808
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                 131,013
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                  103,606
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                3,789,427
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              1,566,223
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              1,614,653
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           2,174,774
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                     165,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                      0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 1,746,265
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   693,687
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                        693,687
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                      839,421
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         .58
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         .58
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                          6
<LOANS-NON>                                        71,515
<LOANS-PAST>                                       58,996
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                        0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                  393,139
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      61,132
<RECOVERIES>                                        6,007
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                 503,014
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                              503,014
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                     0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                                 0


</TABLE>
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 18

- 40144 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.

JOSE LUIS GONZALEZ

,

Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:17

- CR

- 1366

- 1

Before DAVIS, JONES, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jose Luis Gonzalez

has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with
Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d
229 (5th Cir. 2011). Luis Gonzalez h a s not filed a res ponse. We have reviewed
counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We
concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED September 24, 2018
Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 18-40144 Document: 00514654432 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/24/2018No. 18

- 40144

2 issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdr aw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the

APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2. Case: 18-40144 Document: 00514654432 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/24/2018
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.                  

###### National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities

# AGENCY:

National Endowment for the Humanities.

# ACTION:

Notice of charter renewal for Humanities Panel Advisory Committee.

# SUMMARY:

Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act and its implementing regulations, the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) gives notice that the Charter for the Humanities Panel advisory committee was renewed for an additional two-year period on November 17, 2023. The Chair of NEH determined that the renewal of the Humanities Panel is necessary and in the public interest in connection with the performance of duties imposed upon the Chair of NEH by the National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities Act of 1965, as amended.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Elizabeth Voyatzis, Committee Management Officer, 400 Seventh Street SW, Washington, DC 20506. Telephone: (202) 606-8322, facsimile (202) 606-8600, or email at                         *gencounsel@neh.gov.*                         Hearing-impaired individuals are advised that information on this matter may be obtained by contacting the National Endowment for the Humanities' TDD terminal at (202) 606-8282.                    

Dated: November 28, 2023.

Jessica Graves,

Paralegal Specialist, National Endowment for the Humanities.

[FR Doc. 2023-26447 Filed 11-30-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7536-01-P