alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 195 (Wednesday, October 11, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 47227]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-21828]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health

National Eye Institute; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, 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 Eye Institute Special Emphasis 
Panel; NEI Clinician Scientist Mentored Training Grant Applications, 
K08 and K23.
    Date: October 30-31, 2017.
    Time: 10:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, 5635 Fishers Lane, 
Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: Anne E. Schaffner, Ph.D., Chief, Scientific 
Review Branch, Division of Extramural Research, National Eye 
Institute, 5635 Fishers Lane, Suite 1300, MSC 9300, Bethesda, MD 
20892-9300, (301) 451-2020, [email protected].

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.867, 
Vision Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: October 4, 2017.
Natasha M. Copeland,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2017-21828 Filed 10-10-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
```
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Evencio Gonzalez, Appellant.

[987 NYS2d 135]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles H. Solomon, J.), rendered on or about March 22, 2011, unanimously affirmed.

Application by appellant’s counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see Anders v California,*386 US 738 [1967]; *People v Saunders,*52 AD2d 833 [1st Dept 1976]). We have reviewed this record and agree with appellant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous points which could be raised on this appeal.

Pursuant to Criminal Procedure Law § 460.20, defendant may apply for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals by making application to the Chief Judge of that Court and by submitting such application to the Clerk of that Court or to a Justice of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of this Department on reasonable notice to the respondent within 30 days after service of a copy of this order.

Denial of the application for permission to appeal by the judge or justice first applied to is final and no new application may thereafter be made to any other judge or justice.

Concur — Tom, J.E, Friedman, Renwick, Gische and Clark, JJ.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED February 23, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-41267 Conference Calendar

JOHNNIE R. PROPES, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus CITY MANAGER; RODNEY NOLES, Defendants-Appellees.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 4:03-CV-162-RAS-DDB

-------------------- Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Johnnie R. Propes, Texas state prisoner # 1178904, appeals the district court’s dismissal with prejudice of his pro se, in forma pauperis, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights complaint as frivolous and for failure to state a claim. Propes alleged that Plano, Texas, city officials conspired to discriminate against him on the basis of his race by issuing citations to him for violating city ordinances based on the mistaken belief that he owned land which he, in fact, did not own. He claimed that Noles, an uncertified building inspector, had engaged in theNo. 04-41267 -2- wanton prosecution of code violations on residences owned by African-Americans. We review a dismissal as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) for an abuse of discretion. Taylor v. Johnson , 257 F.3d 470, 472 (5th Cir. 2001). We review a dismissal for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted de novo
. Hart v. Hairston , 343 F.3d 762, 763-64 (5th Cir. 2003); § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Propes’s conclusory allegations of a race-based conspiracy are insufficient to support a viable § 1983 claim. See Brinkmann v. Johnston , 793 F.2d 111, 113 (5th Cir. 1986). Nor has Propes demonstrated that either the citations or the warrants issued for his arrest were motivated by discriminatory animus. See Coleman v. Houston Indep. Sch. Dist. , 113 F.3d 528, 533 (5th Cir. 1997). Accordingly, Propes’s appeal lacks an arguable basis in law and fact and is frivolous. See Berry v. Brady , 192 F.3d 504, 507 (5th Cir. 1999) . Because the appeal is frivolous it is dismissed. See 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2.
In Propes v. Dretke , No. 04-50822 (5th Cir. Apr. 20, 2005), we imposed the 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) bar against Propes. We warn Propes that further filing of frivolous complaints or pleadings may result in additional sanctions against him. Propes’s motion for the appointment of counsel on appeal is denied.
APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS; MOTION DENIED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Agriculture

###### Agricultural Research Service

# AGENCY:

Agricultural Research Service, USDA.

# ACTION:

Notice of intent.

# SUMMARY:

Notice is hereby given that the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, intends to grant to Golden Valley Organics, Inc. (dba) BioWest Ag Solutions of Nampa, Idaho, an exclusive license to U.S. Patent No. 9,414,602, “PSEUDOMONAS FLUORESCENS INHIBIT ANNUAL BLUEGRASS AND ROUGH BLUEGRASS ROOT GROWTH AND GERMINATION”, issued on August 16, 2016.

# DATES:

Comments must be received on or before November 13, 2017.

# ADDRESSES:

*Send comments to:*                         USDA, ARS, Office of Technology Transfer, 5601 Sunnyside Avenue, Rm. 4-1174, Beltsville, Maryland 20705-5131.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Brian T. Nakanishi of the Office of Technology Transfer at the Beltsville address given above; telephone: 301-504-5989.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Federal Government's patent rights in this invention are assigned to the United States of America, as represented by the Secretary of Agriculture. It is in the public interest to so license this invention as Golden Valley Organics, Inc. (dba) BioWest Ag Solutions of Nampa, Idaho has submitted a complete and sufficient application for a license. The prospective exclusive license will be royalty-bearing and will comply with the terms and conditions of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. The prospective exclusive license may be granted unless, within thirty (30) days from the date of this published Notice, the Agricultural Research Service receives written evidence and argument which establishes that the grant of the license would not be consistent with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7.

Mojdeh Bahar,

Assistant Administrator.

[FR Doc. 2017-21953 Filed 10-10-17; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 3410-03-P
Exhibit 31.2**CERTIFICATION**I, John L. Finlayson, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Susquehanna Media Co., certifythat:     1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2005 ofSusquehanna Media Co.;     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:     (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;     (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and     (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):     (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and     (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.        Date: August 17, 2005 /s/ John L. Finlayson   John L. Finlayson   Vice President and CFO
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Michael CHANEY, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 10-60364

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

April 7, 2011.

Richard Terrell Starrett, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Eugene Carlos Tanner, III, Esq., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Jackson, MS, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Clarence T. Guthrie, III, Esq., The Guthrie Firm, P.L.L.C., Ridgeland, MS, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before JOLLY, GARZA and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Michael Chaney pleaded guilty to one count of carjacking in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2119, and one count of brandishing a firearm during the carjacking, in *395violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). The district court sentenced him to 55 months in prison on the carjacking count, followed by a mandatory consecutive term of 87 months for the § 924(e) offense. Chaney now appeals his sentence, arguing that the Government improperly refused to move for a third point for acceptance of responsibility pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3El.l(b), because Chaney — who denied ownership and possession of the subject firearm despite conceding — would not sign a plea supplement admitting that he had an interest in the gun for purposes of forfeiture. The Government declined to accept what Chaney contends were reasonable alterations to the plea supplement, and Chaney pleaded guilty without the benefit of the plea agreement, including a third point for acceptance of responsibility.

Chaney argues that the Government’s refusal was not rationally related to a legitimate government end, that the district court should have ordered the Government to make the motion, and that his resulting guidelines range was incorrect and thus procedurally flawed. We need not reach whether Chaney’s arguments in the district court, which were more akin to a request for a nonguidelines sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) than the procedural challenge to the guidelines range he now raises, preserved his current claim. *See, e.g., United States v. Mondragon-Santiago,*564 F.3d 357, 361 (5th Cir.), *cert. denied,*— U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 192, 175 L.Ed.2d 120 (2009). We find no error even under the ordinary standard of review. *See United States v. Newson,*515 F.3d 374, 376-78 (5th Cir.2008).

The Government has discretion to decide whether to move for a third point for acceptance of responsibility. *Newson,*515 F.3d at 377-78. Chaney has not made any showing of an unconstitutional motive, a threshold requirement. *See United States v. Urbani,*967 F.2d 106, 109-10 (5th Cir.1992). Moreover, Chaney has not shown that the Government’s decision was not rationally related to the purpose underlying § 3El.l(b), a determination that the Government was in the best position to make. We reject Chaney’s challenge to his sentence.

