alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

No. 04

- 13

- 00764

- CR

Dorothy MARTINEZ

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 226th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013CR2599

Honorable Sid L. Harle, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE MARIO N, JUS TICE BARNARD , AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is

REVERSED and this case is REMANDED to the trial court for a new trial.

SIGNED November 12, 2014.

_____________________________ Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Respondent

v.
NEIL ANDREW NEIDIG, Petitioner : : : : : : : : : : : : No. 210 MAL 2014 Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Unpublished Memorandum and Order of the Superior Court at No. 2135 MDA 2012 filed January 3, 2014, affirming the Judgment of Sentence of the Northumberland County Court of Common Pleas at Nos. CP-49-CR-0000295-2012 and CP-49-CR-0000756-2011 filed October 18, 2012

ORDER

PER CURIAM AND NOW , this 19th day of August, 2014, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED . The judgment of the Superior Court is VACATED , and the matter is REMANDED to the Superior Court to consider the implications of Pa.R.A.P. 1925(c), as outlined in the dissenting statement by Judge Fitzgerald. See Pa.R.A.P. 1925(c)(3) (where an “appellate court is convinced that counsel has been per seineffective, the appellate court shall remand for the filing of a Statement nunc pro tunc and for the preparation and filing of an opinion by the judge.”).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE 
BALANCE SHEET AND STATEMENTS OF LOSS AND ACCUMULATED DEFICIT AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE  TO SUCH 10QSB FOR THE QUARTER ENDED July 31, 1998.
       
       
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          Apr-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               Jul-31-1998
<CASH>                                            6394
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      993
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  7387
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    7672
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      10000
<COMMON>                                          1935
<OTHER-SE>                                       (4263)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      7672
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     2478
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (2478)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.001)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.001)

        

</TABLE>
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 608 

To provide that chapter 1 of title 9 of the United States Code, relating 

to the enforcement of arbitration agreements, shall not apply to enrollment agreements made between students and certain institutions of higher education, and to prohibit limitations on the ability of students to 

pursue claims against certain institutions of higher education. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 28, 2019 

Mr. DURBIN (for himself, Mr. WHITEHOUSE, Ms. WARREN, Mr. REED, Mr. 

BROWN, Mr. BLUMENTHAL, Ms. HIRONO, and Mr. MARKEY) introduced 

the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee 

on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To provide that chapter 1 of title 9 of the United States 

Code, relating to the enforcement of arbitration agreements, shall not apply to enrollment agreements made 

between students and certain institutions of higher education, and to prohibit limitations on the ability of students to pursue claims against certain institutions of 

higher education. 

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


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•S 608 IS

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Court Legal Access 

3 and Student Support (CLASS) Act of 2019’’. 

4 SEC. 2. INAPPLICABILITY OF CHAPTER 1 OF TITLE 9, 

5 UNITED STATES CODE, TO ENROLLMENT 

6 AGREEMENTS MADE BETWEEN STUDENTS 

7 AND CERTAIN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER 

8 EDUCATION. 

9 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 1 of title 9 of the United 

10 States Code (relating to the enforcement of arbitration 

11 agreements) shall not apply to an enrollment agreement 

12 made between a student and an institution of higher edu13 cation. 

14 (b) DEFINITION.—In this section, the term ‘‘institu15 tion of higher education’’ has the meaning given such term 

16 in section 102 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 

17 U.S.C. 1002). 

18 SEC. 3. PROHIBITION ON LIMITATIONS ON ABILITY OF STU19 DENTS TO PURSUE CLAIMS AGAINST CER20 TAIN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION. 

21 Section 487(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 

22 (20 U.S.C. 1094(a)) is amended by adding at the end the 

23 following: 

24 ‘‘(30) The institution will not require any stu25 dent to agree to, and will not enforce, any limitation 

26 or restriction (including a limitation or restriction on 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
3 

•S 608 IS

1 any available choice of applicable law, a jury trial, 

2 or venue) on the ability of a student to pursue a 

3 claim, individually or with others, against an institu4 tion in court.’’. 

5 SEC. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

6 This Act and the amendments made by this Act shall 

7 take effect 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
#### § 354.74 Prerequisites to inspection.

Inspection of products shall be rendered pursuant to the regulations in this part and under such conditions and in accordance with such methods as may be prescribed or approved by the Administrator.
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT
B R IAN NEW TON, a

n individual , Pla i ntiff-Appe lla

nt, v. PARKER DR ILLING M ANAGEM ENT SER VIC ES, LTD., Errone o usly Sue d As Parke r Drilling M ana ge m e nt Se rvic e s, Inc ., De fe nda

n t-Appe l le e , and PARKER DR ILLING M ANAGEM ENT SER VIC ES, INC ., a

Ne va da C orporation, De fe nda n t. No. 15-56352 D.C . No. 2:15-c v-02517-R GK-AGR ORDER *

On R e m and from

the Unite d State s Supre m e C ourt B e fore : PAEZ, B ER

ZON, a n d C HR ISTEN, C irc uit Judge s. B rian Ne wton sue d his form e r e m ploy e r, Parke r Drilling, in C a lifornia sta te c ourt for wa ge and hour viola tions unde r C a lifornia

la w. Pa rke r re m ove d the c a se 

# FIL ED JUL 23 2019 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public a t ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by Ninth C irc uit R

ule 36-3.to fe de ra l distric t c ourt a nd m ove d for judgm e nt on theple a dings. Thedistric t c ourt gra nte d Parke r’ s m otion, c onc luding tha t unde r the Oute r C ontine nta l She l f Lands Ac t, 43 U.S.C . §§ 1331–1356b (“ O C SLA” ), the Fa ir La bor Sta nda rds Ac t (“ FLSA” ), 29 U.S.C . § 201 e t. se q. , is a c o m pre he nsive sta

tutory sc he m e tha

t le ave s no room

for sta te la w to a ddre ss wa g e and hour grie va nc e s. Ne wton a ppe a le d, a

nd we va c a t e d a

nd re m ande d . N

e w ton v . Park

e r Drilling Mgmt. Se

rv s. , 881 F.3d 1078, 1081–82 (9th C ir. 2018). Pa rke r pe t itione d for writ of c e rtiora ri, whic h the Supre m e C ourt gra nte d. Park

e r Drilling Mgmt. Se

rv s. v . N e w ton , 139 S. C t. 914 (2019). The Supre m e C ourt’ s opinion issue d on June 10, 2019. Park e r Drilling Mgmt. Se rv

s. v . N e w ton , 139 S. C t. 1881 (2019). In ac c orda nc e with theC ourt’ s opinion, wea ffirm t

he distric t c ourt’ s orde r dism issing Ne wton’ s C a lifornia la w m inim um wa ge and ove rtim e c la im s. B e c a use our opinion did not a

n a ly z e Ne wton’ s othe r sta

te -la w c la im s a

nd he ld tha

t Ne wton should be

give n le ave to am e nd his c om

pla int, the Supre m e C ourt va c a te d a n d re m a n de d the c a s e to us. W e , in turn, V ACAT E and RE M AND to the distric t c ourt for furthe r proc e e dings c onsiste n t with theC ourt’ s opinion.

2
**EXHIBIT32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Each of the undersignedhereby certifies, in his capacity as an officer of August TechnologyCorporation (the “Company”), for purposes of 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adoptedpursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of hisknowledge:

 

(1)                                  The Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period ended September30, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)                                  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date: November 1, 2004 |                                   |
|------------------------|----------------------------------------|
|                   |                                   |
|                   | By:                                    | /s/ DAVID L. KLENK |   |
|                   | David L. Klenk                         |
|                   | President and Chief  Operating Officer |
|                   | (Acting Principal  Executive Officer)  |
|                   |                                   |
|                   |                                   |
|                   | By:                                    | /s/ STANLEY D. PIEKOS |   |
|                   | Stanley D. Piekos                      |
|                   | Chief Financial Officer                |
|                        |                                        |  |  |  |

 

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to August Technology Corporation and will be retained by August Technology Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
Exhibit






Exhibit 10.10
THIRD AMENDMENT
TO
THE PROGRESSIVE CORPORATION
2003 INCENTIVE PLAN
WHEREAS, The Progressive Corporation 2003 Incentive Plan, as heretofore amended (the “Plan”) is currently in effect; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors believes that it is desirable to further amend the Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as follows:
1.Section 6(d), entitled "Buyout Provisions," is hereby deleted in its entirety.
2.Except as expressly modified hereby, the terms of the Plan shall be unchanged.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1



CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference of our report dated March 15, 2000 included in this Form 10-K, into
the Company's previously filed Registration Statements File Nos. 33-72852,
33-34250, 33-91714, 333-30099, 333-53253, 333-71423, 333-81459, 333-84391, and
333-88807.


Vienna, Virginia
March 28, 2000                              /s/ ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP
                                            -----------------------
* All UAS Operators must perform this pre-flight checklist prior to every respective flight.

PRE-FLIGHT CHECKLIST*

HULL AND PROPELLORS 

All hull screws are securely fastened to the body of the UAS.

All propellers are securely fastened to the motors.

Transmitters and accompanying wires are securely fastened to the hull.

Camera(s), gimbal(s), and accompanying wires are securely fastened to the hull.

There are no loose parts, wires, screws, or extremities that can fall from the UAS.

Operators Notes: 

SAFETY CHECK 

The operator performed a visual review of the area of operation.

The operator is aware of aerial obstructions (i.e., poles, structures, utility wires, trees).

The operator is not within 3-miles of an airport.

The operator clearly marked a take-off/landing zone with 4 orange caution cones.

The operator has clearly announced that a UAS is preparing for flight.

The operator has ensured no persons or animals are near the caution zone.

Weather permits the safe operation of the UAS (i.e., little to no wind, no precipitation, 

If working in pairs, the second operator has a pair of binoculars to maintain line of sight 

Operators Notes: 

POWER TO SYSTEM

The battery being placed into the UAS has a full capacity charge.

The batteries inside the RC controller have a sufficient charge.

There is a spare UAS battery with a full charge.

There are spare batteries for the RC controller with a full charge.

The UAS battery is securely fastened within the UAS hull

The UAS powers up completely indicating a normal audible chime of operability.

All lights on the UAS are operating normally.

Operators Notes: 

RC/WIFI/FPV CONNECTIVITY 

There is a steady connection between the RC controller and the UAS.

There is a steady connection between the video transmitter and the FPV receiver.

The UAS is responding accurately and efficiently to RC commands.

Video equipment is responding accurately and efficiently to FPV commands.

FPV OSD is operational. 

RC Controller is set to GPS and HL and CL modes are both turned off. 

Operators Notes:

SATELLITE CONNECTIVITY 

UAS is indicating full satellite/GPS connectivity.

UAS has set the “home” location. 

Following take-off, UAS successfully completes a 10-second unassisted hover. 

Operators Notes:

UAS Operator’s Signature: ___________________________ Date: ____________________
# C_2007092EN.01000302.xml

| 27.4.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 92/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.4.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 92/3

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4616 — Home Retail/Durinicum/Ogalas)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2007/C 92/06)

On 13 April 2007, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32007M4616. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu) |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32007M4616. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu)

---
II

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1194

To prohibit discrimination in contracting on federally funded projects on

the basis of certain labor policies of potential contractors.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 9, 1999

Mr. HUTCHINSON (for himself, Mr. LOTT, Mr. NICKLES, Mr. COVERDELL,

Mr. HELMS, Mr. ASHCROFT, Mr. GRAMM, Mr. KYL, Mr. HAGEL, Mr.

INHOFE, Mr. FRIST, Mr. BOND, Mr. THURMOND, Mrs. HUTCHISON, Mr.

MCCONNELL, Mr. ENZI, Mr. WARNER, Mr. DEWINE, Mr. SESSIONS, Mr.

COCHRAN, Mr. BUNNING, Mr. ROBERTS, Mr. GORTON, Mr. SHELBY, Mr.

THOMAS, and Mr. MACK) introduced the following bill; which was read

twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and

Pensions

A BILL

To prohibit discrimination in contracting on federally funded

projects on the basis of certain labor policies of potential

contractors.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Open Competition Act

5 of 1999’’.
2

•S 1194 IS

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION REGARDING CONSIDERATION OF

2 CERTAIN LABOR RELATIONS POLICIES OF

3 OFFERORS ON FEDERALLY FUNDED CON4 TRACTS.

5 Section 8(e) of the National Labor Relations Act (29

6 U.S.C. 158(e)) is amended by adding at the end the fol7 lowing: ‘‘Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act,

8 no person may be discriminated against when bidding on

9 a prime contract, funded in whole or in part with funds

10 provided by the Federal Government, where such discrimi11 nation is based in whole or in part on a requirement that

12 such person enter into or adhere to a collective bargaining

13 agreement or any similar agreement as a condition of per14 forming work under the contract.’’.

15 SEC. 3. CONSTRUCTION.

16 The amendment made by section 2 shall not be

17 construed—

18 (1) to apply to subcontractors; or

19 (2)(A) to prohibit a contractor from voluntarily

20 entering into a lawful agreement with a labor orga21 nization; or

22 (B) to discourage contractors who have entered

23 into such an agreement from bidding on Federal

24 contracts.
3

•S 1194 IS

1 SEC. 4. APPLICATION.

2 The amendment made by section 2 shall apply to con3 tracts made directly with any agency of the Federal Gov4 ernment and to contracts made with any entity that is

5 managing or operating a facility owned or controlled by

6 the Federal Government on behalf of the Federal Govern7 ment.

Æ
### §4110. Authorization of appropriations; new spending authority

(a) There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary for carrying out this chapter.

(b) Any new spending authority (within the meaning of section 651 of title 2) which is provided under this chapter shall be effective for any fiscal year only to such extent or in such amounts as may be provided in appropriation Acts.

(Pub. L. 98–373, title I, §111, July 31, 1984, 98 Stat. 1248.)
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6909
BERNARD ENGRAM, Petitioner - Appellant, versus STEVEN J. GAL, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District ofSouth Carolina, at Columbia. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge. (CA01-4309-3) Submitted: October 24, 2002 Decided: October 30, 2002 Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bernard Engram, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Bernard Engram, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Engram v. Gal , No. CA-01-4309-3 (D.S.C. May 20, 2002). We 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.

AFFIRMED
### §212. Right to amend; separability

The right to alter, amend, or repeal this Act is expressly reserved. If any provision of this Act, or the application there of to any person or circumstances, is held invalid, the remainder of the Act, and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances, shall not be affected thereby.

(Mar. 9, 1933, ch. 1, title V, §502, 48 Stat. 7.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This Act, referred to in text, is act Mar. 9, 1933, ch. 1, 48 Stat. 1, popularly known as the Emergency Banking and Bank Conservation Act, which is classified to sections 51a, 51b, 51c, 51d, 95, 201 to 212, 248, 347b, 347c, 347d, and 445 of this title and section 4305 of Title 50, War and National Defense, and classified as a note under section 4305 of Title 50.

Section 51d of this title was repealed by act June 30, 1947, ch. 166, title II, §206(b), (o), 61 Stat. 208. For effect of the repeal on outstanding debentures held by banks, see References in Text note set out under section 51b–1 of this title.

#### Codification

This section was not enacted as part of title II of act Mar. 9, 1933, ch. 1, 48 Stat. 2, which comprises this subchapter.
### §272b. Annual budget submission

The National Institute of Standards and Technology shall annually submit to the Congress, at the time of the release of the President's budget, a three year budget estimate for the Institute, including funding estimates for each major account and new initiative.

(Pub. L. 100–519, title I, §111, Oct. 24, 1988, 102 Stat. 2592.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1989, and not as part of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Act which comprises this chapter.
#### § 25.8 Alcoholic beverages and narcotics.

Operating a motor vehicle while in the GAO Building, its grounds or on its entry ramps by a person under the influence of alcoholic beverages, narcotic drugs, hallucinogens, marijuana, barbiturates, or amphetamines is prohibited. It is prohibited for anyone to enter or be in the GAO Building or to be on its grounds while under the influence of, or using, possessing, selling or distributing any narcotic drug, hallucinogen, marijuana, barbiturate, or amphetamine. This prohibition shall not apply in cases where the drug is being used as prescribed for a patient by a licensed physician. It is prohibited for anyone to enter the GAO Building or its grounds, or be on the premises while under the influence of alcoholic beverages. The use of alcoholic beverages in the GAO Building is prohibited except when specifically authorized by the Comptroller General or his designee for a particular event. The Comptroller General or his designee shall be advised of such events and shall inform the guards and other security staff of the time and precise locations of these events.
#### § 11.20 Time for payment.

Annual charges must be paid no later than 45 days after rendition of a bill by the Commission. If the licensee or exemptee believes that the bill is incorrect, no later than 45 days after its rendition the licensee or exemptee may file an appeal of the bill with the Chief Financial Officer. No later than 30 days after the date of issuance of the Chief Financial Officer's decision on the appeal, the licensee or exemptee may file a request for rehearing of that decision pursuant to § 385.713 of this chapter. In the event that a timely appeal to the Chief Financial Officer or a timely request to the Commission for rehearing is filed, the payment of the bill may be made under protest, and subject to refund pending the outcome of the appeal or rehearing.

[60 FR 15048, Mar. 22, 1995]