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
 Beltsville Agricultural Research Center: Beltsville, MD
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    USDA Civil Rights Policy StatementSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Northeast Area Beltsville, Maryland (BARC) Beltsville Agricultural Research Center Docs





- Home
- Meet the Committee
- Webinars
- Resources
- Long-Term Vision

Committee Resources August 10, 2023: Cross-cutting concepts to transform agricultural research September 19, 2023: Controlled Environment Agriculture: A Case in Urban Agricultural Transformation October 16, 2023: World Food Day and Beltsville Water Research February 16, 2024: CEA References    Upcoming Virtual Events  Advancing Data Sharing to Strengthen One Health Effectiveness: From Ideas to Action **June 11, 2024**, 12:00-1:00pm ET: Registration
First installment of Advancing Data Sharing to Strengthen One Health Effectiveness: A Webinar Series, hosted by the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM)
  **The State of the Science Address** **June 26, 2024**, 3:00-5:00pm ET: Registration
Hosted by the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM)  Climate Crossroads Summit 2024 **July 16-17, 2024**, 8:30am-5:00pm ET: Registration
Hosted by the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM)​


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
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

December 6, 2018

No. 04-18-00734-CR

Brandy Darlene AIELLO,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 437th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018CR1259W

Honorable Lori I. Valenzuela, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The Appellant's Motion for Extension of Time to Show Cause in Writing Why This 

Appeal Should Not Be Dismissed for Lack of Jurisdiction is GRANTED. The appellant’s 

response is due no later than December 10, 2018.

_________________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

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

court on this 6th day of December, 2018.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
ex10-11.htm


Exhibit 10.1.1

 

AMENDMENT 2014-1

 

to the

 

LITHIA MOTORS, INC.

 

2009 EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN

 

 

Pursuant to Section 19 of the Lithia Motors, Inc. 2009 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (the “Plan”), the Plan is hereby amended to clarify the Plan’s operation as follows:

 

1.     Section 2.20 (“Total Pay”) is amended to add the following phrase to the end of such section:

 

“, prior to reduction pursuant to Section 125, 132(f) or 401(k) of the Code, but excluding allowances and reimbursements for expenses such as relocation allowances or travel allowances, income or gains on the exercise of Company stock options, and similar items.”

 

2.     Sections 5.1 (“Payroll Deduction Authorization”) and 6.1 (“Participant Contributions by Payroll Deductions”) are amended to replace each occurrence of the term “Base Pay” with “Total Pay.”

 

3.     Section 7.1 (“Quarterly Grant of Options”) is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:

 

“Quarterly Grant of Options. For each Fiscal Quarter, on the first day of the Fiscal Quarter a Participant will be deemed to have been granted an option to purchase as many whole shares as may be purchased with the payroll deductions credited to the Participant’s Account during the Fiscal Quarter (together with any payroll deductions from the previous Fiscal Quarter retained in the Participant’s Account as of the end of such Fiscal Quarter as provided in Section 8.1 and any cash dividends paid during the Fiscal Quarter as provided in Section 8.2).” 

 

4.     Section 8.1 (“Automatic Exercise of Options”) is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:

 

“Automatic Exercise of Options. Unless a Participant has elected to withdraw payroll deductions in accordance with Section 10, the Participant’s option for the purchase of Common Stock will be deemed to have been exercised automatically as of the last day of the Fiscal Quarter for the purchase of the number of whole shares of Common Stock which the accumulated payroll deductions (and cash dividends on the Common Stock as provided in Section 8.2) in the Participant’s Account at that time will purchase at the applicable option price. No fractional shares may be issued under the Plan. As of the last day of each Fiscal Quarter, the balance of each Participant’s Account shall be applied to purchase the number of whole shares of Common Stock as determined by dividing the balance of such Participant’s Account as of such date by the option price determined pursuant to Section 7.2. Any amounts accumulated in a Participant’s Account during a Fiscal Quarter under Section 5.1 that are not sufficient to purchase a full share of Common Stock at the end of such Fiscal Quarter shall be retained in the Participant’s Account for the subsequent Fiscal Quarter, subject to earlier withdrawal by the Participant as provided in Section 10. The Participant’s Account shall be debited accordingly. The Committee or its delegate shall make all determinations with respect to applicable currency exchange rates when applicable.”
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 444 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 444

               For the relief of Shirley Constantino Tan.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 2, 2011

