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

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 248 (Friday, December 27, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 105620]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-30876]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health

National Institute on Aging; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 1009 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Aging Special Emphasis 
Panel; Research Infrastructure Development for Interdisciplinary 
Aging Studies.
    Date: March 6, 2025.
    Time: 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Address: National Institute on Aging, 5601 Fishers Lane, Suite 
8B, Rockville, MD 20852.
    Meeting Format: Virtual Meeting.
    Contact Person: Thomas John O'Farrell, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Officer National Institute of Aging, National Institute of Health, 
5601 Fishers Lane, Suite 8B, Rockville, MD 20852, (301) 402-8559, 
[email protected].

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.866, Aging 
Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: December 19, 2024.
Miguelina Perez,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2024-30876 Filed 12-26-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
```
Bruce Robert BENSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-3075

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed January 29, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
# C_2021462EN.01002201.xml

| 15.11.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 462/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.11.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 462/22

---

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 2 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — Peek & Cloppenburg KG, legally represented by Peek & Cloppenburg Düsseldorf Komplementär BV v Peek & Cloppenburg KG, legally represented by Van Graaf Management GmbH

(Case C-371/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Consumer protection - Directive 2005/29/EC - Unfair commercial practices - Commercial practices deemed to be unfair in all circumstances - Misleading commercial practices - First sentence of point 11 of Annex I - Advertising campaigns - Use of editorial content in the media to promote a product - Promotion financed by the trader itself - Concept of ‘payment’ - Promotion of sales of the products of the media operator company and of the trader - Advertorial)

(2021/C 462/22)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Peek & Cloppenburg KG, legally represented by Peek & Cloppenburg Düsseldorf Komplementär BV

Defendant: Peek & Cloppenburg KG, legally represented by Van Graaf Management GmbH

Operative part of the judgment

The first sentence of point 11 of Annex I to Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council must be interpreted as meaning that the promotion of a product by the publication of editorial content is ‘paid for’ by a trader, within the meaning of that provision, in the case where that trader provides consideration with an asset value for that publication, whether in the form of payment of a sum of money or in any other form, provided that there is a definite link between the payment thus made by that trader and that publication. That will, inter alia, be the case where that trader makes available, free of charge, images protected by copyright on which are visible the commercial premises and products which it offers for sale.

---

(1)  OJ C 348, 19.10.2020.

---
# C_2021452EN.01003201.xml

| 8.11.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 452/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.11.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 452/32

---

Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2021 — Kanyama v Council

(Case T-110/20) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - Freezing of funds - Restriction on admission to the territory of the Member States - Retention of the applicant’s name on the lists of persons subject to restrictive measures - Obligation to state reasons - Right to be heard - Proof that inclusion and retention on the lists is well founded - Manifest error of assessment - Continuation of the factual and legal circumstances which led to the adoption of the restrictive measures - Right to private and family life - Presumption of innocence - Proportionality - Plea of illegality)

(2021/C 452/36)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Célestin Kanyama (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, A. Giullerme and T. Payan, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M.-C. Cadilhac and H. Marcos Fraile, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment, first, of Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/2109 of 9 December 2019 amending Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2019 L 318, p. 134), and, second, Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2019/2101 of 9 December 2019 implementing Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against persons acting in violation of the arms embargo with regard to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2019 L 318, p. 1) in so far as those acts concern the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Mr Célestin Kanyama to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Célestin Kanyama to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 129, 20.4.2020.

---
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 248 (Friday, December 27, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 105642-105643]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-30809]

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

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

[[Page 105643]]

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 27, 2024.

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 
December 13, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 1067 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-827, K2025-828.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-30809 Filed 12-26-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 390 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 390

  Designating the week of October 1, 2023, through October 7, 2023, as 
                 ``National Community Policing Week''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

           September 30 (legislative day, September 22), 2023

  Mrs. Shaheen (for herself, Mr. Cornyn, Ms. Hassan, and Mr. Peters) 
 submitted the following resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  Designating the week of October 1, 2023, through October 7, 2023, as 
                 ``National Community Policing Week''.

Whereas police officers are indispensable members of the community who put their 
        lives on the line to protect others;
Whereas promoting strong relationships, founded in trust and mutual respect, 
        between law enforcement officers and the communities they serve helps 
        ensure the safe and effective execution of the law;
Whereas relationships developed through community policing help protect both law 
        enforcement officers and civilians;
Whereas law enforcement officers and communities that work together to address 
        public safety concerns can create lasting solutions to difficult 
        challenges;
Whereas community policing has helped produce reductions in both violent and 
        property crime;
Whereas events in recent years have sparked a nationwide call to improve the 
        interactions between law enforcement officers and the communities they 
        serve, particularly communities of color;
Whereas community policing facilitates peaceful dialogue, capable of fostering 
        understanding and trust, between law enforcement officers and civilians;
Whereas community policing informs the public about the challenges that law 
        enforcement officers face in executing their duties and provides law 
        enforcement officers insight into the concerns of community members;
Whereas a long-term commitment to community policing is necessary to eliminate 
        the underlying causes of crime;
Whereas the advancement of community policing should be supported to ensure that 
        State and local law enforcement agencies have necessary resources; and
Whereas community policing has been recognized as an important tool for 
        improving the relationship between law enforcement officers and the 
        communities they serve: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate--
            (1) designates the week of October 1, 2023, through October 
        7, 2023, as ``National Community Policing Week''; and
            (2) supports community policing and encourages the people 
        of the United States, law enforcement agencies, and elected 
        officials to identify ways in which communities can improve 
        public safety, strengthen relationships, and build trust.
                                 <all>
```
* 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. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-41512 Summary Calendar

LEONARD B. HARMON, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION, Michael Unit, Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 6:97-CV-825

- - - - - - - - - - June 11, 1998 Before JONES, SMITH and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Leonard B. Harmon, Texas prisoner # 661460, has filed a motion to vacate the January 30, 1998, letter of the clerk of this court advising him that he is required to comply with 28 U.S.C. § 1915 by filing a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal in the district court. Harmon argues that the clerk abused his authority in issuing the above letter and in not allowing him to proceed IFP on appeal without furtherNo. 97-41512 -2- authorization pursuant to Rule 24 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. Harmon did not file an IFP motion in the district court. The clerk’s January 30, 1998, letter correctly advised Harmon that in order to proceed IFP on appeal he must file an IFP motion in the district court. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1); Morgan v. Haro , 112 F.3d 788, 789 (5th Cir. 1997). Harmon’s motion to vacate the clerk’s January 30, 1998, letter is
DENIED. Because Harmon failed to file an IFP motion in the district court as directed by the clerk of this court and because he has filed a frivolous motion to vacate the clerk’s January 30, 1998, letter in an attempt to circumvent the requirements of § 1915(b), Harmon’s appeal is dismissed as frivolous. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2; Howard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). The dismissal of this appeal as frivolous counts as a strike for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons , 103 F.3d 383, 388 (5th Cir. 1996). Additionally, Harmon is cautioned that any future frivolous appeals or pleadings filed by him or on his behalf will invite the imposition of sanctions. Harmon is cautioned further to review any pending appeals and pleadings to ensure that they do not raise arguments that are frivolous.
MOTION TO VACATE DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.
**Exhibit 32**
   
  **CERTIFICATION 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 Quarterly Report of Mpower Holding Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Rolla P. Huff, Chief Executive Officer of the Company and S. Gregory Clevenger, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of our knowledge:(1)
The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) 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 results of operations of the Company.       /s/ Rolla P. Huff


/s/ S. Gregory ClevengerRolla P. HuffChief Executive OfficerNovember 10, 2004


S. Gregory ClevengerChief Financial Officer November 10, 2004
Vernet SEJOUR, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D18-3190

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[February 14, 2019]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MANUEL BURRUEL, III, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

ROB BONTA, California Attorney General, 

Defendant-Appellee.

No. 23-15065 

D.C. No. 1:22-cv-00116-ADA-EPG 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Ana de Alba, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted October 10, 2023**

Before: S.R. THOMAS, McKEOWN, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

Manuel Burruel, III, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment 

dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations arising 

from his civil commitment. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We 

review de novo. Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir. 2012) (dismissal 

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

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

OCT 18 2023

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 23-15065 

under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)); Whitaker v. Garcetti, 486 F.3d 572, 579 (9th 

Cir. 2007) (dismissal under Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994)). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Burruel’s constitutional claims as 

Heck-barred because success on his claims would necessarily imply the invalidity 

of his civil commitment, and Burruel has not demonstrated that his commitment

has been invalidated. See Huftile v. Miccio-Fonseca, 410 F.3d 1136, 1140-41 (9th 

Cir. 2005) (holding that a plaintiff’s claims are Heck-barred where the success of

his § 1983 claim “would necessarily imply the invalidity of his civil 

commitment”); see also Heck, 512 U.S. at 486-87 (holding that if “a judgment in 

favor of the plaintiff would necessarily imply the invalidity of his conviction or 

sentence . . . the complaint must be dismissed unless the plaintiff can demonstrate 

that the conviction or sentence has already been invalidated”). Contrary to 

Burruel’s contention, the district court did not err by construing this case as a 

§ 1983 action.

We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on 

appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

All pending motions are denied.

AFFIRMED.
Randy L. SPARKLIN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-818

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 6, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-2842
HARTWELL E. EDWARDS; MYRA R. EDWARDS, Plaintiffs - Appellants, versus CHARLES BREW, Detective, Badge #1376, Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District ofMaryland, at Baltimore. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA95-1704-DKC, CA-95-3094-DKC) Submitted: May 15, 1997 Decided: May 28, 1997 Before RUSSELL, HALL, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Hartwell E. Edwards, Myra R. Edwards, Appellants Pro Se. Sean Daniel Wallace, Crystal Renee Mittelstaedt, COUNTY ATT ORNEY'S OFFICE, Upper Marlboro, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:Appellants appeal the district court's order granting the Defendant's motion for summary judgment and denying relief on their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Edwards v. Brew , Nos. CA95-1704-DKC; CA-95-3094-DKC (D. Md. Nov. 8, 1996). Appellants' motion to stay proceedings is denied as moot. 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
III 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 49 

Expressing the sense of the Senate that the Chinese Communist Party’s 

espionage mission to send a surveillance balloon across the United States, 

in violation of international law, is unacceptable and should be condemned. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 9, 2023 

Mr. HAWLEY submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Armed Services 

FEBRUARY 15, 2023 

Committee discharged; considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the Senate that the Chinese Communist Party’s espionage mission to send a surveillance 

balloon across the United States, in violation of international law, is unacceptable and should be condemned. 

Whereas, on January 28, 2023, the Chinese Communist 

Party flew a balloon aircraft into United States airspace 

in Alaska to conduct surveillance; 

Whereas, on January 31, 2023, the Chinese surveillance balloon reentered United States airspace over Idaho; 

Whereas, on February 1, 2023, the Chinese surveillance balloon was seen over Montana; 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

SRES 49 ATS 

Whereas, on February 2, 2023, the Department of Defense 

confirmed its detection and tracking of the Chinese 

‘‘high-altitude surveillance balloon’’; 

Whereas, on February 3, 2023, the Chinese surveillance balloon was seen over Missouri; and 

Whereas, at 2:39 p.m. on February 4, 2023, the United 

States military shot down the Chinese surveillance balloon using a single AIM–9X air-to-air missile fired from 

a F–22 Raptor off the coast of Surfside Beach, South 

Carolina: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) condemns the Chinese Communist Party’s 

3 invasion of United States airspace to conduct sur4 veillance; 

5 (2) affirms that it is the policy of the United 

6 States to protect the sovereignty and integrity of 

7 United States airspace from foreign and hostile state 

8 actors, especially the People’s Republic of China; 

9 and 

10 (3) calls on the President to be transparent 

11 with the American people and Congress regarding 

12 this latest spying incident and all other attempts by 

13 the Chinese Communist Party to conduct surveil14 lance on United States citizens, territory, and assets. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS