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

House Calendar No. 120 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 751 

[Report No. 114–595] 

Relating to consideration of the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 2577) 

making appropriations for the Departments of Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and related agencies for the fiscal year 

ending September 30, 2016, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 25, 2016 

Mr. COLE, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; 

which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 

RESOLUTION 

Relating to consideration of the Senate amendment to the 

bill (H.R. 2577) making appropriations for the Departments of Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending 

September 30, 2016, and for other purposes. 

1 Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution— 

2 (a) the House hereby takes from the Speaker’s table 

3 the bill (H.R. 2577) making appropriations for the De4 partments of Transportation, and Housing and Urban De5 velopment, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending 


smartinez on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 751 RH 

1 September 30, 2016, and for other purposes, with the Sen2 ate amendment thereto, and concurs in the Senate amend3 ment with an amendment consisting of the text of Rules 

4 Committee Print 114-56; and 

5 (b) it shall be in order for the chair of the Committee 

6 on Appropriations or his designee to move that the House 

7 insist on its amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 

8 2577 and request a conference with the Senate thereon. 


smartinez on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS

smartinez on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
House Calendar No. 120 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 751 

[Report No. 114–595] 

RESOLUTION 

Relating to consideration of the Senate amendment 

2016, and for other purposes. agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, Housing and Urban Development, and related for the Departments of Transportation, and to the bill (H.R. 2577) making appropriations 

MAY 25, 2016 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed 


smartinez on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
p

they are primarily spread in the

things people move and pack.

Tips to Save Gardens

Fortunately, homeowners can

follow six easy tips to protect their

gardens and landscapes, and help

keep Hungry Pests from spreading:

• Only buy plants and seeds

from reputable sources, such as

established nurseries or online

businesses. Ask where they buy

their plants and if they comply

with federal quarantine restrictions. Temporary, roadside vendors—and even non-established

dealers online—may not be doing

what is required to keep plants

free of pests.

• If you are in a quarantined

area—check www.HungryPests.

com/the-spread—don’t move

plants or homegrown produce.

And to be safe, don’t bring back

plants from other areas, including

abroad. That’s how the Mexican

fruit fly—which threatens 50

types of fruits and vegetables—

entered the United States.

• When doing property cleanup, call your local USDA office to

find out how to safely dispose of

p

als

rus 

pro

ing

ica

hol

ex

be

Als

lea

or 

ria

act

cio

the 

Hu

qu

law

ou

im

in 

mo

an

ke

tur

lea

tio

DidYou Know?

The USDA cautions gardeners to be

wary of 19 destructive, invasive species

known as Hungry Pests, which can be

spread in the things people move and pack.

Learn more at www.HungryPests.com.

six 

fro

Ga

L

#gardens #pests #trees

#landscapes #USDA #invasive

Tag words 

#

ti

T
#### State v. Kahumoku

23897

04/11/2002

Affirmed
December 14, 2004

25782

#### Chase Mortg. Company-West v. Bufalini

Affirmed
#### State v. Quinn

20953

1/20/99

Vacated & Remanded
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judge McClanahan, Senior Judges Coleman and Annunziata 

MATTHEW WILLIAM NEWBERGER 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION* 

v. Record No. 2265-04-4 PER CURIAM 

 FEBRUARY 8, 2005 

TRAVILIAN HOMES, INC. AND 

 ERIE INSURANCE EXCHANGE 

 FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

 (Dean E. Wanderer; Dean E. Wanderer & Associates, on brief), for 

appellant. 

 (Daniel E. Lynch; John T. Cornett, Jr.; Williams & Lynch, on brief), 

for appellees. 

 Matthew William Newberger (claimant) appeals a decision of the Workers’ 

Compensation Commission finding that he failed to prove that his condition/disability after 

December 9, 2002, was causally related to his compensable October 31, 2002 injury by accident. 

We have reviewed the record and the commission’s opinion and find no reversible error. 

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the commission in its final opinion. See

Newberger v. Travilian Homes, Inc., VWC File No. 214-56-01 (Aug. 23, 2004). We dispense 

with oral argument and summarily affirm because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 

 *

 Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not designated for publication. 
- 2 - 

presented in the materials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

See Code § 17.1-403; Rule 5A:27.1

Affirmed.

 1

Claimant also argues on appeal that he was entitled to a de facto award and the burden of 

proof should have shifted to employer to show that his condition had changed from that of total 

or partial disability. Claimant did not raise this argument or theory of recovery before the 

commission. Accordingly, we will not consider it for the first time on appeal. See Rule 5A:18;

see also Kendrick v. Nationwide Homes, Inc., 4 Va. App. 189, 192, 355 S.E.2d 347, 349 (1987). 

Moreover, the record does not reflect any reason to invoke the good cause or ends of justice 

exceptions to Rule 5A:18.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

OMAR ARELLANO ZARATE,

 Petitioner,

 v.

LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 13-73083

Agency No. A077-160-480

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted February 24, 2016 ** 

Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

Omar Arellano Zarate, a native of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board

of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration

judge’s decision denying his application for relief under the Convention Against

Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for

FILED

FEB 29 2016

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 panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
substantial evidence the BIA’s factual findings, Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066,

1070 (9th Cir. 2008), and we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s denial of Arellano Zarate’s CAT

claim because he failed to establish it is more likely than not that he would be

tortured. See Zheng v. Holder, 644 F.3d 829, 835-36 (9th Cir. 2011). In light of

our conclusion, we need not reach Arellano Zarate’s contention regarding

acquiescence.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

2 13-73083
CT

DC

RI

CA

ID

NV

OR

WA

AZ AR

CO

IA

KS

LA

MN

MO

MT

NE

NM

ND

OK

SD

TX

UT

WY

AL

DE

FL

GA

IL IN

KY

ME

MD

MA

MI

MS

NH

NJ

NY

NC

OH

PA

SC

TN

VT

VA

WV

WI

P.E.I.

N.S.

Ont. Que. N.B.

Man.

Sask. Alta. B.C.

USDA APHIS

2150 Centre Ave

Fort Collins, Co 80526

Data Source:

USDA APHIS PPQ

These data, and all the information contained therein, have been collected by the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Animal and

Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), or by its cooperators on APHIS’ behalf, for restricted government purposes only and is

the sole property of APHIS. See full disclaimer: https://www.aphis.usda.gov/help/data-disclaimer

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service RECOVERY SITES 2008 - 2023

Emerald Ash Borer (Agrilus planipennis)

Recovery Sites

Canadian Provinces

USA Counties

USA States

0 200 400

Miles

0 200 400

Kilometers

Date Created:

1/22/2024

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
6 / 1 2 /2 0 1 4 C o a l P l a n t R et i r e m e n ts - D u k e E n e r g y 2 0 1 3 S u s t a i n a b i l i t y R e p o r t

h t t p : / /s u s t a i n a b i l i t

y r e p o r t . d u k

e - e n e r g y . c o m /e n v i r o n m e n t a l - f

o o t p r i n t / c o a l - p l a n t - r et i r e m e n ts / 1 /2 

### 2 0 1 3 S u s t a i n a b i l i t

y R e p o r t 

# C o a l P l a n t R e t i r e m e n t s6 / 1 2 /2 0 1 4 C o a l P l a n t R et i r e m e n ts - D u k e E n e r g y 2 0 1 3 S u s t a i n a b i l i t y R e p o r t

h t t p : / /s u s t a i n a b i l i t

y r e p o r t . d u k

e - e n e r g y . c o m /e n v i r o n m e n t a l - f

o o t p r i n t / c o a l - p l a n t - r et i r e m e n ts / 2 /2
# C_2019230EN.01005101.xml

| 8.7.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 230/51 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.7.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 230/51

---

Order of the General Court of 8 May 2019 — Getsmarter Online v EUIPO (getsmarter)

(Case T-473/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU figurative mark getsmarter - Mark consisting of an advertising slogan - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - No distinctive character acquired through use - Article 7(3) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 7(3) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)

(2019/C 230/64)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Getsmarter Online Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: I. Silcock, Barrister)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: G. Schneider, A. Folliard-Monguiral and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 10 May 2018 (Case R 2632/2017-1), relating to an application for registration of the figurative sign getsmarter as a European Union trade mark.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed.

| 2. | Getsmarter Online Ltd shall pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Getsmarter Online Ltd shall pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 352, 1.10.2018.

---
Respuesta ante la HPAI para el AF 2016

Compostaje de mortalidad:

hileras de precompost para bandadas de 

aves infectadas con influenza aviar

11 de mayo de 2016

Tenga en cuenta que: estos procedimientos pueden ser modificados a medida que avance la situación.

HILERAS DE PRECOMPOST (PREPARACIÓN DE LAS PILAS)

Aplicabilidad: este método se puede usar luego de haber sacrificado a las aves de corral 

para estabilizar los restos mientras se espera la llegada de un experto en la materia para 

que oriente la construcción de las hileras definitivas.

Descripción: este método, el cual aumenta la cantidad de carbono que se mezcla dentro del 

núcleo de la hilera, implica la formación de dos hileras de precompost, cubrirlas y luego 

formar una hilera definitiva. Esto es particularmente útil al lidiar con grandes cantidades de 

restos relacionados con el mantillo, lo que crea un desequilibrio importante de C:N, o

cuando el material adicional de carbono aumente la porosidad. La formación de hileras de 

precompost también estabiliza el tejido y comienza un proceso de calentamiento hasta que 

se pueda construir una hilera única.

CONSTRUCCIÓN DE HILERAS DE

PRECOMPOST

♦ Mueva el mantillo y los restos desde las 

paredes laterales y a lo largo de las 

mismas y desde el centro del granero,

para formar dos hileras de precompost

que se extiendan a lo largo del granero

(vea la foto superior derecha).

♦ Cubra cada hilera con 8-12 pulgadas

de material de carbono apto.

CONSTRUCCIÓN DE LA HILERA 

DEFINITIVA A PARTIR DE DOS

HILERAS DE PRECOMPOST

♦ En el centro del granero, construya

una base de 12-15 pies de ancho con 

una profundidad de 10-15 pulgadas.

♦ Combine ambas hileras de precompost

cubiertas sobre la base, mezclando el 

mantillo, los restos y el material de 

carbono adicional.

♦ Cubra la hilera definitiva con 8-12 pulgadas

de material de carbono apto (vea la foto 

inferior derecha).

1

Hilera definitiva (foto de Josh Payne)

Hileras de precompost (foto de Josh Payne)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> US DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          52,718
<SECURITIES>                                    61,213
<RECEIVABLES>                                   24,951
<ALLOWANCES>                                       421
<INVENTORY>                                      1,355
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               145,091
<PP&E>                                          12,505
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,424
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 204,596
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           69,771
<BONDS>                                         69,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           123
<OTHER-SE>                                      58,151
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   204,596
<SALES>                                         41,666
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                41,666
<CGS>                                           21,980
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   38,071
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                12,730
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                14,735
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,330
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 11,813
<INCOME-TAX>                                     9,149
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,664
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,664
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.20
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.20
        

</TABLE>
# C_2018427EN.01010202.xml

| 26.11.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 427/102 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.11.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 427/102

---

Action brought on 8 October 2018 — Universität Koblenz-Landau v EACEA

(Case T-606/18)

(2018/C 427/135)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Universität Koblenz-Landau (Mainz, Germany) (represented by: C. von der Lühe and I. Felder, lawyers)

Defendant: Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | declare that the claims for recovery in respect of Grant Agreement 2012-3075/001-001 in the amount of EUR 22 454,22 made by letter of the defendant of 8 August 2018 under reference EACEA/A4/RR-am D (2018) 011591 have no basis; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that the claims for recovery in respect of Grant Agreement 2012-3075/001-001 in the amount of EUR 22 454,22 made by letter of the defendant of 8 August 2018 under reference EACEA/A4/RR-am D (2018) 011591 have no basis;

| — | order the defendant to pay to the applicant EUR 41 408,15 plus interest at the rate of 9 percentage points above the base rate of the European Central Bank as from 30 March 2018; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay to the applicant EUR 41 408,15 plus interest at the rate of 9 percentage points above the base rate of the European Central Bank as from 30 March 2018;

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The action is based on the following pleas in law:

| 1. | Lack of full recognition of reimbursable costs notwithstanding the submission of supporting evidence. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Lack of full recognition of reimbursable costs notwithstanding the submission of supporting evidence.

