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
 Animal Disease Research: Pullman, WA
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Pacific West Area Pullman, Washington Animal Disease Research





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

Newsheadline bar ADRU AWARDS  UPCOMING MEETING PRESENTATIONS   ARS News Articles  USDA's Agricultural Research Service Honors Scientists of the YearApr 24, 2024USDA's Agricultural Research Service Announces Scientist of the Year and Other AwardsJun 11, 2013ARS Honors New Science Hall of Fame InducteesDec 05, 2012Partnership Focuses on Developing East Coast Fever VaccineOct 04, 2011Tick Responsible for Equine Piroplasmosis Outbreak IdentifiedOct 03, 2011Viral Life Cycle of Malignant Catarrhal Fever ExplainedApr 05, 2010Drug Eliminates Parasite that Causes Babesiosis in HorsesSep 28, 2009Research Closes in on Goat ScrapieApr 03, 2009Genetic Underpinnings of Sheep Traits May Yield Clues to Greater
ProductivityAug 15, 2008Researchers Exploit Cattle Pathogen's Genomic SecretsFeb 08, 2007Johanns Announces Top USDA-ARS Scientists for 2005Feb 07, 2006


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
Exhibit 32.1

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 Annual Report of MarkWest Energy Partners, L.P. (the "Partnership"), on Form 10-K for
the period ending December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Frank M. Semple, Chief Executive Officer of the General Partner
of the Partnership, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|                    |  |     |  |                                                                                                                 
|------------------- |  | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: March 1, 2010 |  | By: |  | /s/FRANK M. SEMPLE Frank M. Semple Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)

This
certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document. This
certification shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"), or otherwise subject to liability under that
section. This certification shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act except to the extent this
Exhibit 32.1 is expressly and specifically incorporated by reference in any such filing.

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Partnership and will be retained by the Partnership and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---



QuickLinks
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1886 

To suspend temporarily the duty on cyclopropane-1,1-dicarboxylic acid, 

dimethyl ester. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 27, 2005 

Mr. CLEAVER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on cyclopropane-1,1- 

dicarboxylic acid, dimethyl ester. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CYCLOPROPANE-1,1-DICARBOXYLIC ACID, DI4 METHYL ESTER. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

6 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

7 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

8 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.05.80 Cyclopropane-1,1- 

dicarboxylic acid, dimethyl 

ester (CAS No. 6914–71–2) 

(provided for in subheading 

2917.20.00) ......................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2008 ’’. 
2 

•HR 1886 IH 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ
#### Robert Bendet, Respondent, v Irene Woods, Appellant, et al., Defendants.

— In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, defendant Woods appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Fierro, J.), dated March 5, 1984, as granted plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment against her on the issue of liability only.

Order affirmed, insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The uncontroverted testimony of the codefendant passenger Schiavone, given at an examination before trial, that defendant Woods drove a motor vehicle at a high rate of speed into the rear of plaintiff’s vehicle, without applying the brakes or sounding the horn, clearly establishes the liability of defendant Woods and the plaintiff’s freedom from negligence. Moreover, Woods pleaded guilty to driving while intoxicated as a result of this very accident. The affirmation of defendant Woods’ attorney in opposition to the motion for partial summary judgment failed to raise any triable issue of fact. Titone, J. P., Thompson, O’Connor and Rubin, JJ., concur.
## In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06

- 21

- 00089

- CR

LACEY LYNNE STEDDUM , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 188th District Court

Gregg County, Texas

Trial Court No. 51046

- A

Befo re Morriss, C.J., Burgess and Stevens, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Morriss2 

### ME MORANDUM OPINION

Lacey Lynne Steddum was sentenc ed to t hirteen years’ imprisonment for the offense of

aggravated assault with a deadly weapon

. In connection with h er open plea of guilty, Steddum

signed the following waiver of her rights:

Comes now the Defendant, joined by his or her couns el, and in writing and in

open court, waives the rights and gives up time provided in the Texas Rules of

Appellate Procedure to fi le a motion for new trial, motion for arrest of judgment

or notice of appeal.

S teddum clearly waived h er right of appeal, which deprives this Court of jurisdiction over

this attempted appeal, and the trial court’s certification confirms Steddum ’ s waiver o f h er right s

.

On October 7 , 20 21 , we informed Steddum of the apparent defect in our jurisdict ion over

this appeal and afforded h er an opportunity to respond and, if possible, cure such defect. On

October 18 , 2021, appointed counsel for Steddum responded to this Court’s October 7 letter by

acknowledg ing that Steddum had waived her right o f appeal.