Mrs. Feinstein introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
               For the relief of Shirley Constantino Tan.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR SHIRLEY CONSTANTINO TAN.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b) of section 
201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1151), Shirley 
Constantino Tan shall be eligible for issuance of an immigrant visa or 
for adjustment of status to that of an alien lawfully admitted for 
permanent residence upon filing an application for issuance of an 
immigrant visa under section 204 of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1154) or for 
adjustment of status to lawful permanent resident.
    (b) Adjustment of Status.--If Shirley Constantino Tan enters the 
United States before the filing deadline specified in subsection (c), 
she shall be considered to have entered and remained lawfully and 
shall, if otherwise eligible, be eligible for adjustment of status 
under section 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
1255) as of the date of the enactment of this Act.
    (c) Deadline for Application and Payment of Fees.--Subsections (a) 
and (b) shall apply only if the application for issuance of an 
immigrant visa or the application for adjustment of status is filed 
with appropriate fees within 2 years after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
    (d) Reduction of Immigrant Visa Number.--Upon the granting of an 
immigrant visa or permanent residence to Shirley Constantino Tan, the 
Secretary of State shall instruct the proper officer to reduce by one, 
during the current or next following fiscal year, the total number of 
immigrant visas that are made available to natives of the country of 
the alien's birth under section 203(a) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(a)) or, if applicable, the total number 
of immigrant visas that are made available to natives of the country of 
the alien's birth under section 202(e) of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1152(e)).
    (e) PAYGO.--The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of 
complying with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, shall be 
determined by reference to the latest statement titled ``Budgetary 
Effects of PAYGO Legislation'' for this Act, submitted for printing in 
the Congressional Record by the Chairman of the Senate Budget 
Committee, provided that such statement has been submitted prior to the 
vote on passage.
                                 <all>
```
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2303

To extend the suspension of duty on certain light absorbing photo dyes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 11, 2005

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

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL

To extend the suspension of duty on certain light absorbing 

photo dyes.

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

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN LIGHT ABSORBING PHOTO DYES. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.29.34 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 certain light absorbing photo dyes) is amended by striking 

7 the date in the effetive period column and inserting ‘‘12/

8 31/2010’’. 

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

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

•HR 2303 IH 

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

2 the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-1252
LANTZ H. LITTLE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, Charleston Naval Shipyard/Agency, Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. David C. Norton, District Judge. (CA-95-2144-2-18) Submitted: January 9, 1997 Decided: January 16, 1997 Before HALL and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lantz H. Little, Appellant Pro Se. Margaret Beane Seymour, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order dismissing his complaint against the Department of the Navy. We have reviewed therecord and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Little v. Department of the Navy , No. CA-95-2144-2-18 (D.S.C. Jan. 26, 1996).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.

AFFIRMED
#### Jamal REYES, Petitioner-Appellant, v. WARDEN; The Attorney General for the State of Maryland, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 11-6412.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: July 28, 2011.

Decided: Aug. 2, 2011.

Jamal Reyes, Appellant Pro Se. Edward John Kelley, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Before SHEDD, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Jamal Reyes seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certifícate of ap-pealability. *See*28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (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). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Reyes 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.*
#### GOODMAN v. ALEXANDER.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

April 7, 1898.)

Action against Infant—Necessaries.

A complaint, in an action against an infant, alleging that plaintiff furnished the defendant with board and lodging, upon her request and implied promise-to pay therefor, and that they were necessaries and suited to her position, in life, but not alleging inability or refusal of the child’s father to support her, fails to.set forth facts constituting a cause of action.

Appeal from special term, New York county.

Action by Fanny Goodman against Bertha Alexander. From a judgment dismissing the complaint, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

Argued before VAN BRUNT, P. J., and McLAUGHLIN, PATTERSON, O’BRIEN, and INGRAHAM, JJ.

Lyman A. Spalding, for appellant.

Robert O’Byrne, for respondent.

McLAUGHLIN, J.

The plaintiff brought this action to recover of the defendant, an infant of the age of seven years, the sum of $651.14, and interest thereon. The right to recover was predicated upon the complaint, which charged that the plaintiff furnished and. supplied, at a time specified, this infant, upon her request and implied promise to pay therefor, board and lodging which was of the-value claimed; that the board and lodging thus furnished and supplied were “necessaries,” and “of a character suited to the position in life of the defendant.” At the trial the complaint was dismissed upon the ground that it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a. cause of action. Judgment was entered to this effect, and from that judgment this appeal is taken.

The trial court was right in dismissing the complaint. The facts-therein set out do not constitute a cause of action. A father is bound by law to support his minor children, if he be of ability to-do so. Furman v. Van Sise, 56 N. Y. 439; Atchison v. Bruff, 50 Barb. 381. And, if the parent has the ability to and is walling to support his minor children, board and lodging furnished by another without his consent are not -necessaries, within the meaning of the law which renders an infant liable. There is no allegation in the complaint that the father refused or was unable to pay for the board and lodging furnished by the plaintiff. It cannot be that an infant can voluntarily leave her father’s house, who has the ability and is willing to support her, and make a valid contract with another-to furnish board and lodging, which will be binding upon her. Such a rule would permit an infant to determine for herself the style and manner in which she should live. Board and lodging-furnished under such circumstances are not necessaries, and can only become necessaries when the parent or guardian has not the ability, or refuses, to support her. The plaintiff could not have recovered upon the trial without proving these facts. It was a part of her catise of action. And, if she could not recover without proving the facts, then it follows that the complaint did not state a. *885cause of action, because the Code of Civil Procedure requires that a party shall set out in his complaint the facts which constitute his cause of action.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. All concur.
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane lunani m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T I S AI AS GO NZ AL E Z - MAYA , P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 10- 70131 A ge nc yN o. A 072- 532- 862 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

an O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d Jul y12, 2011 ** B e f o r e : S C H R O E D E R , A L A R C Ó N , an dL E A V Y , C ir c u it Ju d g e s . I s a i a s G onz a l e z - M ay a , ana t i ve and c i t i z e n of M e xi c o, pe t i t i ons pr o s e f or re vi ew of the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp ea l s’ (“ B IA ”) order di sm i ss i ng hi s app ea l f r om an i m m i gr a t i on j udge ’ s de c i s i on de ny i ng hi s m ot i on t o r e ope n pr oc e e di ngs cond uct ed i n absent i a. W e have j uri sdi ct i on un der 8 U . S . C . § 1 25 2. W e r evi ew 

# FI LED JU L 21 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS10- 70131 2 f o rab u s e o f

d is c r e tio n th e d e n ia l o f am o tio n to r e o p e n , Sa l ta v . I NS , 314 F . 3d 1 0 7 6 , 1 0 7 8 ( 9 th C i r . 2 0 0 2 ) , an dwe d e n yth e p e t i t i o n f o rr e v i e w. T he a ge nc ydi d notabus e i t s di s c r e t i on i n de ny i ng the m ot i on t o r e ope n on the gr ound tha tG onz a l e z - M ay af a i l e d t o de m ons tr a t e tha tpe r s ona ls e rvi c e of the O r d e rto S h o w C au s e p r o v id e dh im in s u f f ic ie n t n o tic e o f

h is h e ar in g . See Kha n v. A s h c r o ft , 37 4 F . 3d82 5, 82 9 (9th C i r. 20 04 ). P E T I T I ON F OR RE V I E W DE NI E D.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2168 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2168

 To extend the duty suspension on 5-Methyl-2-(methylethyl)cyclohexyl-2-
                           hydroxypropanoate.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 5, 2005

 Mr. Brown of South Carolina introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To extend the duty suspension on 5-Methyl-2-(methylethyl)cyclohexyl-2-
                           hydroxypropanoate.

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

SECTION 1. 5-METHYL-2-(METHYLETHYL)CYCLOHEXYL-2-HYDROXYPROPANOATE.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.01.42 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to 5-Methyl-2-
(methylethyl)cyclohexyl-2-hydroxypropanoate) is amended by striking 
``12/31/2006'' and inserting ``12/31/2008''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
EX-99.1



                            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 (the "Report") of TCI Solutions,
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the twelve months ending December 31,
2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), Lance C. Jacobs, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify
to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
906 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 result of operations of the Company.


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


Date:  March 28, 2003                    By:/s/ Lance C. Jacobs
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Lance C. Jacobs
                                            Chief Financial Officer

                                       42
[No. 15841-1-III.

Division Three.

October 9, 1997.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Patrick Alan Mullaly, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Walla Walla County, No. 96-1-00040-7, Yancey Reser, J., entered May 12, 1996. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Kurtz, J., concurred in by Sweeney, C.J., and Brown, J.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA 

FORT WAYNE DIVISION 

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) 

 ) 

 v. ) CASE NO.: 1:16-CR-27-TLS 

 ) 

STEPHAN M. DAVIS ) 

 

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 

 This matter is before the Court on the Findings and Recommendation of the United States 

Magistrate Judge [ECF No. 31], filed on October 3, 2016. The Defendant has waived objection 

to the Findings and Recommendation, and the Court, being duly advised, adopts the Findings 

and Recommendation [ECF No. 31] in its entirety and accepts the recommended disposition. 

Subject to this Court’s consideration of the Plea Agreement pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal 

Procedure 11(c), if applicable and necessary, the plea of guilty to the offense charged in Count 

One (1) of the single Count Indictment is hereby accepted, and the Defendant is adjudged guilty 

of such offense. 

 The notice of sentencing and pre-sentence scheduling deadlines will be issued by separate 

order.

SO ORDERED on October 20, 2016. 

 s/ Theresa L. Springmann 

 JUDGE THERESA L. SPRINGMANN 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT