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

ها هي هشاشة العظام؟

هشاشة العظام هو مرض يتسبب يف ضعف شديد يف العظام 

ويجعلها سهلة الكرس.

من هم املعرضون للخطر؟

ميكن ألي شخص أن يصاب بهشاشة العظام، لكن النساء أكرث 

عرضة لإلصابة به من الرجال. قد تزداد احتاملية إصابتك به 

إذا كنت:

• بعمر أكرب من 50 عاًما

• مدخنة

• انخفاض وزن الجسم

لديك أفراد من العائلة مصابني بهشاشة العظام أو سهولة 

كرس العظام

•

• ال تتمرين بشكل كايف

• تتناولني املرشوبات الكحولية )أكرث من 3 مرشوبات يف اليوم(

تتناولني بعض األدوية لفرتة طويلة مثل أدوية التشنجات أو 

املنشطات

•

كيف أعلم أنني أعاين من هشاشة 

العظام؟

هناك اختبارات تستخدم لقياس كثافة العظام، إما األشعة 

السينية أو املوجات الصوتية. هذه االختبارات غري مؤملة. 

استرشي طبيبك إذا كان يجب عليك إجراء هذه االختبارات.

اختبارات األشعة السينية، وتسمى فحوصات امتصاص األشعة 

السينية مزدوجة الطاقة )AXD)، تفحص العمود الفقري أو 

الورك أو الرسغ. تستخدم فحوصات امتصاص األشعة السينية 

مزدوجة الطاقة )DXA )عددا قليالً جدا من موجات األشعة 

السينية.

•

اختبارات املوجات الصوتية األحدث، تسمى املوجات فوق 

الصوتية، الختبار كعب قدمك.

•

كيف يتم عالجه؟

ال توجد طريقة لعالج هشاشة العظام. هناك أشياء ميكنك 

القيام بها إلبطائه. تحديث إىل طبيبك لوضع خطة للحفاظ 

عىل صحة عظامك.

مكتب صحة املرأة يف إدارة الغذاء والدواء األمريكية 

womens/gov.fda.www
 تم إعداد تقرير الحقائق هذا من قبل مكتب صحة املرأة التابع إلدارة الغذاء والدواء األمريكية.

للحصول عىل مصادر ملوضوعات صحة املرأة األخرى، انتقيل إىل

womens/gov.fda.www

2021

أدوية عالجية

هناك أدوية عالجية ميكنك تناولها. تأيت هذه األدوية عىل 

شكل حبوب أو لصقة أو حقنة. تحديث إىل طبيبك أو ممرضتك 

أو الصيديل قبل أن تتوقفي عن تناول الدواء.

البايفوسفونيتات وهي أنواع شائعة من األدوية تعطى إلبطاء 

فقدان العظام. قد يعرض عليك طبيبك أدوية أخرى .

تحديث إىل طبيبك حول املدة التي يجب أن تتناولني فيها 

هذه األدوية.

•

أخربي طبيبك إذا بدأت تعانني من آثار جانبية، مثل أمل 

جديد يف الورك أو الفخذ. بعض األشخاص الذين يتناولون 

هذه األدوية أصيبوا بكرس يف عظام الفخذ.

•

• بعض هذه األدوية قد تسبب تهيج يف حلقك.

• قد تحدث أيضا مشكالت شديدة يف عظام الفك.

املكمالت الغذائية

املكمالت الغذائية هي منتجات يضيفها األشخاص إىل وجباتهم 

الغذائية. تشمل الفيتامينات واملساحيق وألواح الطاقة 

واألعشاب.

تحديث إىل طبيبك قبل تناول أي مكمالت غذائية. قد تؤثر 

هذه عىل أدويتك األخرى وتجعلك تشعرين أنك لست بخري.

تغيري منط الحياة

هناك تغيريات يف منط الحياة ميكنك إجراؤها لتقليل خطر 

اإلصابة بهشاشة العظام.

حافظي عىل نشاطك البدين. ماريس متارين تحت تأثري وزنك، 

مثل امليش.

•

• أقلعي عن التدخني.

• حدي من تناولك للمرشوبات الكحولية.

احصيل عىل ما يكفي من الكالسيوم وفيتامني )د( يف 

نظامك الغذايئ. قد يقرتح طبيبك تناول أقراص الكالسيوم 

والفيتامينات.

•

هشاشة العظام

هشاشة العظام )ARABIC)
#### In the Matter of Tracey Anne Corp., Doing Business as Barley Cove, Petitioner, v New York State Liquor Authority, Respondent.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of respondent, dated January 6, 1984, which, after a hearing, found petitioner guilty of certain charges, revoked its liquor license and imposed a $1,000 bond claim.

Determination confirmed and proceeding dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements.

There was sufficient evidence to support the determination that (1) petitioner aided or abetted the sale of alcohol at an unlicensed premises, in violation of Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 100 (1) and 9 NYCRR 53.1 (h), and (2) the conduct of petitioner leading to the issuance of a summons for operating an unlicensed bottle club was improper *(300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights,*45 NY2d 176; 9 NYCRR 53.1 [n]).

Furthermore, we do not find the penalty shockingly disproportionate to the offense *(Matter of Pell v Board of Educ.,*34 NY2d 222). Lazer, J. P., Gibbons, O’Connor and Brown, JJ., concur.
Order filed, September 16, 2013

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 13

- 00773

- CR

____________ EXPARTE STEPHEN KYLE HELMCAMP , Appellant

On Appeal from the County Court Colorado County, Texas Trial Court C ause No. 21,179

- A



### ORDER
The reporter’s record in this case was due February 21, 2013

. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.1. The court has not received a request to extend time for filing the record. The record has not been filed with the court. Because the repo rter’s record has not been filed timely, we issue the following order.

We order Bonnie Minatra , the official court reporter, to file the record in this appeal within 10 days of the date of this order

. PER CURIAM
**EXHIBIT 15**

**LETTER FROM INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM REGARDING UNAUDITED INTERIM FINANCIAL INFORMATION**

**LETTER IN LIEU OFCONSENT FOR REVIEW REPORT**

April 24, 2007 

Boeing Capital Corporation

500 Naches Avenue SW, 3rd Floor 

Renton, Washington 

We have performed a review, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), of the unaudited interim financial information of Boeing Capital Corporation and subsidiaries for the periodsended March 31, 2007 and 2006, as indicated in our report dated April 24, 2007; because we did not perform an audit, we expressed no opinion on that information. 

We are aware that our report referred to above, which is included in your Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2007, is incorporated by reference in Registration StatementNos. 333-55846 and 333-83208 on Form S-3. 

We also are aware that the aforementioned report, pursuant to Rule 436(c) under the Securities Act of1933, is not considered a part of the Registration Statement prepared or certified by an accountant or a report prepared or certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act. 

/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP 

Seattle, Washington 

 

19
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

HAMMOND DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) No. 2:15 CR 64

)

CLARENCE DARNELL BLANCHARD )

O R D E R

Pursuant to the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate

Judge, to which objections have been waived, the Magistrate Judge’s findings and

recommendations are now ADOPTED. Defendant is ADJUDGED to have committed

the violations of supervised release described in the Amended Summary Report of

Violations. Defendant is sentenced to 9 months incarceration, with no supervision to

follow, with credit for time served on the pending petition for revocation of supervised

release.

SO ORDERED.

Date: October 7, 2020

s/ James T. Moody

JUDGE JAMES T. MOODY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

USDC IN/ND case 2:15-cr-00064-JTM-JEM document 96 filed 10/07/20 page 1 of 1
Eleanor McCULLEN, et al., petitioners, v. Martha COAKLEY, Attorney General of Massachusetts, et al.

No. 12-1168.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 24, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit granted.
SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION

      I, Robert E. Fitzgerald, Chief Executive Officer of YDI Wireless, Inc.,
certify that:

      1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of YDI Wireless,
Inc.;

      2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

      3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

      4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining 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 such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

            b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

            c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most
recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and

      5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

            a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and

            b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control
over financial reporting.


Date: May 14, 2004                              /s/ Robert E. Fitzgerald
                                                --------------------------------
                                                Robert E. Fitzgerald
                                                Chief Executive Officer
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 105 (Thursday, June 1, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 28602]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-13322]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[FE Docket No. 95-26-NG]


Cibola Canada Energy Marketing Co.; Order Granting Blanket 
Authorization To Import and Export Natural Gas From and to Canada

AGENCY: Office of Fossil Energy, DOE.

ACTION: Notice of order.

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

SUMMARY: The Office of Fossil Energy of the Department of Energy gives 
notice that it has issued an order granting Cibola Canada Energy 
Marketing Company (Cibola) authorization to import from and to export 
to Canada a combined total of up to 50 Bcf of natural gas. The term of 
the authorization is for a period of two years, beginning on the date 
of first import or export delivery.
    Cibola's order is available for inspection and copying in the 
Office of Fuels Programs Docket Room, 3F-056, Forrestal Building, 1000 
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-9478. The 
docket room is open between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    Issued in Washington, D.C., May 8, 1995.
Clifford P. Tomaszewski,
Director, Office of Natural Gas, Office of Fuels Programs, Office of 
Fossil Energy.
[FR Doc. 95-13322 Filed 5-31-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20-1217

GARY L. SWANSON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

CAROLINA FRESH WATER, LLC; SPEAK TERESERVICES LLC; SID SMITH,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at 

Wilmington. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (7:19-cv-00244-FL)

Submitted: June 16, 2020 Decided: June 18, 2020

Before MOTZ and KING, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gary L. Swanson, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Gary L. Swanson appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his civil action under 

28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2018) and denying his motion to reopen the case. The district 

court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2018). 

The magistrate judge recommended dismissing the action as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and advised Swanson that failure to file timely, specific objections to 

this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the 

recommendation.

The timely filing of specific objections to a magistrate judge’s recommendation is 

necessary to preserve appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when the 

parties have been warned of the consequences of noncompliance. Martin v. Duffy, 858 

F.3d 239, 245 (4th Cir. 2017); Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 846-47 (4th Cir. 1985); see 

also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 154-55 (1985). Swanson has waived appellate review 

by failing to file objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendation after receiving 

proper notice. Moreover, we discern no abuse of discretion in the district court’s order 

denying Swanson’s motion to reopen the case. See Robinson v. Wix Filtration Corp., 599 

F.3d 403, 407 (4th Cir. 2010) (articulating standard of review for postjudgment motions 

under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e)). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. 

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

AFFIRMED
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1706

To direct the Secretary of Energy to conduct a program in partnership 

with the private sector to accelerate efforts of domestic automobile manufacturers to manufacture commercially available competitive hybrid vehicle technologies in the United States. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 19, 2005

Mr. SHADEGG introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Science, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in 

each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL

To direct the Secretary of Energy to conduct a program 

in partnership with the private sector to accelerate efforts of domestic automobile manufacturers to manufacture commercially available competitive hybrid vehicle 

technologies in the United States.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. HYBRID VEHICLE TECHNOLOGIES. 

4 As soon as practicable after the date of enactment 

5 of this Act, the Secretary of Energy, in partnership with 

6 the private sector, shall implement a program to address 
2

•HR 1706 IH 

1 the ability of domestic automobile manufacturers to manu2 facture commercially available competitive hybrid vehicle 

3 technologies in the United States. The objective of the pro4 gram shall be to accelerate efforts directed toward the im5 provement of batteries and other rechargeable energy stor6 age systems, power electronics, hybrid systems integra7 tion, and other technologies for use in hybrid vehicles.

Æ
<PAGE>



                                                                    Exhibit 99.2


                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 on Form 10-Q for the period ended
August 31, 2002 of ACR Group, Inc. (the "Company") as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Anthony R.
Maresca, Chief Financial Officer, certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.

                                                   /s/ Anthony R. Maresca
                                                   -----------------------
                                                   Anthony R. Maresca
                                                   Chief Financial Officer
                                                   October 15, 2002
#### Enak Realty Corp., Respondent, v City of New York, Appellant.

— In an action to recover damages for breach of a lease, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Monteleone, J.), dated May 17, 1983, which denied its motion for summary judgment.

