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
 Plant Stress and Germplasm Development Research: Lubbock, TX
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Projects
                        NP 301Search small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Plains Area Lubbock, Texas Cropping Systems Research Laboratory Plant Stress and Germplasm Development Research People & Locations







Mallory  Brock
                        Plant Stress and Germplasm Development Research

                        




                        
                        Biological Aid (Plants)
                        Phone: (806) 749-5560
                        
                        
                        Fax: (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
<PAGE>
 

                                                                    EXHIBIT 15.1


                         Acknowledgment Of Independent
                         Certified Public Accountants
                 Regarding Independent Auditors' Review Report



The Board of Directors
Enterprise Systems, Inc.:

With respect to the Registration Statements on Form S-8 of Enterprise Systems,
Inc. and on Form S-4 of HBO & Company, we acknowledge our awareness of the use
therein of our report dated April 22, 1997 related to our review of interim
financial information as of March 31, 1997.

Pursuant to Rule 436(c) under the Securities Act of 1933, such report is not
considered part of a registration statement prepared or certified by an
accountant or a report prepared or certified by an accountant within the meaning
of sections 7 and 11 of the Act.


                                                           KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP

Chicago, Illinois
May 14, 1997
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24

- 6156

GARY B UTERRA WILLIAMS , Petitioner

- Appellant ,

v.
CHADWICK DOTSON , Director of Dept. of Corrections , Respondent

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Richmond

. Henry E. Hudson , Senior District Judge. ( 3:13

- cv - 00276

- HEH )

Submitted : June 25 , 2024 Decided: June 28, 2024

Before RICHARDSON and QUATTLEBAUM , Circuit Judges , and TRAXLER , Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Gary Buterra Williams, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 24-6156 Doc: 11 Filed: 06/28/2024 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM: Gary Buterra Williams appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for relief from judgment as an unauthorized, successive 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition and denying reconsideration. ∗ Our review of the record confirms that the district court properly construed Williams’ Rule 60(b) motion as a successive § 2254 petition over which it lacked jurisdiction because he failed to obtain prefiling authorization from this

court. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A); McRae , 793 F.3d at 397

- 400. Accordingly, we
affirm the district court’s order s
. Consistent with our decision in United States v. Winestock , 340 F.3d 200, 208 (4th Cir. 2003), we construe Williams’ notice of appeal and informal brief as an application to file a second or successive § 2254 petition. Upon review, we conclude that Williams’
claim does not meet the relevant standard. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b). We therefore deny authorization to file a successive § 2254 petition. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED

∗ A certificate of appealability is not required to appeal the district court’s jurisdictional categorization of a Rule 60(b) motion as an unauthorized , successive habeas petition. United States v. McRae , 793 F.3d 392, 400 (4th Cir. 2015). USCA4 Appeal: 24-6156 Doc: 11 Filed: 06/28/2024 Pg: 2 of 2
VI

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 204

For the relief of Dogan Umut Evans.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 28, 1997

Mr. INOUYE introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

For the relief of Dogan Umut Evans.

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

3 SECTION 1. IMMEDIATE RELATIVE STATUS FOR DOGAN

4 UMUT EVANS.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Dogan Umut Evans shall be clas6 sified as a child under section 101(b)(1)(F) of the Immi7 gration and Nationality Act for purposes of approval of

8 a relative visa petition filed under section 204 of such Act

9 by his adoptive parent and the filing of an application for

10 an immigrant visa or adjustment of status.

11 (b) ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS.—If Dogan Umut

12 Evans enters the United States before the filing deadline
2

•S 204 IS

1 specified in subsection (c), he shall be considered to have

2 entered and remained lawfully and shall, if otherwise eligi3 ble, be eligible for adjustment of status under section 245

4 of the Immigration and Nationality Act as of the date of

5 the enactment of this Act.

6 (c) DEADLINE FOR APPLICATION AND PAYMENT OF

7 FEES.—Subsections (a) and (b) shall apply only if the pe8 tition and the application for issuance of an immigrant

9 visa or the application for adjustment of status are filed

10 with appropriate fees within 2 years after the date of the

11 enactment of this Act.

12 (d) REDUCTION OF IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBER.—

13 Upon the granting of an immigrant visa or permanent res14 idence to Dogan Umut Evans, the Secretary of State shall

15 instruct the proper officer to reduce by 1, for the current

16 or next following fiscal year, the worldwide level of family17 sponsored immigrants under section 201(c)(1)(A) of the

18 Immigration and Nationality Act.

19 (e) DENIAL OF PREFERENTIAL IMMIGRATION

20 TREATMENT FOR CERTAIN RELATIVES.—The natural

21 parents, brothers, and sisters of Dogan Umut Evans, if

22 any, shall not, by virtue of such relationship, be accorded

23 any right, privilege, or status under the Immigration and

24 Nationality Act.

Æ
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 164 (Friday, August 27, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48277-48278]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-18448]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration #17108 and #17109; Louisiana Disaster Number LA-
00114]


Presidential Declaration of a Major Disaster for Public 
Assistance Only for the State of Louisiana

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a Notice of the Presidential declaration of a major 
disaster for Public Assistance Only for

[[Page 48278]]

the State of Louisiana (FEMA-4606-DR), dated 08/20/2021.
    Incident: Severe Storms, Tornadoes, and Flooding.
    Incident Period: 05/17/2021 through 05/21/2021.

DATES: Issued on 08/20/2021.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 10/19/2021.
    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 05/20/2022.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, 
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of 
the President's major disaster declaration on 08/20/2021, Private Non-
Profit organizations that provide essential services of a governmental 
nature may file disaster loan applications at the address listed above 
or other locally announced locations.
    The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected 
by the disaster:

Primary Parishes: Ascension, Assumption, Calcasieu, East Baton Rouge, 
Iberville, Lafourche.

    The Interest Rates are:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Physical Damage:
  Non-Profit Organizations with Credit Available Elsewhere...      2.000
  Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere      2.000
For Economic Injury:
  Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere      2.000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 17108 B 
and for economic injury is 17109 0.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

James Rivera,
Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2021-18448 Filed 8-26-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8026-03-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                            9
<MULTIPLIER>                                     1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                           8,014
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                          49,143
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                  1,209,273
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        917,234
<ALLOWANCE>                                      9,048
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,260,301
<DEPOSITS>                                   1,139,174
<SHORT-TERM>                                   325,689
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             34,491
<LONG-TERM>                                    577,189
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           339
<OTHER-SE>                                     183,419
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               2,260,301
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 19,246
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               21,161
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                40,407
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              12,980
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              26,309
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           14,098
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      830
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                               2,384
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  9,823
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  8,373
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       8,373
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,749
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .17
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.51
<LOANS-NON>                                      8,011
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                 11,895
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 8,614
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      441
<RECOVERIES>                                        45
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                9,048
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             6,013
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          3,035
        



</TABLE>
#### IN THE MATTER OF EDWARD A. FLECKENSTEIN, AN ATTORNEY AT LAW.

Argued December 6, 1960

Decided January 10, 1961.

Eor the order: *Mr. James F. McGovern, Jr.*

Eor the respondent: *Mr. Edward A. Fleclcenstein, pro se.*

Pee Curiam.

Respondent was convicted on two indictments charging acts of lewdness and carnal indecency in violation of *N. J. 8. 2A*:115-1, and placed on probation upon terms requiring submission to psychiatric treatment. His convictions were affirmed, *State v. Fleckenstein,*60 *N. J. Super.*399, certification denied 33 *N. J.*109.

The offenses warrant striking respondent’s name from the rolls but since he obviously is ill, the stigma of disbarment should not be visited upon him. Accordingly he is suspended from the practice of law until the court shall otherwise order upon satisfactory proof of his cure.

*21
      *For*suspension—Chief Justice Weiftratjb, and Justices Jacobs, Erancis, Proctob, Hall, Schettino and Haneman—7.

Opposed—None.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Lawrence Spruill, Appellant.

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Miller, J.), rendered February 22, 1984, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law and as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, and a new trial is ordered.

During the redirect examination of the police officer who arrested the defendant, the prosecutor twice elicited, through a lengthy series of questions, that after his arrest the defendant did not elaborate on the details of the cursory alibi statement which he had previously given to that officer. This was error. In *People v Dawson*(50 NY2d 311, 320) the Court of Appeals reaffirmed the rule set out in *People v Rutigliano*(261 NY 103, 107), that the People are entirely precluded from using the defendant’s silence while in custody as evidence-in-chief at his trial because he is then under no duty to speak. When questioned after his arrest, a defendant is under no obligation to say anything or to lay out an alibi *(see, People v Christman,*23 NY2d 429). Since the defendant did not take the stand, the principle enunciated in *People v Conyers*(52 NY2d 454), and *People v Savage*(50 NY2d 673), that a defendant’s pretrial silence may be admissible to impeach the defendant where unusual circumstances are present, is inapplicable. As the proof of the defendant’s guilt was not overwhelming, this error cannot be considered harmless.

Although no objection was made to the alibi charge, it erroneously failed to state that the People had the burden of disproving the defendant’s alibi beyond a reasonable doubt *(see, People v Victor,*62 NY2d 374; *People v McLaughlin,*104 AD2d 829). In addition, a portion of the charge which indi*511cated that only the defense witnesses could be considered interested witnesses was improper. The question of whether a witness is interested, and the effect that may have on the witness’s testimony is for the jury, and is applicable to any witness *(see,*1 CJI [NY] 7.03; *People v Gerdvine,*210 NY 184; *People v Manning,*278 NY 40; *People v Jackson,*80 AD2d 904). Bracken, J. P., Niehoff, Eiber and Sullivan, JJ., concur.
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
 Rangeland Resources & Systems Research: Fort Collins, CO
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                                    Software
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Areas of Research
                        CARM
                                    PHACE
                                    Thunder Basin
                                    Modeling
                                    WindSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Plains Area Fort Collins, Colorado Center for Agricultural Resources Research Rangeland Resources & Systems Research Docs







Near Real Time Dataheadline bar


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
<PAGE>


                                                                      EXHIBIT 11


                        CHOICES ENTERTAINMENT CORPORATION

                                 Loss Per Share


                            1996               1995               1994
                            ----               ----               ----

Net loss                $   (666,680)      $ (2,139,327)      $   (988,139)
                        ============       ============       ============

Weighted Average
Number of Shares
Outstanding               22,004,395         21,652,000         18,491,000
                        ============       ============       ============

Net loss per share      $      (0.03)      $      (0.10)      $      (0.05)
                        ============       ============       ============
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Troy D. Kosse, Appellant.

[941 NYS2d 847]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Sullivan, J.), rendered March 1, 2011, convicting him of robbery in the second degree (two counts) and criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that he was deprived of his right to the effective assistance of counsel when his attorney took a position adverse to him with respect to his pro se application to withdraw his plea of guilty. The record demonstrates, however, that the Supreme Court denied the application before counsel made her comments. Consequently, those comments did not deprive the defendant of his right to effective representation *(see People v Rogers,*43 AD3d 1189 [2007]; *People v Lattimore,*5 AD3d 399, 400 [2004]; *cf. People v Gruttadauria,*40 AD3d 879, 880 [2007]).

The determination whether to allow a defendant to withdraw a plea of guilty is addressed to the sound discretion of the court *(see People v Jackson,*87 AD3d 552, 553 [2011]; *People v Douglas,*83 AD3d 1092 [2011]; *People v Collazo,*45 AD3d 857 [2007]; *People v Bullard,*33 AD3d 715 [2006]). Here, in deciding whether to grant the defendant’s pro se application to withdraw his plea of guilty, the Supreme Court was entitled to rely on its recollection of the plea proceeding, including the defendant’s unequivocal answers to that court’s thorough questioning at that proceeding. The record of the plea proceeding provides no reason to question the validity of the defendant’s plea of guilty. Under the circumstances, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the defendant’s application, without a hearing *(see People v Bullard,*33 AD3d at 715).

The defendant’s valid waiver of his right to appeal precludes review of his claim that the procedure used to adjudicate him a second felony offender was defective *(see People v Evans,*88 AD3d 1029, 1030 [2011], *lv denied*18 NY3d 858 [2011]; *People v*
      *909
      *Rodriguez,*82 AD3d 794, 795 [2011]; *People v Haynes,*70 AD3d 718, 718-719 [2010]). Balkin, J.P., Chambers, Hall and Austin, JJ., concur.