alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Skip to main content
          Skip to FDA Search
          Skip to in this section menu
          Skip to footer links


U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government

					Here’s how you know
          			Dot gov**The .gov means it’s official.**Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.
							      SSL**The site is secure.** The **https://** ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely. 
			U.S. Food and Drug Administration
				
        Search
            Menu
							
						Search FDA
									
									Submit search 
		Featured
							Contact FDA
	                FDA Guidance Documents
	                Recalls, Market Withdrawals and Safety Alerts
	                Press Announcements
	                Warning Letters
	                Advisory Committees
	                En Español

					Products
            Food
							Drugs
							Medical Devices
							Radiation-Emitting Products
							Vaccines, Blood, and Biologics
							Animal and Veterinary
							Cosmetics
							Tobacco ProductsTopics
            About FDA
							Combination Products
							Regulatory Information
							Safety
							Emergency Preparedness
							International Programs
							News and Events
							Training and Continuing Education
							Inspections and Compliance
							Science and ResearchInformation For
            Consumers
	            Patients
	            Industry
	            Health Professionals
	            Federal, State and Local Officials 
 In this section:

                White Oak Campus Information

White Oak Campus Information Home
          About FDA
          Jobs and Training at FDA
          Buildings and Facilities
          White Oak Campus Information
          White Oak Shuttle Bus Stop Location at the College Park Metro StationWhite Oak Campus Information White Oak Shuttle Bus Stop Location at the College Park Metro Station
  
  	
    Share
    Post
    Linkedin

    Email
    PrintEffective date of October 9, 2022



White Oak Shuttle Bus Location at the College Park Metro Station 2015-06

                                                                                  Content current as of:
      03/28/2018White Oak Campus Information
 
 Footer Links
    FDA Archive
          About FDA
          Accessibility
      Visitor Information
          Website Policies / Privacy
          No FEAR Act
          Vulnerability Disclosure Policy
      FOIA
          HHS.gov
          USA.gov
    Contact FDA
      Follow FDA on Facebook
      Follow FDA on X
      Follow FDA on Instagram
      Follow FDA on LinkedIn
      View FDA videos on YouTube
      Subscribe to FDA RSS feeds
    FDA Homepage
    Contact Number
      1-888-INFO-FDA (1-888-463-6332) Back toTop
STATE of Louisiana v. Jack CUCCIA

No. 2018-KP-1726

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 28, 2019

**ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF ORLEANS**

PER CURIAM:

Writ granted. In 2004, an Orleans Parish jury found petitioner guilty as charged of manslaughter, and the trial court later sentenced him as a third-felony offender to 30 years imprisonment at hard labor. The conviction and sentence were affirmed on direct review. *See* *State v. Cuccia* , 05-0807 (La. App. 4 Cir. 3/15/06), 933 So.2d 134, *writ denied* , 06-0903 (La. 10/27/06), 939 So.2d 1273.

In 2007, petitioner filed in the district court a timely application for post-conviction relief, which he supplemented in 2015 with the district court's approval. *See* *State ex rel. Benn v. State* , 11-2418 (La. 6/22/12), 90 So.3d 1045, 1045-46 ("Established jurisprudence of this Court grants district judges the discretion to allow or to refuse amendment of timely filed but not yet ruled-on applications for post-conviction relief."). As supplemented and amended, petitioner's application asserts six claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and one claim of cumulative error.

In 2018, one year after it conducted a two-part evidentiary hearing, the district court issued a brief order which set forth no factual findings and denied only one of petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. Petitioner unsuccessfully sought supervisory writs in the court of appeal. *See* *State v. Cuccia* , 18-0624 (La. App. 4 Cir. 9/19/18) (unpub'd).

Petitioner now correctly argues that the district court erred in failing to address the five outstanding claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. Further, the district court's lack of factual findings renders the addressed claim unreviewable.

The matter is thus remanded to the district court for a full and complete ruling on the merits of all the claims raised in petitioner's application for post-conviction relief, as supplemented, including for the district court to make specific and detailed factual findings in support of its ultimate legal conclusions. Following that ruling, either party may seek supervisory writs from an adverse disposition. *See* La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.6.

**REMANDED**
IIA 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. J. RES. 29 

Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United 

States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Labor relating 

to ‘‘COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing; Emergency Temporary Standard’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 17, 2021 

Mr. BRAUN (for himself, Mr. SULLIVAN, Mr. HAGERTY, Mr. MARSHALL, Mr. 

LEE, Mr. LANKFORD, Mr. SCOTT of Florida, Mrs. BLACKBURN, Mr. 

PAUL, Ms. LUMMIS, Mrs. CAPITO, Mr. RUBIO, Mr. BARRASSO, Mrs. 

HYDE-SMITH, Mr. THUNE, Mr. MORAN, Mr. WICKER, Mr. BURR, Mr. 

ROUNDS, Mr. HOEVEN, Mr. TOOMEY, Mr. TUBERVILLE, Mr. RISCH, Mr. 

CRAPO, Mr. CRUZ, Mr. COTTON, Ms. ERNST, Mr. CRAMER, Mr. HAWLEY, 

Mr. BOOZMAN, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. GRASSLEY, Mr. YOUNG, Mr. KENNEDY, 

Mr. JOHNSON, Mr. SASSE, Mr. DAINES, Mrs. FISCHER, Mr. GRAHAM, 

Mr. TILLIS, Mr. CORNYN, Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina, Mr. MCCONNELL, Mr. CASSIDY, Mr. SHELBY, Mr. BLUNT, Mr. PORTMAN, Ms. COLLINS, Ms. MURKOWSKI, and Mr. ROMNEY) introduced the following joint 

resolution; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 

Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of 

title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by 

the Department of Labor relating to ‘‘COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing; Emergency Temporary Standard’’. 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•SJ 29 IS 

1 That Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the De2 partment of Labor relating to ‘‘COVID-19 Vaccination 

3 and Testing; Emergency Temporary Standard’’ (86 Fed. 

4 Reg. 61402 (November 5, 2021)), and such rule shall have 

5 no force or effect. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
STIP. REQUEST TO CONTINUE HEARING

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

BRIAN J. STRETCH (CABN 163973)

United States Attorney

BARBARA J. VALLIERE (DCBN 439353)

Chief, Criminal Division

CHRISTINA McCALL (CABN 234139)

Assistant United States Attorney

1301 Clay Street, Suite 340S

Oakland, California 94612

Telephone: (510) 637-3680

FAX: (510) 637-3724

christina.mccall@usdoj.gov

Attorneys for Plaintiff

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

OAKLAND DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

 v.

ALBERTO ACOSTA,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CR 17-00024 JST

 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO 

CONTINUE HEARING TO MAY 5, 2017

Date: April 14, 2017

Time: 9:30 a.m.

Court: Hon. Jon S. Tigar

The above-captioned matter is set on April 14, 2017 before this Court for the initial appearance 

in District Court following arraignment. The parties request that the Court continue the status hearing to 

May 5, 2017. The continuance is requested to allow defense counsel to review the discovery and assess

the application of certain provisions of the Sentencing Guidelines. Defense counsel also needs to collect 

prior records pertaining to Mr. Acosta. The parties stipulate that the time is excludable from the time 

limitations of the Speedy Trial Act because the interests of justice are served by granting a continuance, 

//

//

//

//
STIP. REQUEST TO CONTINUE HEARING

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ' 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv). 

DATED: April 11, 2017 Respectfully submitted,

BRIAN J. STRETCH

United States Attorney

 /s/ Christina McCall 

CHRISTINA McCALL

Assistant U. S. Attorney

 /s/ Angela M. Hansen 

ANGELA M. HANSEN

Attorney for Alberto Acosta

ORDER

Based on the reasons provided in the stipulation of the parties above, the Court hereby FINDS that 

for adequate preparation of the case by all parties, and in the interest of justice, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 

sections 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv), an exclusion of time is warranted under the Speedy Trial Act. Based 

on these findings, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT (1) the status hearing is continued until May 5, 

2017, at 9:30 a.m., and (2) time is excluded until May 5, 2017. 

IT SO ORDERED.

DATED: _______________________________

The Hon. Jon S. Tigar

United States District Court Judge

April 12, 2017

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

 Judge Jon S. Tigar
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-6526 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

GLEN MARK, JR.,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle

District of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr.,

Senior District Judge. (2:89-cr-00263; 1:05-cv-01037-FWB-PT)

Submitted: September 28, 2006 Decided: October 6, 2006

Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Glen Mark, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Angela Hewlett Miller, OFFICE OF

THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Glen Mark, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and

denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The order is

not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A

certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial

showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any

assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is

debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by

the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell,

537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Mark has not

made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal. We deny Mark’s motions to

expedite the appeal and 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.