Because Steddum has no right of appeal due to h er explicit, written waiver of that right

,

and because the trial court’s certification corre ctly indicates th at she is without a right of appeal,

we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

Josh R. Morriss, III

Chief Justice

Date Submitted: October 19, 2021

Date Decided: October 20, 2021

Do Not Publi sh
Ernest Anthony MONTOYA, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-9663.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2013.

*2373Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA 

ANDREW U. D. STRAW, ) 

 Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) Case No.: 3:16-CV-342 

)

CITY OF SOUTH BEND, AND ) 

PETE BUTTIGIEG, MAYOR ) 

OF SOUTH BEND, ) 

Defendants. ) 

 

 

 NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT

Pursuant to this Court’s Order dated January 9, 2017, Defendants’ answer or 

other pleading responsive to Mr. Straw’s amended complaint is due for filing on 

January 26, 2017 [DE 84]. 

The parties now inform the court that they have reached settlement and 

resolution of this case as well as a related case pending in the Superior Court of St. 

Joseph County, Indiana. Accordingly, Defendants will not be submitting an answer 

or other responsive pleading to Plaintiff’s amended complaint. The parties hope to 

conclude execution of all documents related to their settlement within 30 days.

It is requested that further proceedings in this case be stayed without prejudice 

to plaintiff and/or defendants to permit the parties to prepare and execute all 

appropriate settlement documents including a dismissal of this cause of action. 

USDC IN/ND case 3:16-cv-00342-JD-MGG document 86 filed 01/26/17 page 1 of 2
2

s/Aladean M. DeRose

Aladean M. DeRose Atty. No. 4495-71

City Attorney

1200 County-City Building

227 W. Jefferson Blvd.

South Bend et al, Indiana 46601

574-235-9241

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on January 26, 2017, I electronically filed the foregoing 

Notice of Settlement with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF Filing System 

which sent notification of such filing to Andrew U.D. Straw, pro se, whose official 

mailing address is 1900 E. Golf Road, Suite 950 A, Schaumburg, IL 60173. 

s/Aladean M. DeRose

 Aladean M. DeRose

USDC IN/ND case 3:16-cv-00342-JD-MGG document 86 filed 01/26/17 page 2 of 2
#### CRAMSEY, Appellant, v. STERLING, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

October 25, 1907.)

Action by Edward Cramsey against Charles A. Sterling. L. E. Warren, for appellant. R. F. Greacen, for respondent.

No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Order filed.
# L_2008338EN.01003101.xml

| 17.12.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 338/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 338/31

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1264/2008

of 16 December 2008

fixing the standard fee per farm return from the 2009 accounting year of the farm accountancy data network

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation No 79/65/EEC of 15 June 1965 setting up a network for the collection of accountancy data on the incomes and business operation of agricultural holdings in the European Economic Community (1),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1915/83 of 13 July 1983 on certain detailed implementing rules concerning the keeping of accounts for the purpose of determining the incomes of agricultural holdings (2), and in particular Article 5(3) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Article 5(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 1915/83 provides that a standard fee shall be paid by the Commission to the Member States for each duly completed farm return and forwarded to it within the period prescribed in Article 3 of that Regulation. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Article 5(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 1915/83 provides that a standard fee shall be paid by the Commission to the Member States for each duly completed farm return and forwarded to it within the period prescribed in Article 3 of that Regulation.

| (2) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 1453/2007 (3) fixed the amount of the standard fee for the 2008 accounting year at EUR 151 per farm return. The trend in costs and its effects on the cost of completing the farm return justify a revision of the fee. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1453/2007 (3) fixed the amount of the standard fee for the 2008 accounting year at EUR 151 per farm return. The trend in costs and its effects on the cost of completing the farm return justify a revision of the fee.

| (3) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Community Committee for the Farm Accountancy Data Network, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Community Committee for the Farm Accountancy Data Network,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The standard fee provided for in Article 5(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 1915/83 shall be fixed at EUR 155.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

It shall apply from the 2009 accounting year.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 16 December 2008.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ 109, 23.6.1965, p. 1859/65.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 190, 14.7.1983, p. 25.

2

(3)  
  OJ L 325, 11.12.2007, p. 68.

3

---
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
 U.S. Dairy Forage Research Center: Madison, WI
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                                    Software
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Archives
                        Presentations
                                    World Dairy Expo
                                    Newsletters and Research Summaries
                    Resources
                        General Resources
                                    Books
                                    Teacher's Resources
                                    New Research Dairy Updates
                                    Integrated Research at USDFRCSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us






Archivesheadline bar Presentations
               World Dairy Expo
               Newsletters and Research Summaries


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
#### Carolyn Solomon, an Infant, by Her Father and Natural Guardian, Arthur Solomon, et al., Respondents, v City of New York, Appellant.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., defendant the City of New York appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Morton, J.), entered November 17,1983, which, upon a jury verdict, awarded plaintiff Carolyn Solomon the principal sum of $135,000 and plaintiff Arthur Solomon the principal sum of $7,500.

Judgment reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and complaint dismissed.

On June 22,1980, the infant plaintiff, Carolyn Solomon, was injured when she was struck by a bicyclist on the promenade of Manhattan Beach Park in Brooklyn, New York. Despite (1) the existence of posted signs informing the public of a park regulation prohibiting bicycle riding within the park and (2) the assignment of several policemen and park employees to patrol the promenade and enforce the prohibition, plaintiffs alleged in their complaint, that the defendant City of New York, *inter alia,*had failed to “exercise ordinary reasonable care under the circumstances to prevent bicycle riding on the Manhattan Beach Promenade Recreation Area”.

In submitting the issue of defendant’s liability to the jury as a question of fact, the court charged the jury as follows:

> “The City of New York had the duty to provide general supervision to protect persons such as the plaintiff from foreseeable dangers while using its park facility. Thus, the City of New York was under a duty to exercise reasonable care and reasonable supervision. * * *

> “Thus, it is for you, the jury to say whether under all the circumstances disclosed by the evidence that the defendant, City of New York, should have appreciated the danger of the activity in question and whether the City provided enough general supervision to prevent the conducting of bicycle riding”.

The jury returned a verdict in favor of plaintiffs, and defendant’s motion to set aside the verdict as contrary to the law was denied.

In *Benjamin v City of New York*(64 NY2d 44,46), the Court of Appeals held that a municipality’s duty to maintain its parks in reasonably safe condition “includes not only physical care of the property but also prevention of ultrahazardous and criminal activity of which it has knowledge”. However, the condition complained of at bar “cannot be analogized to the ultrahazardous, illegal activity necessary for imposition of a duty on a *803municipality” *(Benjamin v City of New York, supra,*p 46). Nor have plaintiffs established the existence of any special relationship between the infant plaintiff and the defendant which would impose a duty upon the latter *(Vitale v City of New York,*60 NY2d 861, 863; *O’Connor v City of New York,*58 NY2d 184, 189).

Accordingly, the judgment appealed from must be reversed and the complaint dismissed. Lazer, J. P., Mangano, O’Connor and Brown, JJ., concur.
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2213 

To suspend temporarily the duty on formulations of Prosulfuron. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 10, 2005 

Mr. COBLE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on formulations of 

Prosulfuron. 

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

3 SECTION 1. FORMULATIONS OF PROSULFURON. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following: 

‘‘ 9902.07.32 Preparations containing 

Prosulfuron Technical (1-(4- 

methoxy-6-methyltriazin-2- 

yl)–3-(2-(3,3,3- 

trifluoropropyl)-phenyls 

ulfonyl)urea (CAS No. 

94125–34–5) (provided for 

in heading 3808.30.15) ....... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2008 ’’. 
2 

•HR 2213 IH 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ
USDC IN/ND case 2:16-cv-00166-JEM   document 119   filed 02/13/17   page 1 of 2

USDC IN/ND case 2:16-cv-00166-JEM   document 119   filed 02/13/17   page 2 of 2
109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2413

AN ACT

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 1202 1st Street in Humble, Texas, as the 

‘‘Lillian McKay Post Office Building’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2

•HR 2413 EH 

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

2 The facility of the United States Postal Service lo3 cated at 1202 1st Street in Humble, Texas, shall be known 

4 and designated as the ‘‘Lillian McKay Post Office Build5 ing’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

7 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

8 paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

9 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference 

10 to the ‘‘Lillian McKay Post Office Building’’.

Passed the House of Representatives November 1, 

2005. 

Attest:

Clerk. 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2413

AN ACT

To designate the facility of the United States Posting’’. Texas, as the ‘‘Lillian McKay Post Office Build- al Service located at 1202 1st Street in Humble,
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-8071

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

HARRY NOLAN MOODY,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg, 

District Judge. (1:02-cr-00004-LHT-4; 1:07-cv-00127-LHT)

Submitted: March 30, 2010 Decided: April 5, 2010

Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Harry Nolan Moody, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Harry Nolan Moody seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2009) 

motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or 

judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1) (2006). 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) (2006). A 

prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that 

reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the 

constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or 

wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district 

court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 

322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); 

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

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Moody has 

not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a 

certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the 

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED