alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Baker, Benton and Overton 

Argued at Norfolk, Virginia 

ALVIN JEROME PATTERSON 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION* BY 

v. Record No. 2733-95-1 JUDGE NELSON T. OVERTON 

 NOVEMBER 26, 1996 

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA 

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF YORK COUNTY 

 Russell M. Carneal, Judge Designate 

 Sydney K. L. West (Horne, West & McMurtrie, 

P.C., on brief), for appellant. 

 Margaret Ann B. Walker, Assistant Attorney 

General (James S. Gilmore, III, Attorney 

General, on brief), for appellee. 

 Alvin Jerome Patterson was convicted by a jury of shooting 

from a vehicle in violation of § 18.2-286.1, shooting at an 

occupied vehicle in violation of § 18.2-154, and attempted 

malicious wounding in violation of § 18.2-26. He contends on 

appeal that the trial court erred by refusing to admit into 

evidence certain letters that he claims impeach a witness for the 

Commonwealth. Finding no reversible error, we affirm. 

 The two letters in question were written to Patterson by 

Cleo Harper, an eyewitness to the shooting. They were written 

after Patterson's arrest, and contain statements professing 

Harper's affection for Patterson. One letter makes reference to 

another woman with apparent interest in Patterson, but falls 

 

 *Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not 

designated for publication. 
- 2 - 

short of establishing any relationship between the two. 

Patterson claims that the letters show that he and Harper were in 

a relationship, and that Harper found out about this other woman, 

resulting in her motive to testify against him. The trial 

court's refusal to admit these letters, he argues, prevented him 

from properly impeaching a Commonwealth's witness. 

 We disagree. The letters show no real bias by Harper 

against Patterson. Any claim of a jealous motive is supported by 

neither the content of the letters nor anything else in the 

record. The excluded letters would therefore add nothing to the 

evidence presented to the jury. 

 Furthermore, although these two letters were not admitted, 

two other cards sent by Harper to Patterson were admitted. 

Harper also testified at trial as to her continual affection for 

Patterson while he was awaiting trial. Thus, if any error 

occurred, it was harmless. 

 Find no reversible error, we affirm. 

 Affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 931 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 931

  To reduce temporarily the duty on certain articles of natural cork.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 27, 2005

 Mr. Burns introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
        referred to the Committee on FinanceYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To reduce temporarily the duty on certain articles of natural cork.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN ARTICLES OF NATURAL CORK.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

      

``    9902.45.03    Articles of       6%                No change         No change         On or before 12/
                     natural cork                                                            31/2008          ''
                     (provided for                                                                             .
                     in subheading
                     4503.90.60)....

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
    <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width" />
    <meta name="robots" content="noindex">
    <title>Digestive Diseases - NIDDK</title>
    
<meta name="VIcurrentDateTime" content="638490757185419835" />
<meta name="VirtualFolder" content="/" />
<script type="text/javascript" src="/layouts/system/VisitorIdentification.js"></script>

</head>
<body>
    <div></div>
</body>
</html>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Johnnie Lee ALLEN, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 08-12009

Non-Argument Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

May 7, 2009.

Bernardo Lopez, Ft. Lauderdale, FL, Kathleen M. Williams, Miami, FL, for Defendant-Appellant.

Jeanne Marie Mullenhoff, Anne R. Schultz, Kathleen M. Salyer, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Miami, FL, Phillip Dirosa, Ft. Lauderdale, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Before TJOFLAT, DUBINA and CARNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Johnnie Lee Allen appeals the denial of his motion for a reduced sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Allen, who was sentenced as career offender, based his motion on Amendment 706 to the sentencing guidelines, which reduced the base offense levels applicable to crack cocaine offenses. Allen contends that the district court should have realized when it evaluated his eligibility for a sentence reduction that his original sentence exceeded the statutory maximum permissible for the charged offense both because the indictment failed to allege a specific drug amount and because the government failed to file a notice of enhancement pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 851. He argues that the district court should have lowered his sentence for this reason.

Because § 3582(c)(2) proceedings are not *de novo*resentencings, Allen’s arguments about alleged flaws in his original sentencing determinations do not permit a sentence reduction. *See United States v. Bravo,*203 F.3d 778, 781 (11th Cir.2000). Nor is Allen eligible for a sentence reduction under Amendment 706. His sentence was based on the career-offender provisions in U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1 instead of the drug quantity table in U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1, so Amendment 706 did not have the effect of lowering his guideline range. *See United States v. Moore,*541 F.3d 1323, 1330 (11th Cir.2008), *cert. denied, McFadden v. United States,*— U.S.-, 129 S.Ct. 965, 173 L.Ed.2d 156 (2009). Thus the district *872court properly denied Allen’s § 3582(c)(2) motion.

AFFIRMED.
August 23, 2023              CLINICAL            

Peter Grayson, M.D., M.Sc. 

|

Vasculitis Translational Research Program

|

## Description

Giant cell arteritis (GCA), also known as temporal arteritis, is an inflammatory disease of the large blood vessels causing chronic inflammation in the aorta and its major branches. Extracellular mitochondria can activate the immune system in free form or enclosed in extracellular vesicles. The authors of this study investigated how extracellular mitochondria contribute to inflammation and platelet activation in people with GCA.

## What is exciting about this article?

The extracellular mitochondria can activate the immune system. In this study, the researchers demonstrated that people with GCA have an impaired ability to clear mitochondria, which may contribute to excessive inflammation and platelet activation. It is possible that mitochondrial clearance may reduce inflammation and thrombosis in GCA patients.

## Grant support

AR041204

Research Areas:
AutoimmunityClinical ResearchComputational BiologyEpidemiologyGenetics and GenomicsImmunology

Reference:

###             Mitochondrial-mediated inflammation and platelet activation in giant cell arteritis.        

255().

Research reported in this publication was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the NIHʼs National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases.

Previous

See All Advances

Next

## Recent Advances

Selected recent highlights of NIAMS intramural research:

October 3, 2023

The Transcription Factor STAT4 Controls the Fate of Cytotoxic Innate Lymphocytes

September 26, 2023

Genetic Variants of PLCG2 Cause Immune Dysregulation Through Either Increased or Decreased Function

September 26, 2023

The Microbiomes of People with Recombination-Activating Gene (RAG) Deficiency Have Distinct Features, Including Antimicrobial Resistance Signatures 

September 23, 2023

Neutrophil Extracellular Traps (NETs) Trigger Pathogenic Inflammation and Bone Loss in Periodontitis

September 22, 2023

Possible Mechanism of a Rare Bone Overgrowth Disease Identified

Back to Top
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                             3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                    DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                                         MAR-31-1996
<CASH>                                                        60
<RECEIVABLES>                                                461
<INVENTORY>                                                1,524
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                           4,526
<PP&E>                                                     5,804
<DEPRECIATION>                                             2,389
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                            25,434
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                     18,514  
<BONDS>                                                    5,858 
<COMMON>                                                      30 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                          0
<PREFERRED>                                                    0
<OTHER-SE>                                                 1,032
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                              25,434
<SALES>                                                    1,827
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                           2,631
<CGS>                                                        508
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                              1,785
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                             615
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                           658
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                             (426)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                (145)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                         (281)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                0
<CHANGES>                                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                                (281)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                               (.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                               (.07)


</TABLE>
#### Radhika Singh, Appellant, v Gayle H. McCrossen et al., Defendants, and Westchester Rockland Newspapers, Inc., et al., Respondents.

[975 NYS2d 336]

— Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Julia I. Rodriguez, J), entered July 26, 2012, which granted the motion of defendants-respondents (Gannett) for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims as against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

*532Gannett established entitlement to summary judgment in this action where plaintiff was injured when, while walking to a bus stop on Gannett’s property, she was struck by a car driven by her coworker defendant McCrossen as she was leaving work. The motion court properly found that Gannett’s failure to provide a sidewalk leading from the front door of its building to a County bus stop on the property was not a proximate cause of plaintiff’s accident as a matter of law *(see Derdiarian v Felix Contr. Corp.,*51 NY2d 308, 315 [1980]). Instead, the fact that there were no sidewalks in the area of plaintiffs accident merely furnished the occasion for the accident *(see Sheehan v City of New York,*40 NY2d 496, 503 [1976]).

We have considered plaintiffs remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur — Andrias, J.E, Friedman, Richter, Manzanet-Daniels and Feinman, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                          5

<S>                                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                      3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                  DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                       MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                                3626,826
<SECURITIES>                                                 0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        1,873,975
<ALLOWANCES>                                                 0
<INVENTORY>                                                  0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    46,963,504
<PP&E>                                                 923,647
<DEPRECIATION>                                               0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      48,287,583
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               53,401,794
<BONDS>                                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                        0
<PREFERRED>                                            100,010
<COMMON>                                                19,569
<OTHER-SE>                                          (6,711,544)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        48,287,583
<SALES>                                                      0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     5,846,853
<CGS>                                                        0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        7,658,631
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                        67,500
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                       800,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   1,297,730
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     (1,879,278)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                 0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                          0
<DISCONTINUED>                                               0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                              0
<CHANGES>                                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                                        (1,879,278)
<EPS-BASIC>                                               (0.5)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                             (0.5)



</TABLE>
161 

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

Honorable X. S. Rowe 

County Attorney, Lamb County 

Littlefirld, Texas 

Dear Sir1 

W4 aokuowl4dg4 r404lpt 

data, and qaoto tram your 14 

county i8 eonaultural Building, 

from ths County Seat 

nay I ham be413 royour D4partmont,aa 

osition; Therefore will you 

the questions as iollorrr 

onor Court of Lamb County have 

let a oontraot for th4 oonetruotion of 

al Building in whlah to,house the County 

A. A. A. Offl4e4, 4aid building to be 

in a town not tho County Sect of aald 

d would said Court hare the authorfty to 

Wazrante, in the 4um of $ZO,OOO.OO, in 

payment for the conatruotlon of au4h a building. 

2. Would the Commissioners Court of Lamb County, hato 

authority to order an elootion for the 

e 

urpoao of dstermlning whether or not Bonds in the sum of 20,OOO.OO should be 

144ued for the oonrrtruotion of an Agrioultural Building, in 

which to houa4 the County Agent, and the Trip14 A. oTfiO44; 

said building to be oonstruoted in 4 town not the County 

seat of said oounty.” 
I.. 

i 

Honorable El 0. Rowe, Page 2 

The courts of this State hale repeatedly held that a 

oountp oannot issue bonds unl4ss suoh powor la ozprossly oonferred 

by law. Su4h is the sstablishsd dootrlno in this State, and has 

boon tram an early time. It was aiflrmod in the original appeal 

from San'PatrioIo County Vs. MoClane, 44 Tex. 392, and reiterated 

in Roblson vs. Rroedlooe, 61 Tex. 316; also in L4sater vs. Lopez, 

217 5. W. 376. 

It is also a well establishsd rule of law in this State 

that a oountg subjsot to the expresssd restriotions imposed by 

the Constitution and general laws has the implied power to 188~4 

time warrants In payment ror improvements whioh j& is 4 

authorized to oonstruot, provided the applioable rcgulat -F on8 rolating to t~~ssuanoe oi suoh warrants are observed. (Straton vs. 

CommIssion4rs~Court 0r Kinney County, 137 5. W. 1170; Cowan st al 

va. Dupreo, ot al, 139 9. w. 887; Commissionors~ Court or Floyd 

County ot al vs. Nlohols et al, 142 S. W. 371 Iasstsr vs. Lopez, 

217 s. w. 376; Adams vs. YoGIll, 146 S. W. (26) 332.) 

We have railed to find a statute in this Stat4 expressly 

authorizing a oounty to oonstruot the typo bulldIng montlonsd in 

your request. Thoreroro, it 14 the opinion of this Department, 

bssed on the foregoing dooisians of th4 oourts of this .State, that 

8 oounty do48 not hato the suthority to issue time warrants or bonds 

for the ptipose of oonstruotlng en agrioultural building in whIoh . ~\, 

to house the oounty agent and A. A. A. ot?iaes. 

Trusting that this answers your questions, w4 are 

Tory truly yours 

ATTORNEY QENERAL OF TEXAS 

A,saistant
SECOND AMENDMENT


         THIS SECOND AMENDMENT to the License Agreement dated July 2, 2002 (the
"Agreement") by and between NAMCO HOMETEK INC. ("NAMCO") and MAJESCO SALES, INC.
("Licensee") is entered into as of May 7, 2003.

         WHEREAS, NAMCO has licensed the Licensee the right to distribute and
sell video games known as "Namco Museum" and "Pac-Man Collection" (the "Licensed
Materials") for play on the Nintendo Game Boy Advance handheld video game
system.

         WHEREAS, NAMCO and Licensee agree to modify the Agreement as set forth
below.

         NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained
herein, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, NAMCO and
Licensee agree to amend the Agreement as follows:

         1.   Majesco has notified NAMCO that Majesco has the opportunity to
              run a discount sales program for the Titles for at approximately
              "$[****]" through [****],[****] and other major retailers (the
              "$[****] Sale").

         2.   For the $[****] Sale only, the parties agree that Majesco shall
              pay NAMCO a royalty payment of $[****] for each unit of the
              Licensed Materials manufactured by Nintendo of America for
              one-way distribution only to [****],[****] and other major
              retailers with guaranteed sales of [****] units.

         3.   For all sales of the Licensed Materials not associated with the
              $[****] Sale, the parties reaffirm that Section 1(f) of the
              Agreement was modified to reflect that the per unit royalty rate
              for each unit of the Licensed Materials manufactured for or on
              behalf of Licensee shall be [****] per unit.

         4.   Except as otherwise expressly provided for above the Agreement
              shall remain unchanged.

         5.   This Second Amendment to the Agreement may be signed in
              counter-parts and shall not become effective until signed by both
              parties.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereby agree to the terms and
conditions of this Second Amendment to the Agreement as of the date first
written above.


NAMCO HOMETEK INC.                                   MAJESCO SALES, INC.

By:_____________________________            By:____________________________

Printed Name:___________________            Printed Name:__________________

Title:__________________________            Title:_________________________


[*] Confidential portion omitted and filed separately with the Securities
    Exchange Commission.
#### State v. Crump

Case below: 178 N.C. App. 717

No. 474P06

1. Def’s NOA Based Upon a Constitutional Question (COA05-902)

2. AG’s Motion to Dismiss Appeal

3. Def’s PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31

1.-

2. Allowed 06/27/07

3. Denied 06/27/07
# National Maritime Day, 2009 

Americans have long looked to the sea as a source of security and prosperity. Bounded by two oceans and the Gulf of Mexico, and criss-crossed by a myriad of inland waterways, America's destiny as a maritime nation was a story foretold.

The Merchant Marine took up arms alongside the Continental Navy to help defeat the British Navy during the American Revolution. Since then, they have served bravely as the United States has faced threats ranging from war to piracy, and our seafaring fleet has proven instrumental in protecting our safety. In times of conflict and crisis, the Armed Forces rely on the Merchant Marine's sealift capability to transport critical equipment and supplies. Time and again, mariners have demonstrated their willingness and ability to meet daunting challenges.

Waterways have also enabled much of the commerce that has expanded America's economy. Domestic and international commerce occurred along rivers and coasts even before our Nation's birth. Great cities have sprouted near waterways, and maritime activity remains crucial to our economy today.

The men and women of the U.S. Merchant Marine and the many other workers who have supported the maritime industry have made significant contributions to our leadership in the global marketplace, and to our security.

On this National Maritime Day, we also mark the opening of a permanent exhibition at the Smithsonian Institution, “On the Water.” It demonstrates the importance of the maritime industry and chronicles our history as a maritime nation.

The Congress, by a joint resolution approved May 20, 1933, has designated May 22 of each year as “National Maritime Day” and has authorized and requested the President to issue annually a proclamation calling for its appropriate observance.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim May 22, 2009, as National Maritime Day. I call upon the people of the United States to mark this observance by honoring the service of merchant mariners and by displaying the flag of the United States at their homes and in their communities. I also request that all ships sailing under the American flag dress ship on that day.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twentieth day of May, in the year of our Lord two thousand nine, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-third.

[FR Doc. E9-12247

Billing code 3195-W9-P
#### Marc S. Kirschner, as Trustee of the Refco Litigation Trust, Appellant, v KPMG LLP et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants.

Submitted August 2, 2010;

decided August 26, 2010

Motion by DRI-The Voice of the Defense Bar for leave to file a brief amicus curiae on consideration of the certified questions herein granted and the proposed brief is accepted as filed. Two copies of the brief must be served and 24 copies filed within seven days.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

November 15, 2017

No. 04

- 17

- 00119

- CR

Jasmine SIMMS,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 186th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court N o. 2014CR10245

Honorable Jefferson Moore, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

The State ’ s Motion for Extension of Time is hereby GRANTED.

_________________________________ Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

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

court on this 15th day of November, 2017

.

___________________________________ KEITH E. HOTTLE

, Clerk of Cou rt