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:

                Electronic Reading Room

Electronic Reading Room

                        Notice of Opportunity for Hearing (NOOH) - Food
          Notice of Opportunity for Hearing (NOOH) - Proposal to Debar Home
          Regulatory Information
          Freedom of Information
          Electronic Reading Room
          Notice of Opportunity for Hearing (NOOH) - FoodElectronic Reading Room Notice of Opportunity for Hearing (NOOH) - Food
  
  	
    Share
    Post
    Linkedin

    Email
    PrintNameCenterDateIssuing OfficeRoos Foods Inc. (PDF - 3.44MB)Text VersionCFSAN03/11/14Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition

                                                                                  Content current as of:
      03/12/2014Electronic Reading Room

          
                        Notice of Opportunity for Hearing (NOOH) - Food
          Notice of Opportunity for Hearing (NOOH) - Proposal to Debar
 
 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
June 9, 2017 

The Honorable Jacqueline Scott Corley 

United States Magistrate Judge 

United States District Court for the Northern District of California 

San Francisco Courthouse 

450 Golden Gate Avenue 

San Francisco, CA 94102 

 Re: Waymo LLC v. Uber Technologies, LLC et al., Case No. 3:17-cv-00939-WHA 

Dear Judge Corley: 

 Pursuant to the Order Re: Discovery Letter Regarding Agreement Between 

Levandowski’s Attorney and Stroz (Dkt. 568), Defendants Uber Technologies Inc. and 

Ottomotto LLC (collectively, “Uber”) submit this letter brief in opposition to Waymo’s motion 

to compel production of a letter agreement between Stroz Friedberg, LLC (“Stroz”) and John 

Gardner, counsel for Anthony Levandowski (Dkt. 546). 

 Yesterday, Uber filed its Objections to the Order Re: Waymo’s Motion to Compel (Dkt. 

566), which granted Waymo’s Motion to Compel Production of the Due Diligence Report and 

Exhibits. See Objections, Dkt. 575. For the reasons stated in the Objections and pending the 

Court’s ruling on those Objections, Uber continues to assert attorney-work product protections 

over the two letter agreements attached as exhibits to the Due Diligence Report. 

Sincerely, 

 /s/ Karen L. Dunn 

 Karen L. Dunn 

Counsel for Uber Technologies, Inc. and 

Ottomotto LLC 

cc: counsel of record; Special Master John Cooper 

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 577 Filed 06/09/17 Page 1 of 1
Daniel E. COBBLE, petitioner, v. Gregory McLAUGHLIN, Warden.

No. 12-7830.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 29, 2013.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Kay F. BUTLER, Individually and as Executrix of the Estate of Truman DeWayne Butler, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-1174.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 20, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
LAN THI HOANG, petitioner, v. Hilda WEINTRAUB.

No. 12-8790.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 22, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of California denied.
**Exhibit 35.1**

 

**SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT**

**U.S. Bank Trust National Association**

 

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of U.S. Bank Trust National Association (the "Trustee"), as Trustee in respect of the STRATS(SM) Trust for BNSF Funding Trust I Securities, Series 2007-2 (the "Trust"), does hereby certify that:

 

| 1. | The Bank is Trustee under the Trust Agreement. |
|----|------------------------------------------------|

 

| 2. | The undersigned is duly authorized as required pursuant to the Trust Agreement to execute and deliver this Certificate to the Trust. |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| 3. | This Certificate is delivered pursuant to Item 1123 of the Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB. |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| 4. | A review of the Trustee's activities during the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2008 and of its performance under the Trust Agreement has been made under my supervision. |
|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| 5. | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Trustee has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Trust Agreement in all material respects throughout such twelve-month period. |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

|   | IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate this 11th day of March 2009. |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        |
|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| By:    |  /s/ Janet P. O'Hara                                    |
| Name:  | Janet P. O’Hara                                                                                                                                                                                                                       |
| Title: | Assistant Vice President                                                                                                                                                                                                                    |
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:

                Historical Status of OTC Rulemakings

Historical Status of OTC Rulemakings Home
          Drugs
          Development & Approval Process | Drugs
          How Drugs are Developed and Approved
          Over-the-Counter OTC | Nonprescription Drugs
          Historical Status of OTC Rulemakings
          Rulemaking History for OTC Poison Ivy, Oak, and Sumac Drug ProductsHistorical Status of OTC Rulemakings Rulemaking History for OTC Poison Ivy, Oak, and Sumac Drug Products
  
  	
    Share
    Post
    Linkedin

    Email
    PrintOTC Poison Ivy, Oak, and Sumac Drug Product information can be found on the following pages:External AnalgesicSkin Protectant

                                                                                  Content current as of:
      01/23/2017Historical Status of OTC Rulemakings
 
 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
1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 21-0321

DON DANIELS, as conservator of t he Estate of SARAH DANIELS,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.
GALLATIN COUNTY, RICK BLACKWOOD , and ONE BEACON INSURANCE GROUP, LLC, d/b/a ATLANTIC SPE CIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY,
Defendants and Appellants.

________________________________ _______________________________ ___ On Appeal from the Montana Eighteenth Judical District Gallatin County Casue No. DV-18-17B

Honorable Judge Rienne H. McElyea

ORDER DISMISSING GALLATIN COUNTY AND RICK BLACKWOOD’S APPEAL

Upon stipulation of the partie s and for good cause showing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Galla tin County and Rick Blackwood’s

motion to dismiss their appeal a nd withdraw their opening brief is GRANTED.

DATED this ____, _______ 2021.

By:

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

December 3 2021

12/03/2021
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03

- 20

- 00023

- CV

L. A. and T. A., Appellant s

v.

Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, Appellee

FROM THE 146TH DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY NO. 298,086

- B, THE H ONORABLE JACK WELD O N JONES, JUDGE PRESI DING

O R D E R

PER CURIAM

Appellant s L. A. and T. A. filed their notice of appeal on January 7, 2020 . The

appellate record was complete January 17, 2020 , making appellant s ’ brief due February 6, 2020

.

On February 5, 2020 , counsel f or appellant s filed a motion for extension of time to file

appellant s ’ brief.

The rules of judicial administration accelerate the final disposition of appeals

from suits for termin ation of parental rights. See Tex. R. Jud. Admin. 6.2(a) (providing 180 da y s

for court’s final disposition). The accelerated schedule constrains this Court’s leeway in granting

extensions. In this instance, we will grant the motion and order Natalie N. Fowler to file

appellant s ’ brief no later than February 26, 2020 . If the b r ief is not filed by that date, counsel

may be required to show cause why she shou ld not be held in contempt of court.

It is ordered on February 11, 2 0 20

.

Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Baker and Triana
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

SOUTH BEND DIVISION

DAVID R. NEAL, )

)

Petitioner, )

) Cause No. 3:13-cv-63-PPS 

vs. )

)

SUPERINTENDENT, )

)

Respondent. )

OPINION AND ORDER

David R. Neal, a pro se prisoner, filed a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254

challenging a prison disciplinary proceeding. (DE 1.) On March 26, 2012, Neal was found

guilty of intimidation at Miami Correctional Facility (“MCF”) under Cause Number MCF 12-03-

059. (DE 7-1 at 1.) The sanctions imposed were disciplinary segregation, a loss of telephone

and commissary privileges, and a written reprimand. (Id.) 

The respondent moves to dismiss. (DE 6.) As the respondent points out, the disciplinary

proceeding did not lengthen the duration of Neal’s confinement, and so he cannot challenge it

under 28 U.S.C. § 2254.1 See Hadley v. Holmes, 341 F.3d 661, 664 (7th Cir. 2003) (prisoner can

challenge disciplinary proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 only when the punishment imposed

lengthens the duration of his confinement); Montgomery v. Anderson, 262 F.3d 641, 643 (7th

Cir. 2001) (only a disciplinary sanction that affects the fact or duration of custody can be

challenged under 28 U.S.C. § 2254). Instead, the sanctions imposed affected the severity rather

1

 The record reflects that Neal was originally found guilty on March 20, 2012, and among other sanctions he received

a credit class demotion. (DE 1 at 12.) The case was then reheard on March 26, 2012, and Neal was again found

guilty, but this time the sanctions imposed did not include a credit class demotion. (See DE 7-1 at 1.) At the time I

set briefing, I was unaware that the disciplinary case had been reheard, since Neal only mentioned the original

hearing and sanctions in his petition. (See DE 1 at 1, 12.)

case 3:13-cv-00063-PPS document 8 filed 07/12/13 page 1 of 2
than the duration of his custody, and “[m]ore restrictive custody must be challenged under

§ 1983, in the uncommon circumstance when it can be challenged at all.” Montgomery, 262

F.3d at 644. More than sixty days have passed since the respondent filed the motion to dismiss,

and Neal has not filed any response or objection to the motion. Accordingly, the petition will be

dismissed. 

