alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 136 (Friday, July 17, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 34762]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-17085]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of 
Closed Meeting

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

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious 
Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; Antimicrobial Research and 
Development.
    Date: August 25, 2009.
    Time: 10 a.m. to 1 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6700B Rockledge Drive, 
Bethesda, MD 20817, (Telephone Conference Call)
    Contact Person: Lynn Rust, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, 
Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, NIAID/
NIH/DHHS, 6700B Rockledge Drive, MSC 7616, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-
402-3938, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#8ee2fcbcbcb6f8cee0e7e6a0e9e1f8"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="0d617f3f3f357b4d636465236a627b">[email protected]</span></a>.
(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, 
Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, 
Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes 
of Health, HHS)

    Dated: July 13, 2009.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. E9-17085 Filed 7-16-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-7018

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

JAMES NEAL, III, a/k/a Sonny,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Charles E. Simons, Jr., Senior

District Judge. (CR-94-27, CA-96-1624-0-6)

Submitted: May 14, 1998 Decided: May 26, 1998

Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James Neal, III, Appellant Pro Se. Marvin Jennings Caughman,

Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying

his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998).

We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district

court. United States v. Neal, Nos. CR-94-27; CA-96-1624-0-6 (D.S.C.

June 12, 1997). We deny Appellant's motion for appointment of counsel and dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
U S 

J

Defendant, Hon. Lois H. Goodman. U.S.MJ.

MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC. and

MYLAN INC.

Defendants/Counterclaim- Document Fl/ed Electronically Plaintiffs.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS MYLAN INC. AND MYLAN

PHARMACEUTICALS INC. LEAVE TO FILE ITS FIRST AMENDED

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT, SEPARATE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIMS

THIS MATTER having been brought before the Court upon the Motion of Defendants

and Counterclaim-Plaintiffs Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Mylan Inc. (“Defendants” or

Mvlan”) for entry of an Order granting Mylan leave to file its First Amended Answer to

Complaint, Separate Defenses, and Counterclaims to include defenses and counterclaims of

inequitable conduct before the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO’) and

unclean hands; and the Court having considered the papers submitted in support of the within

L k, Vi

Motion awr iet

and for the ieasons sct forth in the record of the

proceedings. and for other and cood cause having been shon.

IT IS on this Ji day of AL. 2013,

0077973( L)OQ
y 

; 

ORDERED that Defendants shall file their First Amended Ans er to Complaint.

Separate Defenses, and Counterclaims, in the form attached as Exhibit A to the Declaration of

Sung W. Kim, within days of the date of receipt of the entry of this Order; and it is

further

ORDERED that Plaintiff and Counterclaim-Defendant Orexo AB shall tile a reply

within fourteen (14) days from the date of the filing of the First Amended Answer to the

Complaint. Separate Defenses and Counterclaims. //

/ /

I

- -

HONORABLE LOIS H GOODMAN

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

CHOI\KoutC\292566, I
Exhibit 31.2
 BROOKSIDE TECHNOLOGY HOLDINGS CORP
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO
RULE 13a-14(a) / 15d-14(a) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Brookside Technology Holdings
Corp;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with
respect to the period covered by this report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the
periods presented in this report;4.
    
    The small business issuers other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15e for the small business issuer) and have:
 a.
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure
that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its
consolidating subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;b.
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuers disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; andc.
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuers
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business
issuers most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuers fourth fiscal
quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuers internal
control over financial reporting; and
 5.
    
    The small business issuers other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small
business issuers auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuers board of
directors (or persons performing equivalent functions):
 a.
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely
to adversely affect the small business issuers ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; andb.
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the small business issuers internal
control over financial reporting.
  By:
    /s/  Bryan McGuireName:
    Bryan McGuireTitle:
    Chief Financial Officer
Case 2:11-cv-03621-CCC -JAD Document 12 Filed 09/09/11 Page 1 of 3 PageID: 175
Case 2:11-cv-03621-CCC -JAD Document 12 Filed 09/09/11 Page 2 of 3 PageID: 176
Case 2:11-cv-03621-CCC -JAD Document 12 Filed 09/09/11 Page 3 of 3 PageID: 177
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5053 Received in Senate (RDS)]

  2d Session
                                H. R. 5053

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 7, 2004

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
     at 1475 Western Avenue, Suite 45, in Albany, New York, as the 
                ``Lieutenant John F. Finn Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 1475 
Western Avenue, Suite 45, in Albany, New York, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Lieutenant John F. Finn Post Office''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Lieutenant John F. Finn Post 
Office''.

            Passed the House of Representatives October 6, 2004.

