alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Reinstated; Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed February 10 , 2015.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14
- 14
- 00769
- CV

IN THE MATTER OF THE MARRIAGE OF DANIEL B ANDA AND LINA MARIA MARTINEZ On Appeal from the 246th District C ourt Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2013
- 68191 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION This is an appeal from a judgment signed July 18, 2014

. On November 13, 2014, this court referred the case to mediation. O n January 30, 2015, appellant Lina Maria Martinez filed a motion to dismiss the appeal because the case has settled

. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1. The motion is granted. Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Christopher, Donovan, and Wise.
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:

                ESG Next Generation

ESG Next Generation

                        Comparison of Current ESG & ESG NextGen
          ESG NextGen Timeline
          ESG NextGen Submission Process
          ESG NextGen Draft API Specification
          ESG NextGen Frequently Asked Questions
          What's New Home
          For Industry
          ESG Next Generation
          ESG NextGen TimelineESG Next Generation ESG NextGen Timeline
  
  	
    Share
    Post
    Linkedin

    Email
    PrintESG NextGen Timeline

ESG NextGen Timeline
**To provide feedback, please email EsgNgSupport@fda.hhs.gov**

                                                                                  Content current as of:
      12/01/2023ESG Next Generation

          
                        ESG & ESG NextGen Comparison
          ESG NextGen Timeline
          ESG NextGen Submission Process
          Draft API Specification
          Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
          What's New
 
 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
Jake MANDEVILLE-ANTHONY, petitioner, v. The WALT DISNEY COMPANY, et al.

No. 12-9017.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 29, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
F I L E D

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

NOV 2 2004

PATRICK FISHER

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

JEFFREY E. STEWART,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

REGINALD HINES, Warden,

Respondent - Appellee.

No. 03-6357

(D.C. No. CIV-02-1752-F)

(W.D. Okla)

ORDER

Before EBEL, MURPHY and McCONNELL, Circuit Judges.

Petitioner Jeffrey E. Stewart brings a habeas action pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 2241, challenging prison disciplinary proceedings for his alleged refusal to cell

with an inmate of another race. He received sanctions of 30 days in disciplinary

segregation, forfeiture of 180 days of earned credits, and demotion from prison

classification level 4 to level 1, which diminished his ability to earn additional

credits. Before this court, Petitioner asserts due process and equal protection

claims, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence against him, the fairness of the

prison’s investigation, and the equality of his treatment as compared to other

inmates. 
- 2 -

The district court, adopting the recommendations of the magistrate judge,

denied habeas relief on the merits of these issues in this case. The district court

also denied a certificate of appealability (“COA”). 

A state habeas petitioner seeking a writ pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 must

obtain a COA before proceeding on appeal. Montez v. McKinna, 208 F.3d 862,

869 (10th Cir. 2000). Petitioner is entitled to a COA only upon making a

“substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” Id. For substantially

the same reasons stated in the district court’s order and the magistrate judge’s

recommendation, we find that Petitioner has not made the requisite showing. 

Accordingly, we DENY COA on all claims and DISMISS this appeal.

ENTERED FOR THE COURT

David M. Ebel

Circuit Judge
Osviel MAURA, Appellant, v. State of Florida, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE CHILD SUPPORT PROGRAM and Yaniurka Gardon Ramos, Appellees.

No. 3D18-1867

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed June 26, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 86 (Thursday, May 4, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 22045]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11074]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS


Notice of Public Meeting Cancellation of the Maine Advisory 
Committee

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and 
regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, that a meeting of 
the Maine Advisory Committee to the Commission which was to have 
convened on Monday, May 8, 1995, at 1:30 p.m. and adjourned at 4:00 
p.m., at the Magistrate Court of the U.S. District Court House, Third 
Floor, 202 Harlow Street, Bangor, Maine 04401, has been canceled.
    The original notice for the May 8, 1995, meeting was announced in 
the Federal Register on April 21, 1995, 60 FR 19883.
    Persons desiring additional information, or planning a presentation 
to the Committee, should contact Edward Darden, Acting Director of the 
Eastern Regional Office, 202-376-7533 (TDD 202-376-8116).

    Dated at Washington, DC, May 1, 1995.
Carol-Lee Hurley,
Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.
[FR Doc. 95-11074 Filed 5-3-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
CROWELL

& MORING LLP 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

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 

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING JOINT STIPULATION 

TO POSTPONE CASE MANAGEMENT DEADLINES; 

CASE NO. 4:17-CV-00881-HSG 

CROWELL & MORING LLP

Kevin C. Mayer (CSB No. 118177) 

Email: kmayer@crowell.com 

3 Embarcadero Center, 26th Floor 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone: 415.986.2800 

Facsimile: 415.986.2827 

Andrew D. Kaplan (Pro hac vice application to be filed) 

Email: akaplan@crowell.com 

Rebecca B. Chaney (Pro hac vice application to be filed) 

Email: rchaney@crowell.com 

1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, D.C. 20004 

Telephone: 202.624.2500 

Facsimile: 202.628.5116 

Attorneys for Defendants Cordis Corporation and Cardinal Health, Inc. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

OAKLAND DIVISION 

RONALD SMALL, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

CORDIS CORPORATION, et al., 

Defendants. 

Case No. 4:17-cv-00881-HSG 

ORDER GRANTING JOINT 

STIPULATION TO POSTPONE CASE 

MANAGEMENT DEADLINES 
CROWE

& MORIN

ATTORNEYS

ELL

NG LLP 

AT LAW

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 

M

fe

m

D

WHERE

Management 

ederal court 

motion in this

PURSUA

Dated: May 

EAS, on cons

Deadlines, 

case manag

s case. 

ANT TO ST

24, 2017 

sideration of

and for good

ement deadl

TIPULATION

-1-

f the parties’

d cause show

lines in this a

N, IT IS SO

[P

’ Joint Stipul

wn, the Cour

action until r

O ORDERED

Hon. Hay

United St

PROPOSED] ORDER

TO POSTPONE C

lation to Pos

rt hereby pos

resolution of

D

ywood S. Gi

tates District

R GRANTING JOIN

CASE MANAGEME

CASE NO. 4:1

stpone Case 

stpones all p

f the admini

illiam, Jr. 

t Judge 

NT STIPULATION 

ENT DEADLINES; 

17-CV-00881-HSG 

pending 

strative
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

WAYMO LLC,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., OTTO TRUCKING 

LLC, OTTOMOTTO LLC,

Defendants

ANTHONY LEVANDOWSKI,

Intervenor-Appellant

______________________ 

2017-1904

______________________ 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the 

Northern District of California in No. 3:17-cv-00939-

WHA, Judge William H. Alsup.

______________________ 

ON MOTION

______________________ 

PER CURIAM. 

O R D E R

Anthony Levandowski submits a motion to stay portions of the district court’s April 10, 2017 order directing 

the defendants to serve an unredacted privilege log. Mr. 

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 242 Filed 04/13/17 Page 1 of 2 Case: 17-1904 Document: 6 Page: 1 Filed: 04/13/2017
2 WAYMO LLC v. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

Levandowski also requests that this court grant a temporary stay pending this court’s consideration of the motions 

papers. Waymo LLC opposes the motion.

The district court ordered that the defendants serve 

the unredacted privilege log by April 13, 2017 at 5:00pm 

“unless the court of appeals extends the deadline.” 

Upon consideration thereof,

 IT IS ORDERED THAT: 

 (1) Mr. Levandowski’s request for a temporary stay is 

granted to the extent that parts two and three of the 

district court’s order are temporarily stayed pending this 

court’s consideration of the papers submitted.

 (2) Any reply to Waymo’s opposition is due no later 

than April 14, 2017.

 FOR THE COURT

 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner

Peter R. Marksteiner

Clerk of Court

s26

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 242 Filed 04/13/17 Page 2 of 2 Case: 17-1904 Document: 6 Page: 2 Filed: 04/13/2017
Richard VALDEZ, petitioner, v. CALIFORNIA.

No. 12-8332.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 22, 2013.

*1998Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of California denied.
OTTO TRUCKING LLC’S RESPONSE TO ORDER TO MAKE STATEMENT UNDER OATH

Case No. 3:17-cv-00939-WHA 

sf-3757526 

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 

MICHAEL A. JACOBS (CA SBN 111664)

MJacobs@mofo.com 

ARTURO J. GONZÁLEZ (CA SBN 121490) 

AGonzalez@mofo.com 

ERIC A. TATE (CA SBN 178719) 

ETate@mofo.com 

MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP

425 Market Street 

San Francisco, California 94105-2482 

Telephone: 415.268.7000 

Facsimile: 415.268.7522 

Attorneys for Defendants 

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., 

OTTOMOTTO LLC, and OTTO TRUCKING LLC 

KAREN L. DUNN (Pro Hac Vice) 

kdunn@bsfllp.com 

HAMISH P.M. HUME (Pro Hac Vice) 

hhume@bsfllp.com 

BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP 

1401 New York Avenue, N.W. 

Washington DC 20005 

Telephone: 202.237.2727 

Facsimile: 202.237.6131 

Attorneys for Defendants 

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

and OTTOMOTTO LLC 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

WAYMO LLC, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., 

OTTOMOTTO LLC; OTTO TRUCKING LLC, 

Defendants. 

