alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Kelli Mars","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/kelli-l-marsnasa-gov\/","title":"40 Years Ago: STS-2 to Fly the First Space Shuttle Payloads","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"vzyQdYJQmr\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/history\/40-years-ago-sts-2-to-fly-the-first-space-shuttle-payloads\/\">40 Years Ago: STS-2 to Fly the First Space Shuttle Payloads<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/history\/40-years-ago-sts-2-to-fly-the-first-space-shuttle-payloads\/embed\/#?secret=vzyQdYJQmr\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“40 Years Ago: STS-2 to Fly the First Space Shuttle Payloads” — NASA\" data-secret=\"vzyQdYJQmr\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/10\/sts_2_l-3_weeks_1_technician_mounting_tile_after_oxidizer_spill_oct_1981_10060455.jpg?w=410","thumbnail_width":410,"thumbnail_height":448}
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Brandi Dean","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/bkdean\/","title":"Practical Advice for Aspiring Space Explorers","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"AJAOTm4vJT\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/humans-in-space\/practical-advice-for-aspiring-space-explorers\/\">Practical Advice for Aspiring Space Explorers<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/humans-in-space\/practical-advice-for-aspiring-space-explorers\/embed\/#?secret=AJAOTm4vJT\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Practical Advice for Aspiring Space Explorers” — NASA\" data-secret=\"AJAOTm4vJT\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/jsc2014e044910.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":399}
NOTICE: All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal 

revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound 

volumes of the Official Reports. If you find a typographical 

error or other formal error, please notify the Reporter of 

Decisions, Supreme Judicial Court, John Adams Courthouse, 1 

Pemberton Square, Suite 2500, Boston, MA, 02108-1750; (617) 557-

1030; SJCReporter@sjc.state.ma.us

SJC-12215

CARE AND PROTECTION OF PENELOPE.

May 18, 2018.

Supreme Judicial Court, Superintendence of inferior courts. 

Practice, Civil, Failure to prosecute.

In October, 2016, the father of a child who was the subject 

of a care and protection proceeding in the Juvenile Court filed 

a petition in the county court for relief from the denial of his 

request for an injunction preventing the child from being

removed from the United States. A single justice of this court 

denied relief, and, in November, 2016, the father appealed to 

this court. He filed a motion for an extension of time to file 

his brief and was given until December 23, 2016, to file it. He 

did not do so. The child's mother, with the child's assent, has 

moved to dismiss the appeal, as has the Department of Children 

and Families.1 See Mass. R. A. P. 19 (c), 365 Mass. 867 (1974). 

In response, the father does not explain his failure to file a 

brief in this matter, but makes unsubstantiated allegations 

concerning the child's treatment outside this country.2 The 

father has had ample time to file a brief in this matter and has 

not done so. Although the father is appearing pro se, we hold 

 

1 In addition, this court issued a notice preceding 

dismissal under the May 17, 1988, standing order concerning 

dismissals of appeals and reports pending in this court for lack 

of prosecution. 

2 The father also suggests that this appeal cannot be 

dismissed until his underlying appeal to the Appeals Court is 

resolved. Without passing on the correctness of that 

proposition, we note that the father did not file a brief in 

that appeal, and it was dismissed for lack of prosecution. 
2

him to the same standards in this regard as litigants 

represented by counsel. See, e.g., Rasheed v. Commonwealth, 440 

Mass. 1027, 1027 (2003); Solimine v. Davidian, 422 Mass. 1002, 

1002 (1996). Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed for lack 

of prosecution.3

Appeal dismissed.

Harriet Schechter for the mother.

Roberta M. Driscoll for the child.

Brian R. Pariser for Department of Children and Families.

The father, pro se.

 

3 The Department of Children and Families also suggests that 

the appeal is moot and that the courts of Massachusetts lack 

jurisdiction due to a child custody proceeding in Switzerland. 

Due to our disposition, we need not address these issues.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

Administrator A 

Daniel S. Goldin 

Deputy Administrator 

John R. Dailey (Acting) 

Associate Deputy Administrator 

John R. Dailey 

Assoc. Dep. Administrator (Tech) 

Michael I. Mott 

Daniel R. Mulville 

Chief Information Officer 

Chief Engineer 

Aerospace Safety 

Council Roberta L. Gross 

I- I I 

Chief Financial --- Counsel 

Arnold Holz Edward A. Frankle George E. Reese (Acting) 

I I I 

I I I 

H P Z 

Policy and Procurement Public Affairs 

I I 

Deidre A. Lee Laurie Boeder Alan M. Ladwig 

Technology Utilization 

I I 

Ralph C. Thomas John E. Mansfield 

I VI I 

Mission to Planet Space I Earth I I ,I I 

Charles F. Kennel I Wil Trafton (Acting) 

Flight Center Space Center I I II I 

Joseph Rothenberg George W.S. Abbey I I John F. Kennedv 1 

Spacecenter- I 

Jay F. Honeycutt I I GeoroeC. Marshall I 

Spa& Flight Center 

Space Center 

I I I 

I II I LI I F1 

External 

Relations 

Human Resource 

and Education 

I 

John D. Schumacher Jeff Lawrence Spence M. Armstrong 

I I 

Operations Facilities Assurance 

I II Michael D. Christensen I 

Benita A. Cooper Frederick Gregory 

Microgravity Communications Sciences and 

Applications 

Charles T. Force Harry C. Holloway 

I I 

Aeronautics Space Science 

L~l4-1 *Jet Propulsion 

Center - - . . Laboratorv I 1 ’ Ken K. Munechika I ’ Edward Stone 

Dryden Flight 

Research Center as of February 5, 1996 

*JPL is a contractor-operated facility. I I 

Roy S. Estess Kenneth J. Szalai
[Cite as Rutushin v. Arditi, 2013-Ohio-2167.]

 STATE OF OHIO, MAHONING COUNTY 

 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 

 SEVENTH DISTRICT 

PATTY RUTUSHIN, ) 

 ) CASE NO. 12 MA 114 

 PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, ) 

 ) 

 - VS - ) OPINION 

 ) AND 

LINDA ARDITI, ) JUDGMENT ENTRY 

 ) 

 DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. ) 

CHARACTER OF PROCEEDINGS: Motion for Reconsideration. 

JUDGMENT: Motion Denied. 

APPEARANCES: 

For Plaintiff-Appellee: Attorney Matthew Giannini 

1040 South Commons Place 

Suite 200 

Youngstown, OH 44514 

No Response Filed. 

For Defendant-Appellant: Linda Arditi, Pro-se 

P.O. Box 221 

North Jackson, OH 44451-0221 

JUDGES: 

Hon. Mary DeGenaro 

Hon. Gene Donofrio 

Hon. Joseph J. Vukovich 

Dated: May 21, 2013
[Cite as Rutushin v. Arditi, 2013-Ohio-2167.]

PER CURIAM: 

{¶1} Pro-se Defendant-Appellant Linda Arditi has filed an application for 

reconsideration of our decision in Rutushin v. Arditi, 7th Dist. No. 12MA114, 2013-Ohio1427. For the following reasons, the application is denied. 

{¶2} An application for reconsideration of an appellate decision can be filed no 

later than ten days after the clerk has both mailed the parties the judgment and made a 

note on the docket of the mailing. App.R. 26(A)(1)(a). This court's decision was filed on 

March 26, 2013. The clerk sent notice of the decision to the parties and made the 

required notation on the docket on March 28, 2013. Arditi's application was filed 20 days 

later, on April 17, 2013, which is well outside the 10-day window and therefore untimely. 

"An untimely application for reconsideration must be denied." State v. Hess, 7th Dist. No. 

02 JE 36, 2004-Ohio-1197, ¶4, citing Martin v. Roeder, 75 Ohio St.3d 603, 665 N.E.2d 

196 (1996). 

{¶3} Even assuming for the sake of argument that Arditi's had been timely filed, it 

would fail on the merits. A reconsideration application must call to the attention of the 

appellate court an obvious error in its decision or point to an issue that was raised to the 

court but was inadvertently either not considered at all or not fully considered. Juhasz v. 

Costanzo, 7th Dist. No. 99-C.A.-294, 2002 WL 206417, (Feb. 1, 2002). An application for 

reconsideration may not be utilized where a party simply disagrees with the conclusion 

reached and the logic used by an appellate court. Victory White Metal Co. v. N.P. Motel 

Syst., 7th Dist. No. 04MA245, 2005-Ohio-3828, ¶2; Hampton v. Ahmed, 7th Dist. No. 

02BE66, 2005-Ohio-1766, ¶16. 

{¶4} Arditi's assertions fail to call attention to an obvious error in this court's 
- 2 - 

decision or an issue that was raised but not fully considered; rather, she expresses 

disagreement with the decision. Moreover, the bulk of her application consists of 

inappropriate ad hominem comments about this court and those in government service. 

This is well outside the scope of what this court may consider in an application for 

reconsideration. 

{¶5} Accordingly, Arditi's application for reconsideration is denied. 

DeGenaro, P.J., concurs. 

Donofrio, J., concurs. 

Vukovich, J., concurs.
|   | (1) | to my knowledge, 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 results of operations of the Company. |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Dated: November 10, 2010 | /s/ Warren Bielke          |   |
|--------------------------|---------------------------------|--------|
|                     | Warren Bielke                   |   |
|                     | Interim Chief Executive Officer |   |
|                     |                            |   |

| Dated: November 10, 2010 | /s/ Katherine L. Wolf                             |   |
|--------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                     | Katherine L. Wolf                                      |   |
|                     | Chief Financial Officer and EVP, Corporate Development |   |
|                     |                                                   |   |
EX-10.33





 Exhibit 10.33 

AMENDMENT FOURTEENTH TO THE 

LOGISTICS SERVICES AGREEMENT 

This FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT TO THE LOGISTICS SERVICES AGREEMENT (this “Amendment”), is made and entered into as of
November 14, 2019, by and between The Honest Company, Inc. (“Client”) and Geodis Logistics, LLC (“GEODIS,” and together with Client, the “Parties”). 

WHEREAS, the Parties entered into that certain Logistics Services Agreement, dated January 27, 2014, as amended (the
“Agreement”); 
 WHEREAS, the Term for the warehouse located at 13053 San Bernardino Avenue, Fontana, California 92335 (the
“Fontana Warehouse”) will expire on November 15, 2019; 
 WHEREAS, the Parties desire to extend the Term of the
Fontana Warehouse through December 20, 2019. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements set forth in
the Agreement and this Amendment, the Parties agree as follows: 
  

	1.	 Extension of Term. The Parties agree to extend the Term for the Fontana Warehouse through
December 20, 2019. 


  

	2.	 No Other Changes. Except as provided herein, all provisions of the Agreement and related Exhibits remain
unchanged and in full force and effect. 


  

	3.	 Capitalized Terms. Capitalized terms not herein defined shall have the meanings set forth in the
Agreement. 


  

	4.	 Counterparts. This Amendment may be executed in multiple counterparts (including execution by facsimile
or other electronic transmission) with the same effect as if all signing parties had signed the same document. All counterparts shall be construed together and constitute the same document. 



[Signatures on the Following Page] 












 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Amendment to be executed by their duly
authorized representatives as of the date first set forth above. 
  
  

									
	THE HONEST COMPANY, INC.	  		  	GEODIS LOGISTICS LLC
					
	Name:	  	 /s/ Glenn Klages
	  	            	  	Name:	  	 /s/ Mike Honious

					
	Name:	  	 Glenn Klages
	  		  	Name:	  	 Mike Honious

					
	Title:	  	 EVP Supply Chain
	  		  	Title:	  	 Chief Operating Officer

					
	Date:	  	 11/14/2019 12:14 PST
	  		  	Date:	  	 November 15, 2019
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. LORI ANN MITCHELL.

September 19, 1989.

Petition for certification denied.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SAFRON HUOT,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

MONTANA STATE DEPARTMENT OF

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES; et al.,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 18

- 35129

D.C. No. 2:17

- cv

- 00059

- BMM

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Montana

Brian M. Morris, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted June 12, 2018 **

Before: RAWLINSON, CLIFTON, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

Safron Huot appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing her

42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging claims related to the termination of her parental

rights. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo.

Wilhelm v. Rotman , 68 0 F.3d 1113, 1118 (9th Cir. 2012) (dismissal under

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suit able for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

JUN 19 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 18

- 35129

28 U.S.C. § 1915A); Noel v. Hall , 341 F.3d 1148, 1154 (9th Cir. 2003) (dismissal

under the Rooker

- Feldman doctrine); Barren v. Harrington , 152 F.3d 1193, 1194

(9th Cir. 1998) (order) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Huot ’s action for lack of subject matter

jurisdiction under the Rooker

- Feldman doctrine because Huot ’s claims constitut ed

a forbidden de facto appeal of a prio r state court judgment or were inextricably

intertwined with that judgment. See Noel , 341 F.3d at 11 63

- 65 (9th Cir. 2003)

(discussing proper application of the Rooker

- Feldman doctrine); see also Henrichs

v. Valley V

iew Dev. , 474 F.3d 609, 616 (9th Cir. 2007) ( Rooker

- Feldman doctrine

barred plaintiff’s claim because the relief sought “would require the district court

to determine that the state court’s decision was wrong and thus void”).

AFFIRMED.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"NASA","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nasamigrate\/","title":"artemis_humans_space_moon_gateway_main","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"t0d0EQPWBE\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/artemis_humans_space_moon_gateway_main\/\">artemis_humans_space_moon_gateway_main<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/artemis_humans_space_moon_gateway_main\/embed\/#?secret=t0d0EQPWBE\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“artemis_humans_space_moon_gateway_main” — NASA\" data-secret=\"t0d0EQPWBE\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/artemis_humans_space_moon_gateway_main.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":338}
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. RONALD RAVICH.

June 27, 1989.

Petition for certification denied.
----

|   | **CERTIFICATIONS**
**EXHIBIT 32.2**
 

CERTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 906 OF SARBANES-OXLEY 

In connection with the annual report ofCambior Inc. (the "Company") on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ended December 31,2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the "Report"), I Bryan A. Coates, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer,of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18, United States Code, Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

(1) The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and 

(2) The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company. 

 

 
 */s/ Bryan A. Coates* Bryan A. Coates Vice President and Chief    Financial Officer May 17, 2004 |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
#### PMI PHOTOMAGIC, LTD., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. FOTO FANTASY, INC. (doing business as Fantasy Entertainment, Inc.) and American Photo Booths, Inc., Defendants-Cross Appellants.

No. 04-1362, 04-1363.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

March 8, 2005.

Rehearing En Banc Denied April 14 ,2005.

Before LOURIE, CLEVENGER, and PROST, Circuit Judges.

*405
      *JUDGMENT*

PER CURIAM.

This CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

*AFFIRMED. See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.
No. 87-6145.

#### Turner *v.*Lockhart, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction, et al.

C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. MARION JACOBS.

September 26, 1989.

Petition for certification denied.
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. ALVERO OSPINO.

September 26, 1989.

Petition for certification denied.