DISMISSED
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 22-0171

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

CHINA ROSE DAWN DAVIS,

Defendant and Appellant. 

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including September 14, 2022, within which to prepare, 

file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 10 2022

08/10/2022

Case Number: DA 22-0171
1 — U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS • bls.gov

Leaflet Maps

Brandon Kopp

Research Psychologist

Government Advances in Statistical Processing Workshop

25 October 2018
2 — U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS • bls.gov

install.packages(‘leaflet’)

 Demonstration App and Tutorial Available at:

https://osmrbls.shinyapps.io/Leaflet-Tutorial-App/
3 — U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS • bls.gov

library(leaflet)

 Pros and Cons of Using Leaflet

 Building a Basic Leaflet Map

 Map Components

 Basemaps

 Basic Data Types

– Points

– Lines

– Polygons

– Raster Images

 Popups, Hovers, & Legends
4 — U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS • bls.gov

leaflet()

 Pros

Zoom functionality 

Interactivity (Click & Hover 

Messages)

Great for applications like R 

Shiny and for webpages

 Cons

Must be connected to the 

internet

no way to easily output the 

Leaflet map as an image

Not great for documents 

Alaska and Hawaii can cause 

hassles
5 — U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS • bls.gov

addTiles() 
6 — U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS • bls.gov

addCircleMarkers(), addPolyLines(), addPolygons(), & 

addRasterImage() Points Polygons

Lines Raster Image
7 — U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS • bls.gov

popup=popup, label=hover, & addLegend()
Contact Information

8 — U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS • bls.gov

Brandon Kopp

Research Psychologist

Office of Survey Methods Research

www.bls.gov/osmr

202-691-7514

kopp.brandon@bls.gov
NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT WITH DEFENDANT WHEELS FINANCIAL GROUP, INC. -1-

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

SCOTT J. SAGARIA (SBN 217981)

ELLIOT W. GALE (SBN 263326)

JOE ANGELO (SBN 268542)

SAGARIA LAW, P.C.

2033 Gateway Place, 6th Floor

San Jose, CA 95110

408-279-2288 ph: 408-279-2299 fax

Attorneys for Plaintiff

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WILLIAM SCRIPTER, 

Plaintiff,

v.

EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, 

INC., et al.,

Defendants. 

Case No.: 4:17-cv-00348-SBA

 

NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT WITH 

DEFENDANT WHEELS FINANCIAL 

GROUP, INC.

TO THE COURT, CLERK OF COURT, AND ALL PARTIES:

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT plaintiff William Scripter and defendant Wheels 

Financial Group, Inc. by and through their respective counsel of record, have reached a 

settlement in principle of the above captioned case and are in the process of documenting said 

settlement. The parties believe the settlement will be finalized within 30 days and will request 

dismissal of this action. 

Sagaria Law, P.C.

Dated: April 20, 2017 By: /s/ Elliot Gale 

Elliot Gale

 Attorneys for Plaintiff

Case 4:17-cv-00348-SBA Document 24 Filed 04/20/17 Page 1 of 2
NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT WITH DEFENDANT WHEELS FINANCIAL GROUP, INC. -2-

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Jones Day

Dated: April 20, 2017 By: /s/ Anni Vartanian

Anni Vartanian

 Attorneys for Defendant

Wheels Financial Group, Inc.

I, Elliot Gale, am the ECF user whose identification and password are being used to file 

this Notice. I hereby attest that Anni Vartanian has concurred in this filing.

/s/ Elliot Gale

Case 4:17-cv-00348-SBA Document 24 Filed 04/20/17 Page 2 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

STARVONA HARRIS, ET AL.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

BEST BUY STORES, L.P.,

Defendant.

Case No. 4:17-cv-00446-HSG (KAW)

ORDER TERMINATING STARVONA 

HARRIS'S MOTION FOR 

PROTECTIVE ORDER

Re: Dkt. Nos. 34, 35

On June 3, 2017, Plaintiff Starvona Harris filed a motion for protective order to prevent 

Defendant Best Buy from deposing her in this lawsuit in light of her prior deposition in the related 

case, Starvona Harris v. Best Buy Stores, L.P., Case No. 15-cv-00657-HSG. (Pl.’s Mot., Dkt. No. 

35 at 1.) On June 5, 2017, the pending motion and all other discovery disputes were referred to 

the undersigned. (Dkt. No. 39.)

Pursuant to the undersigned’s standing order, discovery disputes between the parties must 

be addressed in a joint letter. (Judge Westmore’s General Standing Order ¶ 13.) Accordingly, The 

Court TERMINATES the motion for protective order and orders the parties to meet and confer in 

good faith to resolve the dispute without further court intervention. 

To aid the parties in their meet and confer efforts, a cursory review of Plaintiff’s motion 

indicates that she mistakenly relies on Hynix Semiconductor Inc. v. Rambus Inc., 250 F.R.D. 452, 

454 (N.D. Cal. 2008), in support of her position that she is entitled to a protective order. (Pl.’s 

Mot. at 9.) Hynix is easily distinguishable on the facts, as it was one of three, related patent cases, 

and, to minimize the number of depositions, the district court issued a case management order that 

required that 

[a]ll depositions or other sworn testimony in the Rambus Related 

Actions may be used by any party in the Rambus NDCal Cases as if 
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

taken in each of the Rambus NDCal Cases. A party shall be allowed 

to take a further deposition with respect to new issues with which it 

is concerned. A party shall not repeat prior lines of questioning of a 

deponent.

250 F.R.D. at 454. Indeed, in Hynix, the court held a lengthy case management conference and 

solicited competing case management proposals before adopting the “cross-use” provision

Plaintiff seeks to have the Court impose. Id. at 456. The undersigned, however, is unaware of a 

similar order being entered in this case.

In the event that the parties’ meet and confer efforts fail to fully resolve this dispute, they

shall file a joint letter not to exceed five pages, in which they provide a detailed summary of each 

party’s final substantive position, including relevant legal authority. Id.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 6, 2017

__________________________________

KANDIS A. WESTMORE

United States Magistrate Judge
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 192 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 192

  Expressing support for the designation of May 2021 as ``Motorcycle 
                       Safety Awareness Month''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 29, 2021

    Ms. Ernst (for herself and Mr. Peters) submitted the following 
 resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 
                           and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  Expressing support for the designation of May 2021 as ``Motorcycle 
                       Safety Awareness Month''.

Whereas motorcycling is a great United States tradition enjoyed by an estimated 
        30,000,000 people annually, representing approximately 11 percent of the 
        population;
Whereas motorcycles are a valuable component of the transportation mix;
Whereas motorcycles are fuel-efficient and decrease congestion while having 
        little impact on our Nation's transportation infrastructure;
Whereas the motorcycling community promotes rider safety education, licensing, 
        and motorcycle awareness;
Whereas the motorcycling community is committed to decreasing motorcycle crashes 
        through training and safety education, personal responsibility, and 
        increased public awareness;
Whereas approximately 91 percent of motorcycles are operated on highways in 
        conjunction with other vehicles;
Whereas motorcyclist deaths occur more frequently than fatalities in passenger 
        vehicles;
Whereas motorcycle awareness is beneficial to all road users and will help 
        decrease motorcycle accidents; and
Whereas the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration promotes Motorcycle 
        Safety Awareness Month to encourage riders to be properly licensed, 
        receive training, wear personal protective equipment, such as helmets, 
        jackets, boots, and gloves, and to remind all riders and motorists to 
        always share the road: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate--
            (1) supports the designation of May 2021 as ``Motorcycle 
        Safety Awareness Month'';
            (2) recognizes the contribution of motorcycles to the 
        transportation mix;
            (3) encourages motorcycle awareness by all road users;
            (4) recognizes that motorcyclists have a right to the road 
        and that all motorists should safely share the roadways;
            (5) encourages rider safety education, training, and proper 
        gear for safe motorcycle operation; and
            (6) supports the goals of Motorcycle Safety Awareness 
        Month.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit 31.1****Certifications**I, Corey A. Chambas, Chief Executive Officer of First Business Financial Services, Inc., certifythat: 1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of First Business Financial Services,Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensurethat material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;  b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based onsuch evaluation; and  c. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation ofinternal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors: a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likelyto adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and  b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.       /s/ Corey A. Chambas Corey A. ChambasChief Executive Officer         May 14, 2007  
26