Case No. 3:17-cv-00939-WHA

OTTO TRUCKING LLC’S 

RESPONSE TO ORDER TO MAKE 

STATEMENT UNDER OATH 

Trial Date: October 2, 2017 

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 198 Filed 04/10/17 Page 1 of 2
OTTO TRUCKING LLC.’S RESPONSE TO ORDER TO MAKE STATEMENT UNDER OATH 

Case No. 3:17-cv-00939-WHA 1

sf-3757526 

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 

1. Defendant Otto Trucking LLC files this Response to the Court’s Order to make a 

statement under oath regarding whether Defendants have ever resisted arbitration on the ground 

that an adverse party seeking to enforce an arbitration agreement was not actually a signatory to 

said agreement. (Dkt. No. 142.) 

2. Otto Trucking LLC has never resisted arbitration on the ground that an adverse 

party seeking to enforce an arbitration agreement was not actually a signatory to said agreement. 

(See Declaration of Rhian Morgan.) 

Dated: April 10, 2017 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP

By: /s/ Arturo J. González 

ARTURO J. GONZÁLEZ 

Attorneys for Defendants 

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., 

OTTOMOTTO LLC, and OTTO TRUCKING LLC

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 198 Filed 04/10/17 Page 2 of 2
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 13-2500

___________________________

Julio Roberto Fajardo

lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner

v.

Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General of the United States

lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent

____________

Petition for Review of an Order of the

 Board of Immigration Appeals

____________

 Submitted: April 21, 2014

 Filed: April 24, 2014

[Unpublished]

____________

Before WOLLMAN, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Guatemalan citizen Julio Roberto Fajardo petitions for review of an order of

the Board of Immigration Appeals, which upheld an immigration judge’s denial of
asylum and withholding of removal. After careful consideration, we first conclude 1

that we lack jurisdiction to review the denial of asylum, because that denial was based

on an unexcused delay in filing the asylum application. See 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(3)

(no court shall have jurisdiction to review any determination of Attorney General

regarding, inter alia, time limit for filing asylum application). We further conclude

that the denial of withholding of removal was supported by substantial evidence on

the record as a whole. See De Castro-Gutierrez v. Holder, 713 F.3d 375, 379-81 (8th

Cir. 2013) (substantial-evidence standard for denial of withholding of removal);

Tay-Chan v. Holder, 699 F.3d 107, 112-13 (1st Cir. 2012) (for purposes of

withholding of removal, to establish clear probability of persecution based on family

membership, it is not enough to show that multiple members of same family had

negative experiences; rather, those experiences had to have been causally linked to

family membership).

Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

Fajardo was also denied relief under the Convention Against Torture, but he 1

does not address this claim in his brief. See Chay-Velasquez v. Ashcroft, 367 F.3d

751, 756 (8th Cir. 2004) (petitioner waives claim that is not meaningfully raised in

opening brief).

-2-
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________ 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff(s)

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant(s)

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendant’s name and address)

A lawsuit has been filed against you.

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you

are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.

P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney,

whose name and address are:

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. 

You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

CLERK OF COURT

Date:

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

Northern District of California

WAYMO LLC

3:17-cv-00939

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; OTTOMOTTO, LLC;

OTTO TRUCKING LLC

Uber Technologies, Inc. c/o The Corporation Trust Company, Corporation Trust

Center, 1209 Orange St., Wilmington, Delaware 19801

Charles K. Verhoeven

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP

50 California Street, Floor 22

San Francisco, California 94111

02/23/2017
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No.

PROOF OF SERVICE

(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))

This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)

was received by me on (date) .

u I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

on (date) ; or

u I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name)

, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,

on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or

u I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is

 designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)

on (date) ; or

u I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

u Other (specify):

.

My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ .

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.

Date:

Server’s signature

Printed name and title

Server’s address

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

3:17-cv-00939

0.00
Este documento foi desenvolvido pelo 

Departamento de Saúde da Mulher do 

FDA (OWH) e Associação Nacional de 

Redes de Farmácias (NACDS).

Aproximadamente 30% a 50% daqueles 

que usam medicamentos não os usam 

como recomendado. Isto causa mais 

visitas ao médico, internações, perdas de 

salários, e prescrições alteradas. Tudo 

isso custa aos americanos mais de 100 

bilhões de dólares por ano.

Adultos geralmente cuidam de 

medicamentos para toda a família e 

também para eles próprios. Portanto, 

precisamos ler o rotulo, evitar problemas, 

fazer perguntas e manter um registro.

1. LEIA A BULA

Antes de tomar qualquer medicamento, 

leia a bula. A bula deve mostrar:

Lista de componentes – Se você sabe 

que você é alérgico a qualquer 

componente no medicamento, não tome. 

Solicite ao seu médico ou farmacêutico 

outro medicamento.

Reações Adversas – Leia isso 

cuidadosamente.

Data de validade - Não tome um 

medicamento após a data de vencimento 

da embalagem. Pode não fazer efeito.

Para maiores informações sobre os seus 

medicamentos, pergunte ao farmacêutico.

2. EVITE PROBLEMAS

Medicamentos podem causar reações ou 

efeitos colaterais como sonolência, 

vomito, sangramento, dores de cabeça, ou 

alergia. Pergunte sobre os efeitos 

colaterais dos medicamentos que você 

está tomando. Converse com seu médico, 

farmacêutico ou enfermeira.

Organize seus medicamentos.

Não pule horário dos medicamentos. 

Não compartilhe medicamentos.

Não tome medicamentos no escuro.

USE MEDICAMENTOS PRUDENTEMENTE 

DE VOCÊ ... E DAQUELES QUE PRECISAM DE VOCÊ 

É HORA DE CUIDAR

Departamento de 

Saúde da Mulher do FDA (OWH)

www.fda.gov/womens

É HORA DE CUIDAR 

DE VOC Ê ...E DAQUELES QUE PRECISAM DE VOC Ê 

Tiempo Para Cuidar

Su Salud

MEUS 

MEDICAMENTOS
3. PERGUNTE

• Qual o nome do remédio?

• Existe genérico disponível?

• Por que estou tomando esse

 medicamento??

• Quando deve tomá-lo?

• Deve tomá-lo com estomago vazio ou

após a refeição?

• E seguro beber álcool com ele?

• Se eu esquecer, o que devo fazer?

• Qual a dosagem que devo tomar?

• Por quanto tempo devo tomar?

• Quais problemas devo observar?

Se você estiver gravida ou amamentando, 

procure conselho de um médico antes de 

tomar qualquer medicamento ou 

suplemento. Converse com seu médico, 

farmacêutico ou enfermeira. Ela/ele terá o 

prazer em ajudar. 

Lista de alergias

Médico

Telefone

4. MANTENHA UM REGISTRO

DOS MEDICAMENTOS QUE

VOCE TOMA

Selecione aqueles que você toma:

Aspirina ou outro medicamento 

para dor/dor de cabeça/febre

Antialérgico

Antiácido

Antigripal

Tosse

Emagrecedor/suplemento

Laxantes

Para dormir 

Vitaminas 

Minerais

Ervas

Outros

MANTENHA ESSE PAPEL NA BOLSA OU BOLSO E MOSTRE AO SEU MÉDICO, FARMACEUTICO OU 

ENFERMEIRA.

NOME: 

FACA UMA LISTA DOS MEDICAMENTOS PRESCRITOS

DATA

NOME DO

MEDICAMENTO DOSAGEM COMO TOMAR PARA QUE SERVE REFIL

EXEMPLO XXXX 1 comp

400 mg

3x ao dia pós 

refeições Artrite 2

Peça ao seu médico, farmacêutico ou enfermeira reportarem problemas sérios com medicamentos ao FDA

no telefone 1-800-FDA-1088.
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY,

ASSOCIATION OF IRRITATED

RESIDENTS, CLIMATE CHANGE LAW

FOUNDATION, and SIERRA CLUB,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY; SCOTT PRUITT, Administrator;

and ALEXIS STRAUSS, Acting Regional

Administrator,

Defendants. /

No. C 17-00720 WHA

JUDGMENT

For the reasons stated in the accompanying order dismissing this action, FINAL

JUDGMENT IS HEREBY ENTERED in favor of defendants Environmental Protection Agency,

Administrator Scott Pruitt, and Acting Regional Administrator Alexis Strauss, and against

plaintiffs Association of Irritated Residents, Center for Biological Diversity, Climate Change

Law Foundation, and Sierra Club. This judgment is without prejudice to any motion plaintiffs

may bring for attorney’s fees. The Clerk SHALL CLOSE THE FILE.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 15, 2017. 

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Ramesh PATHAK and Maria Jimenez, Appellants, v. JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, NA, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-3837

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed April 9, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
未煮熟的牛絞肉會導致客戶食用後感到

身體不適,甚至有可能致命。

隨時隨地保障人們的飲食安全。

請使用溫度計,以確保牛絞肉已在至少華氏

155度(攝氏68度)的環境中烹煮了持續17秒。

Copyright © International Association for Food Protection
Undercooking ground beef can make your

customers very sick and even kill them.

Protect People Everywhere.

Use a thermometer to make sure ground beef

is cooked to at least 155oF (68oC) for 17 

seconds.

Copyright © International Association for Food Protection
Правильно охлаждайте пищу, чтобы предотвратить

отравления и не потерять работу

Защищайте людей повсюду.Правильно охлаждайте пищу.

, 

Вспышка пищевых 

отравлений по причине

Извините мы ЗАКРЫТЫ
Sony ROY, petitioner, v. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR WALTON COUNTY, FLORIDA, et al.

No. 12-8623.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2013.

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