            Attest:

                                                 JEFF TRANDAHL,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**




CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT
      TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350





In
      connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report On Form 10-QSB of Grace 1,
      Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarter ending August 31, 2007, I, Virginia K.
      Sourlis, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company
      hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge
      and
      belief, that:





1.
      Such
      Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending August 31, 2007, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter
      ending August 31, 2007, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
      condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated:
      October 5, 2007






By: /s/
      VIRGINIA K. SOURLIS





Virginia
      K. Sourlis


Chief
      Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

Criminal Action No.: 11-366 (JLL) 01

ORDER

This matter has been set for jury selection on Thursday,, September 13, 2012 at 9:30

a.m. and trial on Monday, September 17, 2012 , 2011 at 9:30 AM before this Court in

Courtroom 5D, 5th floor ofthe Martin Luther King Jr., Federal Building, Newark, New Jersey.

You must be prepared and ready to proceed for trial at that time; no further adjoumments will be

granted.

This timeline for pretrial motions and other trial matters shall be as follows:

I. Fully-briefed motions in limine are due to the Court on Wednesday, August 15,

2012. The parties shall meet-and-confer on an appropriate briefing schedule to

ensure that the Court receives only fully-briefed motions by that date.

2. No later than Thursday, September 6, 2012, the following must be submitted to

this Court:

a. Jointly agreed to proposed voir dire questions;

b. Jointly agreed to neutral statement about the case, not to exceed one

paragraph;

c. Jointly agreed to proposed jury charges. If there are charges on which the

parties cannot reach agreement, those charges should be submitted

separately in one document of disputed charges. For each disputed charge,

both parties’ versions should be listed together with supporting authorities.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

V.

JOHN ALFY SALAMA MARKUS

Defendants.

Page 1 of 2
The agreed upon version of charges should be clearly marked as “Agreed

Upon” and should not contain authorities; and

d. A single numbered list of all exhibits, including a brief description and any

objection to the exhibit.

All ofthese items should be submitted to the Court in hard copy form delivered to

chambers. A copy should also be provided to the Court in electronic format on

CD, saved in WordPerfect or an early version of Word.

3. For trial, all exhibits should be pre-marked and must include exhibit stickers.

Copies of all trial exhibits must be prepared for the Judge, the Court Deputy, the

Court Reporter, and opposing counsel.

4. Telephone status conference, to be initiated by U.S. Attorney’s office, is set for

Monday, September 10, 2012 at 2:30 p.m.

IT IS on this 5th day ofJUNE, 2012, SO ORDERED.

Linares

States District Judge

Page2of 2
Chart 1-4. The unemployment rate for Hurricane Katrina 

evacuees was much lower for those who were living in their 

August (pre-Katrina) residence than for those who were not

12.4

5.6

20.7

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

Total evacuees December 2005 residence same

as in August 2005

December 2005 residence

different than in August 2005

Percent

December 2005 unemployment rates for persons who evacuated from their 

August 2005 residence, even temporarily, due to Hurricane Katrina

NOTE: Data refer to persons in the civilian noninstitutional population age 16 and over who resided in households that were 

eligible to be selected for the Current Population Survey. These data are not representative of the total evacuee population because 

they do not include children or people residing in shelters, hotels, places of worship, or other units outside the scope of the survey. 

SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics

Chart 1-4. The unemployment rate for Hurricane Katrina 

evacuees was much lower for those who were living in their 

August (pre-Katrina) residence than for those who were not

• Information gathered in December 2005 showed that about 1.1 million persons 

age 16 and over had evacuated from their August residence, even temporarily, 

due to Hurricane Katrina. About 600,000 of these evacuees were living in their 

August 2005 residences when surveyed in December 2005; the remainder were 

living in other residential units covered in the survey. 

• Monthly data collected through special questions on Katrina evacuees do not 

account for all persons who evacuated; those living outside of the scope of the 

survey—such as persons living in hotels or shelters—are not included. The 

questions were asked of persons in the household survey sample throughout the 

country, since some evacuees relocated far from the storm-affected areas. 

• The unemployment rate for persons identified as evacuees was 12.4 percent. 

The rate for evacuees who were again living in their August (pre-Katrina) 

homes (5.6 percent) was much lower than for those who were not (20.7 

percent).
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Michael R. ROUSE, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 11-10743

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Dec. 11, 2012.

Brian W. Portugal, Special Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Jason Douglas Hawkins, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Dallas, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Michael R. Rouse appeals the sentence imposed following his jury convictions for conspiracy to commit securities fraud, mail fraud, and money laundering (Count 1), and aiding and abetting securities fraud (Counts 2 and 3), mail fraud (Counts 4-8), and money laundering (Count 9). As his sole issue on appeal, Rouse argues that the district court clearly erred in finding that the offense involved sophisticated means, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(9)(C) (Nov. 2010).

The determination that the offense involved sophisticated means is a factual finding that we review for clear error. *United States v. Conner,*537 F.3d 480, 492 (5th Cir.2008). “A factual finding is not clearly erroneous as long as it is plausible in light of the record as a whole.” *United States v. Betancourt,*422 F.3d 240, 246 (5th Cir.2005) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Our review reveals that the district court did not clearly err in finding that the offense involved sophisticated means. *See*U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1, comment. (n.8 (B)); *United States v. Clements,*73 F.3d 1330, 1340 (5th Cir.1996).

AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
FI L ED U.S. COURT OF A P P E A LS E LE V E N T H C IR C U IT J AN 24, 2007 THOMAS K. KAH

N CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FO R T HE EL EV EN TH CIRC UI T

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ N o. 06- 1202 9

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ D. C. Docket N o. 02-03165 CV -CA P-1 DOCTOR’S HO SPITAL AUGUSTA, A ssi gne e of

Canda ce A
. Murr ay , D ec ea se d, Pl ai nti ff -Appe llant, ve rs us HORTON HOMES, INC., D ef en dant- Cr oss De fendant-Appellee, ACS BENEFIT SERVIC ES, INC., J. SM ITH LANIER AND CO. ADMINISTRATORS, INC., D ef en dants -C ro ss Cl ai m an ts.

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ Appe al f ro m the U nit ed

S ta te s D istri ct

Co urt f or the N orthe rnD istri ct

of G eo rg ia

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ _ (J an ua ry 24, 200 7) Before AN DE RSO N and BARKET T, Circuit Judges, and ST ROM ,* D istrict Judg e.

____ ____ ____ ___ *Honora ble Lyle E. Strom, United States District J udg e for the District of Ne braska , sitti ngby desig nation.2

PE R CU RIA M: Af ter oral argum ent and caref ul consid eration, w e conclude that the district
co urt i s du e to b e af

fi rm ed be ca use pla int if

f ha s no t pr ove d th at

the de ci sio n of

the plan a dm ini str at or

w as w ro ng. T he e vid en ce be fo re the de ci sio n- m ak er c le ar ly indicated that Candace w as not “ principally dependent” on her father, the covered
em ploy ee. A cc or din gly , the j udgm en t of the dis tr ic t c ourt i s AFFIR MED.
[No. 55151-5-I.

Division One.

October 31, 2005.]

#### David M. Simmonds, *Appellant,*v. David S. Michael et al., *Respondents.*

Appeal from judgments of the Superior Court for King County, No. 02-2-34975-7, Terence Lukens, J., entered May 5 and 19, and August 21, 2003, and July 30, August 20, and September 30, 2004. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Baker, J., concurred in by Appelwick, A.C.J., and Grosse, J.
pp

 Total, 16 years and over ................................................................... 33,384 10,426 22,959 32,836 10,256 22,580

Economic reasons ................................................................................ 5,875 2,259 3,616 5,773 2,198 3,575

 Slack work or business conditions ...................................................... 4,169 2,006 2,163 4,097 1,962 2,135

 Could only find part-time work ............................................................ 1,389 - 1,389 1,380 - 1,380

 Seasonal work .................................................................................... 190 126 64 171 111 60

 Job started or ended during week ...................................................... 127 127 - 125 125 -

Noneconomic reasons .......................................................................... 27,509 8,166 19,343 27,063 8,058 19,005

 Child-care problems ........................................................................... 753 70 683 750 70 680

 Other family or personal obligations ................................................... 5,425 725 4,700 5,354 716 4,638

 Health or medical limitations ............................................................... 834 - 834 814 - 814

 In school or training ............................................................................ 6,057 98 5,959 5,985 96 5,888

 Retired or Social Security limit on earnings ........................................ 2,185 - 2,185 2,089 - 2,089

 Vacation or personal day .................................................................... 3,431 3,431 - 3,399 3,399 -

 Holiday, legal or religious ................................................................... 844 844 - 836 836 -

 Weather-related curtailment ............................................................... 454 454 - 433 433 -

 All other reasons ................................................................................. 7,525 2,543 4,982 7,404 2,508 4,896

Average hours:

Economic reasons .............................................................................. 22.9 23.8 22.4 23.0 23.8 22.4

 Other reasons ..................................................................................... 21.4 25.1 19.8 21.4 25.1 19.8

 NOTE: Detail may not sum to total due to rounding. Updated population controls are introduced annually with the release of January data. Dash indicates no

data or data that do not meet publication criteria. 

232