Order modified, on the law, by granting defendant’s motion to the extent of striking the plaintiff’s demands for damages resulting from foreclosure, and for rent subsequent to the foreclosure sale. As so modified, order affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

We modify Special Term’s order to the extent of striking plaintiff’s demands for damages resulting from the foreclosure inasmuch as such damages were not a foreseeable result of the breach of the lease *(see, Charles E. S. McLeod, Inc. v Hamilton Moving & Stor.,*89 AD2d 863; Restatement, Contracts 2d, § 351 [2]), and striking plaintiff’s claim for rent subsequent to the foreclosure sale inasmuch as once the property was sold, plaintiff had no claim to rents due subsequent to the sale *(see,*RPAPL 1353; *Kane Assoc. v Blumenson,*30 AD2d 127, *affd*23 NY2d 942). O’Connor, J. P., Rubin, Lawrence and Eiber, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 99 (Tuesday, May 23, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27271-27272]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-12719]



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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Export Administration


Regulations and Procedures Technical Advisory Committee; Notice 
of Meeting Change

    Federal Register citation of previous announcement: p. 21792, May 
3, 1995.
    Previously announced time of meeting: 9:00 a.m., May 23, 1995. New 
time of meeting: 9:00 a.m., June 15, 1995, Room 3884.

    [[Page 27272]] Dated: May 19, 1995.
Lee Ann Carpenter,
Director, Technical Advisory Committee Unit.
[FR Doc. 95-12719 Filed 5-19-95; 12:18 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-DT-M
|   | Re:  | Securities      and Exchange Commission |
|--------|-----------|-----------------------------------------|
|   |      | Form      10-KSB (Amended)              |
|   |      | Consent      of IndependentEngineer     |

|   | Very      truly yours,          |                                 |
|--------|---------------------------------|--------------------------------------|
|   |                            |                                 |
|   | HUDDLESTON      & CO., INC. |                                 |
|   |                            |                                 |   |
|   | By:                             | /s/ GREGORY      S. FLOYD, P.E. |   |
|   | Name:                 | Gregory      S. Floyd, P.E.          |   |
|   | Title:                     | Vice President                       |   |
|   |                            |                                 |   |
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

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

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

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

WILLIE EDWARDS,

 Petitioner - Appellant,

 v.

BEN CURRY, Warden; Board of Parole

Hearings; ARNOLD

SCHWARZENEGGER, Governor,

 Respondents - Appellees.

No. 09-16589

D.C. No. 4:08-cv-01923-CAW

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

Claudia A. Wilken, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 17, 2012** 

Before: LEAVY, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges. 

California state prisoner Willie Edwards appeals from the district court’s

judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction

under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm. 

FILED

JAN 19 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 09-16589

Edwards contends that the Board of Prison Hearings’s 2005 decision finding

him unsuitable for parole is not supported by some evidence and was otherwise

improper. The only right at issue in the parole context is procedural, and the only

proper inquiry is what process the inmate received, not whether the state court

decided the case correctly. See Swarthout v. Cooke, 131 S. Ct. 859, 862-63 (2011)

(per curiam). Because Edwards raises no procedural challenges, we affirm. 

Edwards’s motion to set oral argument and/or for decision is denied as moot. 

AFFIRMED.
Willie James BATES, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-9959.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 28, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
#### C. R. JAMES, TO USE v. GEO. NOAKER, ET AL.

error to the court oe common pleas oe union county.

Argued May 15, 1889

Decided May 27, 1889.

Before Paxson, C. J., Green, Clark, Williams and McCollum, JJ.

No. 72 July Term 1889, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 38 March Term 1886, C. P.

On February 5,1886, a writ of scire facias sur mortgage was issued by C. R. James, to use of Ann W. James, against George Noaker and Catharine Noaker. On March 20, 1886, the defendants filed an affidavit of defence and afterward a supplemental affidavit of defence, the two setting out in many pages a complicated series of facts and accounts claimed to affect their liability on said mortgage. The plaintiff entered a rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defence, which rule after argument was discharged, the court, Bucher, P. J., filing no opinion. Thereupon the plaintiff took this writ, assigning as error the order discharging the rule for judgment.

*Mr. J. Merrill Linn,*for the plaintiff in error.

*Mr. Samuel H. Orwig,*for the defendant in error.

Per Curiam :

We think the affidavit of defence was sufficient to carry the ease to the jury. As it may come up again we refrain from any discussion of it at present.

Order affirmed.