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.
Order entered February 13, 2015.

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**
No. 05
- 15
- 00071
- CV LUCIEN B. CROSLAND, Appellant
V. RODNEY J. ROHRICH, M .D., Appellee On Appeal from the 134th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC
- 14
- 06381 

### O RDER Before the Court is appellant’s February 12, 2015, unopposed motion for extension of time to file appellant’s brief

. Appellant asks this Court to extend his filing deadline for thirty days. Because this case is acc elerated, we GRANT the motion to the extent we allow appellant an additional twenty days to file his brief. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 38.6(a). We ORDER appellant file his brief no later than March 1 7, 2015.

/s/ CRAIG STODDART JUSTICE
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                           5

<S>                                                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                       12-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                   dec-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                        dec-31-2000
<CASH>                                                      1,947,276
<SECURITIES>                                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                                               7,878,816
<ALLOWANCES>                                                  282,991
<INVENTORY>                                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                    0
<PP&E>                                                              0
<DEPRECIATION>                                                      0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                             79,350,099
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                               0
<BONDS>                                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                               0
<PREFERRED>                                                         0
<COMMON>                                                            0
<OTHER-SE>                                                 48,537,398
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                               79,350,099
<SALES>                                                             0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                           27,796,597
<CGS>                                                               0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                           18,431,964
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                          3,151,691
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                             6,212,942
<INCOME-TAX>                                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                         6,212,942
<DISCONTINUED>                                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                             3,320,774
<CHANGES>                                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                                9,533,716
<EPS-BASIC>                                                         0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                       0



</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2914 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2914

 To amend the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 to terminate 
  marketing assistance loans and loan deficiency payments for mohair 
                               producers.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 17, 2009

 Mr. Chaffetz introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                        Committee on Agriculture

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 to terminate 
  marketing assistance loans and loan deficiency payments for mohair 
                               producers.

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

SECTION 1. TERMINATION OF AVAILABILITY OF MARKETING ASSISTANCE LOANS 
              AND LOAN DEFICIENCY PAYMENTS FOR MOHAIR PRODUCERS.

    (a) Removal of Mohair From Eligible Loan Commodities.--Section 
1001(8) of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 
8701(8)) is amended by striking ``mohair,''.
    (b) Elimination of Future Loan Rates for Mohair.--Section 1202(c) 
of such Act (7 U.S.C. 8732(c)) is amended by striking paragraph (18).
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32.2**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Wilsons The Leather Experts Inc. (the “Company”) onForm 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended April 29, 2006, as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Stacy A. Kruse, Chief Financial Officer andTreasurer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, adopted pursuant to Section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:     1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended; and     2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.     /s/ STACY A. KRUSE **Stacy A. Kruse,**
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2943 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2943

  To eliminate most Federal penalties for possession of marijuana for 
                 personal use, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 18, 2009

  Mr. Frank of Massachusetts (for himself, Ms. Baldwin, Mr. Paul, Mr. 
Rohrabacher, and Mr. Hinchey) introduced the following bill; which was 
  referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the 
   Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently 
   determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such 
 provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To eliminate most Federal penalties for possession of marijuana for 
                 personal use, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Personal Use of Marijuana by 
Responsible Adults Act of 2009''.

SEC. 2. ELIMINATION OF CERTAIN MARIJUANA-RELATED PENALTIES.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no penalty may be 
imposed under an Act of Congress for the possession of marijuana for 
personal use, or for the not-for-profit transfer between adults of 
marijuana for personal use. For the purposes of this section, 
possession of 100 grams or less of marijuana shall be presumed to be 
for personal use, as shall the not-for-profit transfer of one ounce or 
less of marijuana, except that the civil penalty provided in section 
405 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 844a) may be imposed 
for the public use of marijuana if the amount of the penalty does not 
exceed $100.
                                 <all>
```