alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Tropical Crop and Commodity Protection Research: Hilo, HI
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Scientist Pages
                        Acebes-Doria, Angelita
                                    Cha, Dong
                                    Follett, Peter
                                    Johnson, Melissa
                                    Liang, Peishih
                                    Manoukis, Nicholas
                                    Sun, Xiuxiu
                                    Wall, MarisaSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Pacific West Area Hilo, Hawaii Daniel K. Inouye U.S. Pacific Basin Agricultural Research Center Tropical Crop and Commodity Protection Research





- ARS News & Events
- AgResearch Magazine
- Image Gallery
- News

Newsheadline bar Test news item   ARS News Articles  USDA's Agricultural Research Service Honors Scientists of the YearApr 05, 2022New Fruit Fly Lure Developed from Pest?s Favorite ScentApr 29, 2015


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

SOUTH BEND DIVISION

TOMMY WEBSTER, )

)

Plaintiff, )

) CAUSE NO. 3:15-CV-554-PPS-CAN 

vs. )

)

U.S. ATTORNEY, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

OPINION AND ORDER

Tommy Webster, a pro se prisoner, filed a motion asking me to reopen this case

because Judge Miller might modify an order I relied on when I dismissed this case. 

Then again, he might not. The possibility that order could be modified is not a basis for

reopening this case. Moreover, even if Judge Miller modifies his order, there would be

no basis for reopening this case. 

In the amended complaint, Webster sought compensation for a number of items

seized by the South Bend Police Department from his home pursuant to a warrant

issued by the St. Joseph Superior Court in March 2011. In connection with events

related to the seizure of the property at issue here, Webster was charged and convicted

of federal crimes. See United States v. Webster, 3:11-CR-67 (N.D. Ind. filed May 12, 2011). 

In that criminal proceeding, Webster also litigated his claims about these items. Motion

to Reopen & For Review & Mandamus Regarding Records Inaccuracies Based Property

Divestiture & for Other Necessary and Warranted Relief, United States v. Webster, 3:11-

CR-67 (N.D. Ind. Nov. 2, 2015), ECF No. 126. Two of the defendants to this action are
federal officials who Judge Miller, presiding over the criminal proceeding, ruled never

had possession of the seized property and, as such, I dismissed them from this case. 

[DE 10.] Specifically, Judge Miller ruled that “the federal government doesn’t have

possession of the items Mr. Webster seeks.” Order, United States v. Webster, 3:11-CR-67

(N.D. Ind. Nov. 30, 2015), ECF No. 130. 

Since then, the United States Attorney has conceded to having three items that

were admitted during Webster’s criminal trial and that can be returned if Judge Miller

modifies his order. So if Judge Miller agrees, Webster will get those three items back. If

Judge Miller’s original order had said exactly what the anticipated modified order is

expected to say, this case would have still been dismissed. Thus, there is no reason to

reopen this case. Webster will either win or lose based on the proceedings in his

criminal case. As I explained in my order dismissing this case, Webster can challenge

that ruling in his criminal case, but he cannot re-litigate it in this one. [DE 10 at 2-3.]

Finally, Webster also filed a motion indicating that he has agreed to donate a

portion of his recovery to charity. [DE 29.] If Webster wants to give something to

charity, he can do so. No motion is necessary. 

For these reasons, Webster’s motions [DE 28 and 29] are DENIED.

SO ORDERED.

ENTERED: January 27, 2017

s/ Philip P. Simon

PHILIP P. SIMON, CHIEF JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2
# C_2008317EN.01000501.xml

| 12.12.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 317/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 317/5

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5317 — IBM/ILOG)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2008/C 317/04)

On 10 November 2008, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M5317. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu). |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M5317. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).

---
#### Raymond Billy SIMS, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Edward R. MURRAY, Respondent—Appellee.

No. 05-7667.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 27, 2006.

Decided: May 3, 2006.

Raymond Billy Sims, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Drummond Bagwell, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Raymond Billy Sims seeks to appeal from the district court’s order denying his supplemental motion to amend his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000); *see Reid v. Angelone,*369 F.3d 363, 370 (4th Cir.2004) (applying the certificate of appealability requirement to appellate review of the denial of a Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) motion). 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 the district court’s assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. *See Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Sims has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appeala-bility and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequátely presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED*
# C_2008129EN.01000101.xml

| 27.5.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 129/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.5.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 129/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4992 — ArcelorMittal/Galvex)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2008/C 129/01)

On 10 March 2008, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M4992. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu). |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M4992. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).

---
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Plant Science Research: St. Paul, MN
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




Welcome to the Plant Science Research Unit
 Alfalfa embryos During the process of regenerating in tissue culture
 Biomass Alfalfa Nonlodging alfalfa variety developed by ARS for bioenergy and value-added coproducts
 Alfalfa protein concentrate in fish feed Alfalfa leaf protein is a viable substitute for fish meal in aquaculture diets
 Bacterial stem blight An emerging disease problem that is also associated with frost damage of alfalfa
 Hand crossing alfalfa flowers for developing disease resistant germplasm
 Aphanomyces infection Hypersensitive response of a resistant alfalfa plant to infection


Mission


People Alexander, Jonathan Bergquist, Galen Blecha, Sarah Brendler, Shelby Curtin, Shaun Dornbusch, Melinda
                                            *- Mindy* Gamble, Joshua Heuschele, Deborah
                                            *- Jo* Huerd, Sheri Jeo, Richard
                                            *- Ted* Larson, Joshua McFarlane, John McNamara, Amy
                                            *- Bownds* Read, Andrew
                                            *- Andy* Samac, Deborah
                                            *- Debby* Schlatter, Daniel Weihs, Brandon Xu, Zhanyou


Midwest Area   debby.samac@usda.gov


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
Exhibit 32.2

DIABETIC TREATMENT CENTERS OF AMERICA, INC.

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350

The undersigned, Steven Weldon, in his capacities as Chief Financial Officer and Director, of Diabetic Treatment Centers of America,
Inc. do each hereby certify that the Form 10-KSB of Diabetic Treatment Centers of America, Inc. for the year ended March 31, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15
U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that the information contained in such Form 10-KSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Diabetic Treatment Centers of America, Inc.

This certification is given by the undersigned solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. 1350 and is subject to the knowledge standard contained therein.

Executed this 16th day of July, 2007.



/s/ Steven WeldonSteven WeldonChief Financial Officer and Director
The State of TexasAppellee/s

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

July 22, 2015

No. 04-15-00240-CR

Mario Jesus RAMIREZ,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 379th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2011CR10323

Honorable Ron Rangel, Judge Presiding

ORDER

Court reporter Amy Hinds Alvarado has filed a notification of late reporter’s record, 

requesting additional time in which to complete the record. We GRANT her request and ORDER 

her to file the reporter’s record on or before July 24, 2015.

_________________________________

Karen Angelini, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 22nd day of July, 2015.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2239 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2239

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to reduce the recognition 
        period for built-in gains for subchapter S corporations.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 10, 2005

  Mr. Ramstad (for himself, Mr. Herger, Mr. Sam Johnson of Texas, Mr. 
  English of Pennsylvania, Mr. Foley, and Mr. Cantor) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to reduce the recognition 
        period for built-in gains for subchapter S corporations.

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

SECTION 1. REDUCED RECOGNITION PERIOD FOR BUILT-IN GAINS.

    (a) In General.--Paragraph (7) of section 1374(d) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to definitions and special rules) is 
amended to read as follows:
            ``(7) Recognition period.--The term `recognition period' 
        means the 7-year period beginning with the 1st day of the 1st 
        taxable year for which the corporation was an S corporation. 
        For purposes of applying this section to any amount includible 
        in income by reason of distributions to shareholders pursuant 
        to section 593(e), the preceding sentence shall be applied 
        without regard to the duration of the recognition period in 
        effect on the date of such distribution.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--
            (1) General rule.--The amendment made by this section shall 
        apply to any recognition period in effect on or after the date 
        of the enactment of this Act.
            (2) Special application to existing periods exceeding 7 
        years.--Any recognition period in effect on the date of the 
        enactment of this Act, the length of which is greater than 7 
        years, shall end on such date.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 32


CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (the “Report”) of Cambridge Holdings, Ltd. (the “Company”) for the quarter ended September 30, 2011, each of the undersigned Gregory Pusey and Jeffrey G. McGonegal, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of the undersigned’s knowledge and belief:




(1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




(2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.






Dated: November 17, 2011


/s/ Gregory Pusey

Gregory Pusey, President and Chief Executive Officer






Dated: November 17, 2011


/s/ Jeffrey G. McGonegal

Jeffrey G. McGonegal, Senior Vice President-Finance and Chief Financial Officer





* * * * *








A signed original of the written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### BROOKS BROS., Respondents, v. TIFFANY, Appellant, et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

November 22, 1907.)

Action by Brooks Bros, against Bur-, nett Y. Tiffany, impleaded. A Tulin, for appellant. L. M. Berkeley, for' respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Judgment affirmed, with costs, with leave to defendant to amend on payment of costs in this court and in the court below. Order filed.

INGRAHAM, J., dissents.
EXHIBIT 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      In connection with the Quarterly Report of Pharmos Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Haim
Aviv, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C ss.
1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 ss. of the Sarbanes -Oxley Act of 2002, that:

      1)    The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13 (a) or
            15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      2)    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Company.


                                            /s/ Haim Aviv
                                            -----------------------------
                                            Haim Aviv, Chief Executive Officer
                                            July 30, 2004


                                       26
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.



# United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2009-3090 CARL E. ROSS,

Petitioner, v. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT, Respondent. Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection Board in

DC0831080735-I-1. ON MOTION 

### ORDER Carl E. Ross moves without opposition to voluntarily dismiss petition for review no. 2009-3090 and requests that the court refund the filing fee. The court is required to deposit filing fees with the Treasury Department immediately upon receipt and, unfortunately, cannot refund any fee once it has been deposited. See Practice Note, Fed. Cir. R. 52. Upon consideration thereof, IT IS ORDERED THAT: (1) The motion to voluntarily dismiss the petition is granted.

### (2) Each side shall bear its own costs.FOR THE COURT



### MAR 10 2009 /s/ 

### Jan Horbaly Date

cc: 

### Carl E. Ross Kenneth S. Kessler, Esq. s17 ISSUED AS A MANDATE: Jan Horbaly Clerk


### MAR 10 2009 FILED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUR MAR 10 2009
CLERK



### 2009-3090 2
Salvador M. RENTERIA, petitioner, v. Derral G. ADAMS, Warden.

No. 13-6034.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 4, 2013.

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

Justice BREYER took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
#### NUSBAUMER, Respondent, v. JACKSON, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

February 3, 1899.)

Action by John Nusbaumer against Samuel Jackson, impleaded, etc.

No opinion. Order affirm-with costs and disbursements.