| 2. | Lack of reasoning, or insufficient reasoning, for the refusal to recognise reimbursable costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Lack of reasoning, or insufficient reasoning, for the refusal to recognise reimbursable costs.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Statement of Financial Position at January 31, 1999 (Unaudited) and the
Statement of Operations for the three months ended January 31, 1999 (Unaudited)
and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                                       0000880121
<NAME>                            Market America, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                         1
<CURRENCY>                                U.S. Dollars
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                              NOV-1-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                      30,349,025
<SECURITIES>                                 7,645,112
<RECEIVABLES>                                  455,931
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  1,726,198
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            40,399,220
<PP&E>                                       1,492,047
<DEPRECIATION>                                 599,009
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              41,655,557
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,570,758
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           199
<OTHER-SE>                                  36,044,600
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                41,655,557
<SALES>                                     27,123,874
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            27,123,874
<CGS>                                        6,376,288
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                6,376,288
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            15,125,052
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  39
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              6,272,504
<INCOME-TAX>                                 2,708,348
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          5,622,534
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 3,564,156
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.18
        


</TABLE>
IV 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 831 

Promoting awareness of motorcycle profiling and encourage collaboration and 

communication with the motorcycle community and law enforcement officials to prevent instances of profiling. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 13, 2016 

Mr. RIBBLE (for himself and Mr. WALBERG) submitted the following 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

RESOLUTION 

Promoting awareness of motorcycle profiling and encourage 

collaboration and communication with the motorcycle 

community and law enforcement officials to prevent instances of profiling. 

Whereas motorcycle ridership continues to increase over time 

with registrations growing from 3,826,373 in 1997 to 

8,404,687 in 2013; 

Whereas a survey conducted by the Motorcycle Profiling 

Project shows increases in the number of motorcyclists 

that feel that they are profiled by law enforcement; 

Whereas motorcycle profiling means the arbitrary practice of 

law enforcement using the fact that a person rides a motorcycle or wears motorcycle related apparel as a factor 

in deciding to stop and question, take enforcement action, 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 831 IH 

arrest, or search a person or vehicle with or without legal 

basis under the United States Constitution; 

Whereas complaints surrounding motorcycle profiling have 

been cited in all 50 States; 

Whereas nationwide protests to raise awareness and combat 

motorcycle profiling have been held in multiple States; 

Whereas in 2011, Washington signed into law legislation 

stating that the criminal justice training commission 

shall ensure that issues related to motorcycle profiling 

are addressed in basic law enforcement training and offered to in-service law enforcement officers in conjunction 

with existing training regarding profiling; 

Whereas the 2011, Washington law has reduced profiling incidents by over 90 percent and the stops that do occur 

are being dismissed 100 percent of the time; and 

Whereas in the spring of 2016, Maryland became the second 

State to pass a law addressing the issue of motorcycle 

profiling: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) promotes increased public awareness on the 

3 issue of motorcycle profiling; 

4 (2) encourages collaboration and communica5 tion with the motorcycle community and law enforce6 ment to engage in efforts to end motorcycle 

7 profiling; and 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HRES 831 IH 

1 (3) urges State law enforcement officials to in2 clude statements condemning motorcycle profiling in 

3 written policies and training materials. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Order No. 97-35

19566

April 22, 1997

#### State v. Paza

Affirmed in part, Vacated in part
# STATEOFLOUISIANA

COURTOFAPPEAL,FIRSTCIRCUIT

PRISCILLADUETAND CURTIS DUET, HUSBANDANDWIFE NO. 2022 CW 1198
VERSUS CALEB LAND CORPORATION 

### APRIL 12, 2023

In Re:

BEFORE: Caleb Land Corporation, applying for

writs, 17th Judicial District Court, Lafourche, No. 143161.
McCLENDON, HOLDRIDGE, AND GREEjNE, JJ. supervisory Parish of

WRIT GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED INI PART. The portion ofthe district court's October 5, 2022 judgmeht that denied Caleb Land Corporation's motion to file a reconventional demand against plaintiffs, Priscilla Duet and Curtis Duet, in its proposed third supplemental and amended pleading is reversed in part. Portions of the proposed pleading with respect to the reconventional demand may constitute compulsory reconventional demands, arising out of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of the principal action. See La. Code Civ. P. art. 1061 (B). Therefore, to the extent the pleading asserted compulsory reconventional demands, the district court abused its discretion in denying the motion which sought leave to file the reconventional demand, and the motion is granted in part to allow the filing of the reconventional demand in the third supplemental and amended pleading to the extent it asserts a compulsory reconventional demand. The writ is denied in all other respects.

COURT OFAPPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT 

# O\.c.D DEPUTY CLERKOF COURT FORTHE COURT PMc GH HG