alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CDC Emerging Tobacco Products Communication Initiative

 Teacher Live Action Video – Short

Described Audio Transcript (min:sec)

00:00 Closeup shot of student picking up vape pen. 

A logo in the upper left corner reads Empower Vape-Free Youth.

00:02 [TEACHER’S INNER VOICE] “Is that a vape?”

Frontal shot of a male middle school student in a school hallway and a female middle 

school teacher behind the student.

00:02 Music begins to play and continues through the end of the video.

00:02 [TEACHER’S INNER VOICE] “I see some of your friends are vaping. And you’re vaping.”

Multiple shots of teacher’s face as she walks down the hall composing her thoughts, 

practicing what she wants to say to the student.

00:06 Frontal shot of student walking down hall, with teacher behind, gathering her thoughts 

to talk to the student. Focus on the student is slightly blurred while the teacher is in 

sharp focus.

00:07 [TEACHER’S INNER VOICE] “Wouldn’t you be happier if you didn’t?”

00:10 We see a closeup of the teacher’s face, she rolls her eyes and laughs at herself.

00:11 [TEACHER’S INNER VOICE] “Ah, not the best argument,”

00:12 Closeup of teacher’s face.

00:13 [TEACHER’S INNER VOICE] “He knows that it's not safe for him to vape. Just needs a 

nudge from someone he trusts. I know you have a lot going on.”

00:21 We see the student’s face as the teacher speaks to student. Student looks uneasy.

00:22 Shot of teacher’s face as she speaks to student.

[TEACHER] “Getting addicted to nicotine is the last thing you need.”

00:24 The teacher and student walk into the classroom. Video blurs, text dissolves onto 

screen.

[ANNOUNCER] “Step up for your students.”

Text and logo: Step up for your students. Visit CDC.gov/Vaping for more information. CDC logo.

00:25 [ANNOUNCER] “Talk to them about vaping. Visit CDC.gov/Vaping for more information.”

00:30 END.
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.4


                           AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE TO
                               ROCK-TENN COMPANY
                       1993 EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN
              (AS AMENDED AND RESTATED EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 1998)

         Pursuant to the power reserved in Section 17 of the Rock-Tenn Company
1993 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (as amended and restated effective January 1,
1998), Rock-Tenn Company hereby deletes in its entirety the language contained
in Section 3.8 and inserts the following language in its place:

         Option Price.

         "The term Option Price shall mean for each Purchase Period 85% of the
average of the high and low sales prices for a share of Stock on the last day
of such Purchase Period, as such high and low prices are reported in The Wall
Street Journal or in any successor to The Wall Street Journal or, if no such
successor, any similar trade publication selected by the Plan Administrator (or
its delegate) or, if the Plan Administrator (or its delegate) makes no such
selection, as such prices are determined in good faith by the Plan
Administrator (or its delegate); provided, if no such prices are so reported
for any such day, the average of the high and low sales prices for such day
shall be deemed to be the average of the high and low sales prices for a share
of Stock which was so reported on the most recent day before such day."

         This Amendment Number Three shall be effective with the purchase
period that commences on May 1, 2005.


                                        ROCK-TENN COMPANY

                                        By: /s/ Steven C. Voorhees
                                            -----------------------------------
                                        Title: Executive Vice President and
                                               Chief Financial Officer
                                        Date: December 10, 2004
# C_2015171EN.01000601.xml

| 26.5.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 171/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.5.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 171/6

---

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 26 March 2015 — Wünsche Handelsgesellschaft International mbH & Co KG v European Commission

(Case C-7/14 P) (1)

1

((Appeal - Community Customs Code - Articles 220(2) and 239 - Refund of import duties - Import of preserved mushrooms from China - Decision declaring the refund of import duties unjustified))

(2015/C 171/08)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Wünsche Handelsgesellschaft International mbH & Co KG (represented by: K. Landry and G. Schwendinger, Rechtsanwalte)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: A. Caeiros and B.-R. Killmann, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders Wünsche Handelsgesellschaft International mbH & Co KG to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Wünsche Handelsgesellschaft International mbH & Co KG to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 52, 22.2.14.

1

---
# DLA Distribution Yokosuka prepares to manage Japan’s Transportation Protective Service program

/ Published Aug. 21, 2015
YOKOSUKA, Japan, 
As part of an effort to increase support to the warfighter, Defense Logistics Agency Distribution Yokosuka, Japan, is preparing to manage Japan’s Transportation Protective Service program.  This effort gives DLA responsibility for freight within mainland Japan that requires TPS, including classified, sensitive, and hazardous material.

DLA Distribution Yokosuka has been working jointly with United States Transportation Command, 515th Air Mobility Operations Wing, and the 730th Air Mobility Squadron on this initiative.  

Earlier this summer, the distribution center, along with the 730th AMS completed their inaugural run of the program.

Navy Lt.j.g. Hannah Ringel and Navy Petty Officer 2nd Class Fernando Mercader observed the process with their 730th AMS counterpart, as material was loaded onto a commercial Common User Land Transportation truck. 

The team escorted the CULT truck over 700 kilometers, using the trip to collect data, including vehicle mileage, toll fares, rest stop locations and general escorting protocol.  Once the team arrived at their location, they observed the offload and turnover of material at the Air Terminal Operations Center.

The following day, the team picked up two pallets of TPS material from ATOC before completing the return trip.  “The overall trip was a success,” said Ringel. “We worked on our coordination with AMC and ATOC, the local base policies, and the ‘rules of the road’ while escorting a CULT vehicle. 

Extensive planning was conducted with Air Mobility Command, DLA Distribution, and other stakeholders, including a funding analysis, identifying vehicle and personnel resources, developing a concept of operations and inter-service agreement, as well as developing escort trip and contingency plans.  Weekly runs will eventually occur between several inland facilities.
# DSCR participates in statewide tornado drill March 22

/ Published March 10, 2016
RICHMOND, Virginia, 
Devastating tornadoes hit Virginia Feb. 24, killing three in Waverly and another in Appomattox County, and injuring multiple people in Tappahannock.  The storms left families, neighborhoods and communities in destruction that will take months and years to rebuild. Tornadoes can happen anytime, anywhere, with little or no warning.  Knowing what to do can save lives.  

Defense Supply Center Richmond will participate in the Virginia Department of Emergency Management and National Weather Service annual statewide Tornado Drill here from 9:45-10:45 a.m., March 22.  All employees are encouraged to take an active role and practice tornado safety in their workplace.

The drill will include Defense Logistics Agency Aviation, DLA Installation Support at Richmond and DSCR tenant activities. 

DLA Installation Support at Richmond urges employees to review what to do before a tornado strikes.

All appointed safety representatives are asked to go through their work center safety plans and for leaders to use staff meetings and town halls as an opportunity to talk about what to do in case a tornado touches down on the installation prior to the event.

Proper familiarization and preparation is the key to a smooth exercise.

**What to expect:**

On March 22 at 9:45 a.m. the National Weather Service will send out a test tornado warning over the installation’s Giant Voice speaker system. DLA Installation Support at Richmond’s and Security and Emergency Services will initiate the installation’s mass warning system to include tones and messages notifying employees of the exercise and appropriate responses. 

DLA Police, Fire and Emergency Services will respond and evacuate the Southern Administrative Complex Trailers.  The Bettye Ackerman-Cobb Child Development Center will practice in place protective measures and be evaluated by the fire department. SAC evacuation should take 10-20 minutes and supervisors must account for all employees. 

Supervisors should designate one or more people in their organization to coordinate the drill and follow these steps:

- ensure employees are aware of the tornado drill and are aware of tornado evacuation procedures found in the Employee Emergency Action Guide;

- move to the basement and away from windows or to a windowless interior room such as a closet, bathroom or interior hall on lowest level of building;

- use stairs and avoid using elevators;

- in an actual tornado emergency, posture by crouching down low on the floor, face down, cover head; and

- wait for end-of-drill announcement.

Employees can visit the Virginia Emergency Management website for additional information on conducting tornado drills.
# C_2015016EN.01002303.xml

| 19.1.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 16/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.1.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 16/23

---

Order of the President of the Court of 21 October 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia No 34 de Madrid — Spain) — Rafael Villafáñez Gallego, María Pérez Anguio v Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria, SA

(Case C-54/14) (1)

(2015/C 016/35)

Language of the case: Spanish

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 135, 5.5.2014.

---
No. 10-471.

#### Tonya C. Miller-Goodwin, Petitioner v. City of Panama City Beach, Florida.

562 U.S. 1136, 131 S. Ct. 908,

178 L. Ed. 2d 750,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 285.

January 10, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.

Same case below, 385 Fed. Appx. 966.
# C_2015320EN.01002603.xml

| 28.9.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 320/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.9.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 320/26

---

Order of the President of the Court of 3 June 2015 — European Commission v Republic of Finland

(Case C-538/14) (1)

1

(2015/C 320/40)

Language of the case: Finnish

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 34, 2.2.2015.

1

---
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT
UNITED STATES OF AM ER IC A, Plaintiff - Appe lle e , v. R ASHAD Q. SANDER S, De fe nda

nt - Appe lla

nt. No. 13-30156

D.C . No. 3:11-c r-00385-HZ
M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Distric t of Ore gon M arc o A
. He rnande z , Distric t Judge , Pre siding Subm itte d Fe brua

ry 18, 2014 * * B e fore : ALAR C ÓN, O’ SC ANNLAIN, a nd FER N ANDEZ, C irc uit Judge s. R a sha d Q. Sa

nde rs a ppe a ls from

the distric t c ourt’ s judgm e nt a nd c h a lle nge s his guilty -ple a c o nvic tion a nd 194-m onth se nte n c e for tra nsporta tion of a m inor, in viola tion of 18 U.S.C . § 2423(a); a nd two c ounts of se xtra ffic king of a m i nor, in viola tion of 18 U.S.C . §§ 1591(a), 1591(b)(2), a nd 1594(a). Pursua

nt to A nde rs v . 

# FIL ED FEB 27 2014 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S
. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).C

alifornia , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Sa nde rs’ s c ounse l ha s file d a brie f stating tha

t the re are no grounds for re lie f, a long with a m otion to withdra w a s c ounse l of
re c o rd. W e have p rovide d Sande rs the opportunity to file a pro se supple m e nta l brie f. No pro se supple m e nta l brie f or answe ring brie f ha s be e n file d. Sande rs ha s wa ive d his right to a ppe a l his c onvic tion a

nd se nte n c e . Our inde pe nde nt re vie w of the re c ord pursua nt to P e n son v . Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), disc lose s no a

rgua ble issue a s to the va lidity of the wa ive r. Se e Unite d State s v . W atson , 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th C ir. 2009). W e a c c ordingly dism iss the a ppe a l. Se e id . at 988. C ounse l’ s m otion to withdra w is G RANT E D. DISM I SSE D.

1 3
- 3 0 1 5 6 2
No. 09-10817.

#### Raymond Alexander Ford, Jr., Petitioner v. Gene M. Johnson, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections.

562 U.S. 1086, 131 S. Ct. 690,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9288.

178 L. Ed. 2d 520,

November 29, 2010.

Petition for rehearing denied.

Former decision, 562 U.S. 853, 131 S. Ct. Ill, 178 L. Ed. 2d 68, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 5851.
No. 10-7765.

#### Deborah L. Akers, Petitioner v. MBNA America Bank, N.A.

562 U.S. 1176, 131 S. Ct. 1036,

178 L. Ed. 2d 824,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 887.

January 18, 2011.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied. Petitioner is allowed until February 8, 2011, within which to pay the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) and to submit a petition in compliance with Rule 33.1of the Rules of this Court.
No. 10-226.

#### Philip Stotter, Petitioner v. University of Texas at San Antonio, et al.

562 U.S. 897, 131 S. Ct. 359,

178 L. Ed. 2d 149,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6107.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 369 Fed. Appx. 641.
Final - July 21, 2021

PRESIDER/PRESENTER(s)

Dr. José Romero (ACIP Chair)

Dr. Amanda Cohn (ACIP Executive Secretary, CDC)

11:30 Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Vaccines

Introduction

Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) after Janssen COVID-19 vaccine:

Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)

Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) after Janssen COVID-19 vaccine: 

Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD)

VaST assessment of GBS after Janssen COVID-19 vaccine

Discussion

Dr. Matthew Daley (ACIP, WG Chair)

Dr. Meghna Alimchandani (FDA)

Dr. Nicola Klein (Kaiser Permanente Northern California) 

Dr. Grace Lee (ACIP, VaST Chair)

1:00

1:15

1:45 COVID-19 vaccines: benefits-risk discussion

Work Group interpretation and next steps

Discussion

Dr. Hannah Rosenblum (CDC/NCIRD)

Dr. Sarah Mbaeyi (CDC/NCIRD)

3:15

3:30 Data and clinical considerations for additional doses in immunocompromised Dr. Sara Oliver (CDC/NCIRD)

4:30 Adjourn

Acronyms

CDC

CMS

COVID-19

EtR

FDA

GRADE

HRSA

IHS

NCHHSTP

NCIRD

NCEZID

NIAID

National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Diseases [of CDC/DDID]

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services 

Coronavirus Disease 2019

Evidence to Recommendations Framework

Food and Drug Administration

Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation

Health Resources and Services Administration

Indian Health Service

National Center for HIV, Hepatitis, STD and TB Prevention [of CDC/DDID] 

National Center for Immunization & Respiratory Diseases [of CDC/DDID] 

MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IMMUNIZATION PRACTICES (ACIP)

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Atlanta, Georgia 30329 

July 22, 2021

AGENDA ITEM

Thursday, July 22, 2021

11:00 Welcome & Introductions

Break

 

Break

Public comment

page 1 of 1
# C_2014061EN.01001301.xml

| 1.3.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 61/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 61/13

---

Action brought on 16 December 2013 — Zitro IP v OHIM — Gamepoint (SPIN BINGO)

(Case T-665/13)

2014/C 61/22

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Zitro IP Sàrl. (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: A. Canela Giménez, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Gamepoint BV (The Hague, Netherlands)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 14 October 2013 given in Case R 1388/2012-4; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 14 October 2013 given in Case R 1388/2012-4;

| — | Order the defendant and the other party, should it intervene, to bear the costs of proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant and the other party, should it intervene, to bear the costs of proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: The coloured figurative mark in colours containing the verbal element ‘SPIN BINGO’ for goods and services in Classes 9, 41 and 42 — Community trade mark application No 9 545 658

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The applicant

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited in opposition: The word mark ‘ZITRO SPIN BINGO’ for goods and services in Classes 9, 28 and 41 — Community trade mark registration No 9 058 868

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition in part

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annuled the contested decision and rejected the opposition

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) CTMR.

Pleas in law:

---
EXHIBIT (32)(a)

Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 *

In connection with the Annual Report of The Empire District Electric Company (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the
period ending December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), William L. Gipson, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1.     The
Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.     The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

By:

/s/ William L. Gipson


Name:

William L. GipsonTitle:

President and Chief Executive Officer


Date:
February 19, 2010

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 or other document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form
within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to The Empire District Electric Company and will be retained by The Empire District Electric
Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---



QuickLinks
Bureau of Labor Statistics

Series Id:

Series title:

Labor force status:

Type of data:

Age:

Years:

Year Qtr1 Qtr2 Qtr3 Qtr4 Annual

2011 1292

Unemployed

Number in thousands

35 to 39 years

2011 to 2011

Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey

Original Data Value

LNU03024934Q

Not Seasonally Adjusted

(Unadj) Unemployment Level - 35-39 yrs.

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics Generated on: May 16, 2011 (02:08:56 PM)
#### In the Matter of Tracey Waldron, Appellant, v Wayne Heyward, Respondent.

[62 NYS3d 545]

*637Appeal by the petitioner from an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Jennifer Mitek, Ct. Atty. Ref.), dated October 27, 2016. The order, without a hearing, dismissed the family offense petition on the ground that it failed to state a cause of action.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

On April 22, 2016, the petitioner filed a family offense petition pursuant to article 8 of the Family Court Act. Following a court appearance, the Family Court dismissed, without a hearing, the petition on the ground that it failed to state a cause of action. The petitioner appeals.

“A family offense petition may be dismissed without a hearing where the petition fails to set forth factual allegations which, if proven, would establish that the respondent has committed a qualifying family offense” *(Matter of Brown-Winfield v Bailey,*143 AD3d 707, 708 [2016]). “In determining whether a petition alleges an enumerated family offense, the petition must be liberally construed, the facts alleged in the petition must be accepted as true, and the petitioner must be granted the benefit of every favorable inference” *(Matter of Arnold v Arnold,*119 AD3d 938, 939 [2014]).

Here, the petition was conclusory and devoid of specificity, and it did not allege conduct constituting the family offense of harassment in the second degree *(see*Penal Law § 240.26 [3]; *Matter of Janczewski v Janczewski,*152 AD3d 595 [2017]; *Matter of Graham v Rawley,*148 AD3d 1018, 1018-1019 [2017]; *Matter of Graham v Rawley,*147 AD3d 1053, 1054 [2017]; *Matter of Ring v Ring,*140 AD3d 1076 [2016]; *Matter of Marino v Marino,*110 AD3d 887 [2013]; *Matter of Vasciannio v Nedrick,*305 AD2d 420 [2003]; *cf. Matter of Jones v Jones,*149 AD3d 1079 [2017]; *Matter of Brown-Winfield v Bailey,*143 AD3d at 708). Accordingly, the Family Court properly dismissed the petition without a hearing.

Mastro, J.P., Chambers, LaSalle and Brathwaite Nelson, JJ., concur.
No. 10-6909.

#### Ruben M. Gutierrez, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1036, 131 S. Ct. 585,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8785.

178 L. Ed. 2d 426,

November 8, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.