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
 Meat Safety and Quality: Clay Center, NE
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    USMARC Home
                    USMARC Research Units
                        Genetics and Animal Breeding
                                    Livestock Bio Systems
                                    Nutrition, Growth and Physiology
                                    Animal Health GenomicsSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Plains Area Clay Center, Nebraska U.S. Meat Animal Research Center Meat Safety and Quality People & Locations







Peggy A Ekeren

(Peg)
                        Meat Safety and Quality

                        




                        
                        Biological Science Lab Technician (Biochemistry)
                        Phone: (402) 762-4234
                        
                        
                        Fax: (402) 762-4149(Employee information on this page comes from the REE Directory. Please contact your front office staff to update the REE Directory.)


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
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1292 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                       Calendar No. 222
105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1292

Disapproving the cancellations transmitted by the President on October 
                 6, 1997, regarding Public Law 105-45.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 9, 1997

Mr. Stevens (for himself, Mr. Byrd, Mr. Burns, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Akaka, 
   Mr. Allard, Mr. Bond, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Bingaman, Mrs. 
    Boxer, Mr. Campbell, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Coverdell, Mr. Craig, Mr. 
D'Amato, Mr. Domenici, Mr. Faircloth, Mr. Ford, Mr. Frist, Mr. Graham, 
 Mr. Hatch, Mr. Helms, Mrs. Hutchison, Mr. Inouye, Mr. Kempthorne, Mr. 
 Leahy, Mr. Lott, Mr. Mack, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Moynihan, Mr. Reid, Mr. 
Roberts, Mr. Santorum, Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. Specter, Mr. Thompson, and Mr. 
    Warner) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
 referred to the Committee on Appropriations for seven days of session 
             pursuant to section 1025 of Public Law 93-344

                            October 23, 1997

               Reported by Mr. Stevens, with an amendment
                     [Omit the part struck through]

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
Disapproving the cancellations transmitted by the President on October 
                 6, 1997, regarding Public Law 105-45.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress 
disapproves of cancellations 97-4, 97-5, 97-6, 97-7, 97-8, 97-9, 97-10, 
97-11, 97-12, 97-13, 97-14, <DELETED>97-15, 97-16,</DELETED> 97-17, 97-
18, 97-19, 97-20, 97-21, 97-22, 97-23, 97-24, 97-25, 97-26, 97-27, 97-
28, 97-29, 97-30, 97-32, 97-33, 97-34, 97-35, 97-36, 97-37, 97-38, 97-
39, and 97-40, as transmitted by the President in a special message on 
October 6, 1997, regarding Public Law 105-45.
                                     

                                                       Calendar No. 222

105th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                S. 1292

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

Disapproving the cancellations transmitted by the President on October 
                 6, 1997, regarding Public Law 105-45.

_______________________________________________________________________

                            October 23, 1997

                       Reported with an amendment
```
#### Ty DAUL and Raimond Grube, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. PPM ENERGY, INC., now known as Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. and Change in Control Severance Enhancement for Key PPM Employees Plan, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 10-36011.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted July 13, 2011.*

Filed July 19, 2011.

Mark A. Friel, Steve Douglas Larson, Esquire, Scott Alden Shorr, Esquire, Stoll Berne, Portland, OR, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.

Robert E. Maloney, Jr., Esquire, William T. Patton, Thomas William Sondag, Esquire, Lane Powell PC, Portland, OR, for Defendants-Appellees.

Before: PREGERSON, WARDLAW, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Plaintiff-Appellants Ty Daul and Rai-mond Grube appeal the district court’s *148grant of partial summary judgment for Defendant-Appellees, claiming that PPM Energy, Inc. (PPM) breached an agreement to pay them severance benefits. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of this case, we do not recount additional facts except as necessary to explain our decision. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm.

As an initial matter, the district court did not err in holding that Daul and Grube voluntarily eliminated their rights under the Value Appreciation Rights (VAR) Plan. The district court correctly characterized the Replacement Value Appreciation Rights (RVAR) Plan as a substituted contract, replacing all rights under the VAR Plan. *See Eagle Indus., Inc. v. Thompson,*321 Or. 398, 900 P.2d 475, 482 (1995). In the alternative, Daul and Grube waived their rights under the VAR Plan by signing the Election to Participate form, and by their conduct when they accepted higher payments under the RVAR Plan. *See Bennett v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Or.,*332 Or. 138, 26 P.3d 785, 796 (2001).

Moreover, Daul and Grube did not experience a material alteration in compensation under the terms of the severance agreement. The RVAR Plan did not adversely affect their “opportunity to earn comparable value appreciation for the growth of PPM,” as specified in the agreement. The agreement also provides that a material alteration in compensation does not include a change “related to ... a restructuring of Participant’s pay components so that the Participant’s total direct compensation ... is comparable,” and, here, Daul and Grube’s direct compensation actually increased.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1232 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1232

  To provide for the declassification of the journal kept by Glenn T. 
   Seaborg while serving as Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 26, 1997

 Mr. Moynihan introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To provide for the declassification of the journal kept by Glenn T. 
   Seaborg while serving as Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission.

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

SECTION 1. FINDINGS.

    (1) Whereas Dr. Glenn T. Seaborg is a truly great American who has 
made indispensable contributions in the development of nuclear energy.
    (2) Whereas Dr. Seaborg is the co-discoverer of plutonium and eight 
other elements and as a result of these discoveries was awarded the 
1951 Nobel Prize for chemistry.
    (3) Whereas while serving as Chairman of the Atomic Energy 
Commission (AEC), Dr. Seaborg maintained a journal consisting of a 
diary, correspondence, announcements, minutes of meetings, and other 
documents of historical value.
    (4) Whereas in preparing the journal, Dr. Seaborg took care to 
include only information which was not classified and could be made 
public.
    (5) Whereas before leaving the Atomic Energy Commission, Dr. 
Seaborg submitted the journal to the AEC's Division of Classification 
for review.
    (6) Whereas Dr. Seaborg's journal was cleared by the Division of 
Classification, virtually without deletion.
    (7) Whereas twelve years later, in 1983, the chief historian at the 
Department of Energy asked to borrow a copy of Dr. Seaborg's journal in 
order to write a history of the AEC.
    (8) Whereas when the journal was returned to Dr. Seaborg three 
years later, passage after passage was redacted, including explicitly 
public information, such as the published code names of nuclear weapons 
tests, and purely personal material, such as his description of 
accompanying his children on a ``trick or treat'' outing one Halloween 
evening.

SEC. 2. DECLASSIFICATION OF SEABORG JOURNAL.

    The Secretary of Energy shall return to Dr. Glenn T. Seaborg his 
journal which the prepared while serving as Chairman of he AEC. The 
journal shall be returned in the original, unredacted form in which it 
was lent to the Department of Energy in 1983.
                                 <all>
```
Case: 1:02-cr-00464 Document #: 442 Filed: 06/23/05 Page 1 of 8 PageID #:1612
Case: 1:02-cr-00464 Document #: 442 Filed: 06/23/05 Page 2 of 8 PageID #:1613
Case: 1:02-cr-00464 Document #: 442 Filed: 06/23/05 Page 3 of 8 PageID #:1614
Case: 1:02-cr-00464 Document #: 442 Filed: 06/23/05 Page 4 of 8 PageID #:1615
Case: 1:02-cr-00464 Document #: 442 Filed: 06/23/05 Page 5 of 8 PageID #:1616
Case: 1:02-cr-00464 Document #: 442 Filed: 06/23/05 Page 6 of 8 PageID #:1617
Case: 1:02-cr-00464 Document #: 442 Filed: 06/23/05 Page 7 of 8 PageID #:1618
Case: 1:02-cr-00464 Document #: 442 Filed: 06/23/05 Page 8 of 8 PageID #:1619
**Consent
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**
 
 
 
 The Board
of Directors and Shareholders
 Emeritus
Corporation:
  We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements (Nos.
333-60323, 333-05965 and 333-70580) on Forms S-8 and (No. 333-20805) on Form S-3
of Emeritus Corporation of our report dated March 29, 2005 with respect to the
consolidated balance sheets of Emeritus Corporation and subsidiaries as of
December 31, 2004 and 2003, and the related consolidated statements of
operations, shareholders’ deficit and comprehensive operations, and cash flows
for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2004,
and our report on the related financial statement schedule dated March 29,
2005, which reports appear in the December 31, 2004, annual report on Form 10-K
of Emeritus Corporation.
  
 /s/ KPMG
LLP
 
 Seattle,
Washington
 March 29,
2005
Order entered April 13, 2016

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-16-00179-CV

ERICA CORNELIUS, Appellant

V.

SHAWN PHIPPS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 7

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 007-00117-2016

ORDER

Court reporter Denise Carrillo has filed a request to extend the time to file the record 

asserting, in part, that appellant has not requested preparation of the reporter’s record. We 

GRANT the request to the extent we ORDER appellant to file, within ten days of the date of 

this order, written verification that she has requested preparation of the reporter’s record. 

Appellant is cautioned that failure to comply may result in the appeal being submitted without 

the reporter’s record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(c)(1).

/s/ CRAIG STODDART 

JUSTICE
#### In the Matter of Giannis F., a Child Alleged to be Abused. Vilma C., Appellant; Manny M., Respondent; Administration for Children’s Services, Respondent.

[944 NYS2d 534]—

Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Carol R. Sherman, J.), entered on or about October 14, 2011, which granted the application of the attorney for the child alleged to have been abused to permit the child to testify at the fact-finding hearing through two-way closed circuit television, subject to contemporaneous cross-examination by the parties, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly balanced respondent mother’s due process rights with the emotional well-being of the child in permitting the child to testify to years of sexual abuse by her stepbrother, which the mother did not believe took place, outside their presence, but visible via closed-circuit television and subject to contemporaneous cross-examination *(Matter of Q. L. H.,*27 AD3d 738, 739 [2006] [“(t)he Family Court must balance the due process rights of an article 10 respondent with the mental and emotional well being of the child (witness)”]). The affidavit of the social worker who interviewed the child on multiple occasions and who spoke with a social worker at the facility where the child was being treated sufficiently established the potential trauma to the child, which would likely interfere with her ability to testify accurately and without inhibition *(see id.) Matter of Arlenys B. [Aneudes B.],.*70 AD3d 598, 599 [2010]).

*619An evidentiary hearing was not required where the mother failed to present evidence that raised issues concerning the social worker’s assessment of the risk of harm to the child or to her expertise *(see e.g. Matter of Jessica R.,*78 NY2d 1031, 1033 [1991]). Concur — Tom, J.P., Andrias, Renwick, DeGrasse and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Fernando Morrison, Jr., Appellant.

[941 NYS2d 521]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Dolan, J.), rendered June 4, 2010, convicting him of assault in the first degree, criminal mischief in the fourth degree, and stalking in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

“[N]ot every misstep by a juror rises to the inherently prejudicial level at which reversal is required automatically” *(People v Brown,*48 NY2d 388, 394 [1979]; *see People v Clark,*81 NY2d 913, 914 [1993]; *People v Giarletta,*72 AD3d 838, 839 [2010]; *People v Dombroff,*44 AD3d 785, 787 [2007]; *People v Simon,*224 AD2d 458 [1996]). “Because juror misconduct can take many forms, no ironclad rule of decision is possible. In each case the facts must be examined to determine the nature of the material placed before the jury and the likelihood that prejudice would be engendered” *(People v Brown,*48 NY2d at 394; *see People v Giarletta,*72 AD3d at 839; *People v Dombroff,*44 AD3d at 787; *People v Simon,*224 AD2d at 458).

Here, after being alerted to comments made by a juror in the *914jury room before any evidence had been presented, the trial court, with approval of the defense counsel and the prosecutor, properly carried out a complete individual inquiry of each juror and alternate to ascertain the nature and extent of the comments. The responses of the jurors and alternates established that they had not made any premature determination as to the guilt or innocence of the defendant, nor had they assigned any burden of proof to the defendant. The trial court was in the best position to assess the effect of the comments on the individual jurors, and its determination that a mistrial was not warranted will not be disturbed *(see People v Dombroff,*44 AD3d at 787; *People v*McDonald, 40 AD3d 1125 [2007]; *People v Kennedy,*11 AD3d 561 [2004]; *People v Simon,*224 AD2d at 458).

The defendant’s contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to support his conviction of assault in the first degree is unpreserved for appellate review *(see People v Hawkins,*11 NY3d 484, 492 [2008]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution *(see People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to disprove the defendant’s justification defense and to establish the defendant’s guilt of assault in the first degree beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon our independent review pursuant to CPL 470.15 (5), we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt on that count was not against the weight of the evidence *(see People v Romero,*7 NY3d 633 [2006]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive *(see People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80, 85 [1982]). Dillon, J.P., Angiolillo, Plorio and Cohen, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 123 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 123

 To amend title 10, United States Code, to increase the grade provided 
         for the heads of the nurse corps of the Armed Forces.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 21, 1997

  Mr. Inouye introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
              referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 10, United States Code, to increase the grade provided 
         for the heads of the nurse corps of the Armed Forces.

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

SECTION 1. INCREASED GRADE FOR HEADS OF NURSE CORPS.

    (a) Army.--Section 3069(b) of title 10, United States Code, is 
amended by striking out ``brigadier general'' in the second sentence 
and inserting in lieu thereof ``major general''.
    (b) Navy.--The first sentence of section 5150(c) of such title is 
amended--
            (1) by inserting ``rear admiral (upper half) in the case of 
        an officer in the Nurse Corps or'' after ``for promotion to the 
        grade of''; and
            (2) by inserting ``in the case of an officer in the Medical 
        Service Corps'' after ``rear admiral (lower half)''.
    (c) Air Force.--Section 8069(b) of such title is amended by 
striking out ``brigadier general'' in the second sentence and inserting 
in lieu thereof ``major general''.
                                 <all>
```
# Official Journal C 414/2021

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 414 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6413 October 2021 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 414

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6413 October 2021

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2021/C 414/01 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10441 — Bridgepoint/FFL/ACT) (
  1
  ) | 1 |

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2021/C 414/01

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10441 — Bridgepoint/FFL/ACT) (
  1
  )

1

1

---

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2021/C 414/02 | Euro exchange rates — 12 October 2021 | 2 |
| 2021/C 414/03 | Commission notice on current State aid recovery interest rates and reference/discount rates applicable as from 1 November 2021
  (Published in accordance with Article 10 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 794/2004) | 3 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2021/C 414/02

Euro exchange rates — 12 October 2021

2

2021/C 414/03

Commission notice on current State aid recovery interest rates and reference/discount rates applicable as from 1 November 2021
  (Published in accordance with Article 10 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 794/2004)

(Published in accordance with Article 10 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 794/2004

3

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY |
| | European Commission |
| 2021/C 414/04 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10450 — CDP/Macquarie/Open Fiber) (
  1
  ) | 4 |
| 2021/C 414/05 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10487 — CDPQ/Investcorp/ICR) – Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  ) | 6 |

V   Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

2021/C 414/04

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10450 — CDP/Macquarie/Open Fiber) (
  1
  )

1

4

2021/C 414/05

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10487 — CDPQ/Investcorp/ICR) – Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  )

1

6

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN