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
 Sustainable Agricultural Systems Laboratory: 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 Sustainable Agricultural Systems Laboratory People & Locations





- Find a person
- Find a location
- ARS Organizational Chart
- People
- Contact Information
- Research Projects
- Publications
- ARS News Articles
- List of Publications
- Awards
- Invitations and Advisory Assignments
- Project Achievements
- Discoveries Summary

Autar  Mattoo
                     

                     Plant Physiologist


                     Phone: (301) 504-6622
                     
                     

                     Fax: (301) 504-6491
                     Room 119

                     10300 BALTIMORE AVENUE                            
                     
                     BLDG 001 BARC-WEST            

                     BELTSVILLE                    , MD 20705-235


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
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the Court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_______________________ No. 97-40286 Summary Calendar

_______________________
MELANIE MARTINEZ-JONES, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus J C PENNEY COMPANY, INCORPORATED, Defendant-Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas

(2:96-CV-65)

_________________________________________________________________ January 6, 1998
Before JONES, SMITH, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *

Having reviewed the briefs and pertinent portions of the record, we agree for essentially the reasons stated by the district that summary judgment was properly granted to appellee. There is

no genuine material issue of fact as to appellant’s claims, including whether her asthma substantially limited any major life activity or prevented her from working in any building other thanthe Legacy Complex. S ee Heilwell v. Mount Sinai Hospital , 32 F.3d

718, 722-24 (2d Cir. 1994).

AFFIRMED
.
#### In the Matter of Shahin Sultana, Respondent, v Abdul Malek, Appellant. (Proceeding No. 1.) In the Matter of Abdul Malek, Appellant, v Shahin Sultana, Respondent. (Proceeding No. 2.)

[946 NYS2d 509]

— In related family offense proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, Abdul Malek appeals from (1) an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Feldman, *960J.H.O.), dated May 26, 2011, which, after a hearing, dismissed his petition, and (2) an order of protection of the same court dated June 7, 2011, which, upon a finding that he committed certain family offenses, directed him, inter alia, to stay away from Shahin Sultana for a period up to and including May 25, 2013.

Ordered that the appeal from the order dated May 26, 2011, is dismissed as abandoned, without costs or disbursements; and it is further,

Ordered that the order of protection is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The determination of whether a family offense was committed is a factual issue to be resolved by the hearing court, whose determination regarding the credibility of witnesses is entitled to deference *(see Matter of Harry v Harry,*85 AD3d 790, 790 [2011]; Family Ct Act §§ 812, 832; *Matter of Kaur v Singh,*73 AD3d 1178 [2010]; *Matter of Creighton v Whitmore,*71 AD3d 1141 [2010]). Here, a fair preponderance of the credible evidence supports a determination that the appellant committed acts constituting certain family offenses warranting the issuance of an order of protection *(see*Family Ct Act § 812; Penal Law § 120.00 [1]; § 240.26 [3]).

The appellant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Skelos, J.P., Florio, Lott and Miller, JJ., concur.
Case: 1:01-cv-02892 Document #: 29 Filed: 08/12/02 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:342
# C_2016145EN.01000401.xml

| 25.4.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 145/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.4.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 145/4

---

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 18 February 2016 — Council of the European Union v Bank Mellat, European Commission

(Case C-176/13 P) (1)

1

((Appeal - Common foreign and security policy - Combating nuclear proliferation - Restrictive measures taken against the Islamic Republic of Iran - Freezing of funds of an Iranian bank - Obligation to state reasons - Procedure for the adoption of the act - Manifest error of assessment))

(2016/C 145/03)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Council of the European Union (represented by: S. Boelaert and M. Bishop, acting as Agents)

Appellant:

Other parties to the proceedings: Bank Mellat (represented by: M. Brindle QC, R. Blakeley and V. Zaiwalla, Barristers, and by Z. Burbeza, P. Reddy, S. Zaiwalla and F. Zaiwalla, Solicitors), European Commission (represented by: D. Gauci and M. Konstantinidis, acting as Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings:

Intervener in support of the appellant: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: L. Christie and S. Behzadi-Spencer, acting as Agents, and by S. Lee, Barrister)

Intervener in support of the appellant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Bank Mellat in both sets of proceedings; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Bank Mellat in both sets of proceedings;

| 3. | Orders the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the European Commission to bear their own costs in both sets of proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the European Commission to bear their own costs in both sets of proceedings.

---

(1)  OJ C 171, 15.6.2013.

1

---
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Paris Smith, Appellant.

(Appeal No. 2.)

[942 NYS2d 916]

Appeal *1549from a judgment of the Oneida County Court (Barry M. Donalty, J.), rendered March 17, 2010. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed *(see People v Hidalgo,*91 NY2d 733, 737 [1998]). Present — Scudder, P.J., Smith, Fahey and Sconiers, JJ.
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
 Genetic Improvement for Fruits & Vegetables Laboratory: Beltsville, MD
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Northeast Area Beltsville, Maryland (BARC) Beltsville Agricultural Research Center Genetic Improvement for Fruits & Vegetables Laboratory People & Locations





- Find a person
- Find a location
- ARS Organizational Chart
- People
- Contact Information
- Research Projects
- Publications
- ARS News Articles
- Blue Suede TM
- Cara's Choice
- Chanticleer
- Hannah's Choice
- Legacy
- Little Giant
- Pink Champagne
- Pink Lemonade
- Razz
- Sweetheart

Mark K Ehlenfeldt
                     

                     Research Geneticist (Plants)
                     


                     ARS News Articles
                        item
                                             A New Blueberry for Home Growersitem
                                             Mitigating Mummy Berry Disease of Blueberryitem
                                             "Pink Lemonade," "Razz," "Sweetheart," and "Cara's Choice": Superb Blueberries from ARS


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
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 142 (Wednesday, July 28, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 40603]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-16079]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; 
Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive 
and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; Time-Sensitive Obesity 
Review.
    Date: August 17, 2021.
    Time: 3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications and/or 
proposals.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 
Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892.
    Contact Person: Michele L. Barnard, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Officer, Review Branch, Division of Extramural Activities, NIDDK, 
National Institutes of Health, Room 7353, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, 
Bethesda, MD 20892-2542, (301) 594-8898, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#87e5e6f5e9e6f5e3eac7e2fff3f5e6a9e9eee3e3eca9e9eeefa9e0e8f1"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="aecccfdcc0cfdccac3eecbd6dadccf80c0c7cacac580c0c7c680c9c1d8">[email protected]</span></a>.

    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and 
funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.847, 
Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Research; 93.848, Digestive 
Diseases and Nutrition Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology 
and Hematology Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: July 23, 2021.
Miguelina Perez,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2021-16079 Filed 7-27-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Yacov YIDA, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 08-10222.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*966Submitted July 12, 2011.*

Filed July 22, 2011.

James T. Chou, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Francisco, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Warrington Samuel Parker, III, Counsel, Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, San Francisco, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: SCHROEDER, ALARCÓN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Yacov Yida appeals from his jury-trial conviction and 121-month sentence for conspiracy to import MDMA, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 963; importation of MDMA, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 952; and smuggling, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 545. We affirm.

Yida contends the case should be remanded with instructions to delete from the written judgment the condition that Yida “submit to one drug test within 15 days of release from imprisonment and two periodic drug tests thereafter” because he was not orally advised of the condition at sentencing. We disagree. The imposition of this statutorily-mandated condition of supervised release is deemed to be implicit in an oral sentence imposing supervised release, and therefore the condition was properly included in the written judgment. *See United States v. Napier,*463 F.3d 1040, 1042-43 (9th Cir.2006).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

March 23, 2012 

h0320 

Order 

 

March 23, 2012 

142842 & (53)(66) 

KENNETH ADMIRE, 

Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant, 

v SC: 142842 

 COA: 289080 

AUTO-OWNERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Ingham CC: 07-001752-NF 

Defendant-Appellant/Cross-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On March 7, 2012, the Court heard oral argument on the application for leave to 

appeal the February 15, 2011 judgment of the Court of Appeals. On order of the Court, 

the motion to strike portions of the plaintiff’s briefs and exhibits is DENIED. The 

application is again considered, and it is GRANTED. The parties shall include among 

the issues to be briefed: (1) whether MCL 500.3107(1)(a) allows the plaintiff to recover 

the full cost of handicap-accessible transportation or whether the plaintiff’s recovery is 

offset to the extent that the handicap-accessible transportation replaces the plaintiff’s 

other transportation costs; (2) if the plaintiff’s recovery is offset, what procedure a 

factfinder must undertake in calculating the amount of the plaintiff’s recovery and what 

evidence is relevant to that calculation; (3) whether there is any basis in MCL 

500.3107(1)(a) to treat transportation costs differently from other household expenses, 

such as food or housing, that every person incurs whether injured or not; and (4) whether 

the principles and standards articulated in Griffith v State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins, 

472 Mich 521 (2005), are sufficient to resolve this dispute. 

 We invite the continued participation of all amici who have previously appeared in 

this case. Other persons or groups interested in the determination of the issues presented 

in this case may move the Court for permission to file briefs amicus curiae.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER>                                      1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-26-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             SEP-28-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-27-1998
<CASH>                                           3,595
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   85,572
<ALLOWANCES>                                       766
<INVENTORY>                                     24,216
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               139,576
<PP&E>                                         174,450
<DEPRECIATION>                                  56,234
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 328,537
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          139,322
<BONDS>                                        171,976
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      15,108
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   328,537
<SALES>                                        138,096
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               138,096
<CGS>                                          113,060
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  113,060
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,396
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,952
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,250
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,702
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,702
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Richard Williams, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Rothwax, J.), rendered on April 8, 1983, unanimously affirmed. Application by appellant’s counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted. *(See, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Saunders,*52 AD2d 833.) We have reviewed this record and agree with appellant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous points which could be raised on this appeal. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Fein, Milonas, Kassal and Rosenberger, JJ.
# C_2020222EN.01002402.xml

| 6.7.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 222/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.7.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222/24

---

Order of the General Court of 13 May 2020 — Lucaccioni v Commission

(Case T-308/19) (1)

(Action for annulment and for compensation - Civil service - Non actionable measure - Preparatory measure - No claim - Action in part manifestly inadmissible and in part inadmissible)

(2020/C 222/27)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Arnaldo Lucaccioni (San Benedetto del Tronto, Italy) (represented by: E. Bonanni, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Bohr and L. Vernier, acting as Agents, and A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Re

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, annulment of the Commission’s decision of 11 January 2019 on the mandate of a new medical committee in the context of a request made by the applicant for recognition of aggravation of an occupational disease and, second, compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the applicant.

Operative part of the order

| 1) | The action is dismissed as, in part, manifestly inadmissible and, in part, inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1)

The action is dismissed as, in part, manifestly inadmissible and, in part, inadmissible.

| 2) | Mr Arnaldo Lucaccioni shall pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2)

Mr Arnaldo Lucaccioni shall pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 230, 8.7.2019.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 9 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                       January 7, 1997.
    Resolved, That unless otherwise ordered, before Monday, May 12, 1997, the 
daily meetings of the House shall be at 2 p.m. on Mondays; at 11 a.m. on 
Tuesdays and Wednesdays; and at 10 a.m. on all other days of the week; and that 
from Monday, May 12, 1997, until the end of the first session, the daily 
meetings of the House shall be at noon on Mondays; at 10 a.m. on Tuesdays, 
Wednesdays, and Thursdays; and at 9 a.m. on all other days of the week.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23

               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

    We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-07331) pertaining to the Applied Microsystems
Corporation 1996 Stock Purchase Plan, the Registration Statement (Form S-8
No. 333-03396) pertaining to the Applied Microsystems Corporation 1990 Stock
Benefit Plan, Applied Microsystems Corporation 1992 Performance Stock Plan,
and the Applied Microsystems Corporation Director Stock Option Plan and the
Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-14823) pertaining to the 1992
Performance Stock Plan of our report dated February 5, 1997 with respect to
the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Applied Microsystems
Corporation included in its Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended
December 31, 1996 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

                                          ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Seattle, Washington
March 31, 1997