For the reasons set forth above, the motion to dismiss (DE 7) is GRANTED, and the

petition (DE 1) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. 

SO ORDERED.

ENTERED: July 12, 2013.

s/ Philip P. Simon 

PHILIP P. SIMON, CHIEF JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

case 3:13-cv-00063-PPS document 8 filed 07/12/13 page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                       2,632,784
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,679,986
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,632,784
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      47,202
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,679,986
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,036,486
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,977,668
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                58,818
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         0
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .39
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .39


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 96 (Thursday, May 18, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 26721]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-12223]



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

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS


Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the South Carolina 
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 South Carolina meeting to the Commission will convene at 10:00 a.m. 
and adjourn at 1:00 p.m. on Friday, June 2, 1995, at the Adams Mark 
Inn, Meeting Room, 1200 Hampton Street (Downtown), Columbia, South 
Carolina. The purpose of the meeting is to release the report, 
Perceptions of Racial Tensions in South Carolina; discuss civil rights 
progress and/or problems in the State; and discuss future project 
plans.
    Persons desiring additional information, or planning a presentation 
to the Committee, should contact Bobby D. Doctor, Director of the 
Southern Regional Office, 404-730-2476 (TDD 404-730-2481). Hearing-
impaired persons who will attend the meeting and require the services 
of a sign language interpreter should contact the Regional Office at 
least five (5) working days before the scheduled date of the meeting.
    The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the 
rules and regulations of the Commission.

    Dated at Washington, DC, May 4, 1995.
Carol-Lee Hurley,
Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.
[FR Doc. 95-12223 Filed 5-17-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
Jose Abraham MEMBRENO-ORELLANA, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-9491.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 29, 2013.

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

MULTI MEDIA, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

CHATURBATE.TO,

Defendant.

Case No.17-cv-00301-JST 

ORDER CONTINUING CASE 

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

In light of the Court’s July 28, 2017 order denying Plaintiff’s motion for alternate service, 

the Case Management Conference currently scheduled for August 16, 2017 is CONTINUED to 

November 15, 2017 at 2:00 p.m. An updated Joint Case Management Statement is due November 

6, 2017 by 5:00 p.m. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 4, 2017

______________________________________

JON S. TIGAR

United States District Judge

Case 3:17-cv-00301-JST Document 19 Filed 08/04/17 Page 1 of 1
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-20-00423-CV

In re Javier Omar Elizondo, Sr.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM WILLIAMSON COUNTY

O R D E R

PER CURIAM

Relator Javier Omar Elizondo, Sr., has filed a petition for writ of mandamus and 

a motion for emergency stay. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.1, .10(a). We grant the motion and 

temporarily stay all proceedings in the trial court pending further order of this Court. See id.

R. 52.10(b). Further, the Court orders the real party in interest to file a response to the petition 

for writ of mandamus on or before September 15, 2020.

It is ordered on August 25, 2020.

Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Baker and Kelly
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                         489,464
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,230,465
<ALLOWANCES>                                   239,448
<INVENTORY>                                  6,042,657
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            11,120,171
<PP&E>                                       6,112,855
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,872,256
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              16,112,702
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        7,388,055
<BONDS>                                      1,196,438
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  7,076,641
<COMMON>                                       428,408
<OTHER-SE>                                  (2,206,676)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                16,112,702
<SALES>                                      7,181,324
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             7,181,324
<CGS>                                        4,057,005
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               10,681,225
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                (4,922)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             378,406
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (3,873,385)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (3,873,385)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (4,227,507)<F1>
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .10
<FN>
<F1>Net loss applicable to common stock.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>