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

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. CON. RES. 41 

Expressing the sense of Congress that the Secretary of the Navy should 

name the next Virginia-class submarine of the United States Navy the 

‘‘USS Wisconsin’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 23, 2020 

Ms. BALDWIN (for herself and Mr. JOHNSON) submitted the following 

concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of Congress that the Secretary of the 

Navy should name the next Virginia-class submarine of 

the United States Navy the ‘‘USS Wisconsin’’. 

Whereas Wisconsin has a rich and historical connection to 

the United State Navy, evidenced particularly by the fact 

that the submarine fleet of the United States Navy produced 28 freshwater submarines for the World War II 

war effort; 

Whereas the first USS Wisconsin (BB–9) was an 11,565-ton 

Illinois-class battleship that was commissioned in 1901, 

sailed as the flagship of both the Pacific Squadron and 

Asiatic Fleet, and went on to sail in the Great White 

Fleet that circumnavigated the globe; 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•SCON 41 IS 

Whereas the USS Wisconsin (BB–64), commonly known as 

‘‘Big Wisky’’ and ‘‘the Last Battleship’’, was commissioned in 1944 and served in every major conflict until 

its decommissioning in 1991, including World War II, the 

Korean War, and the Persian Gulf War; 

Whereas the USS Wisconsin (BB–64) continues to play a 

vital role in educating visitors to Hampton Roads, Virginia, about the famed history of the ship; 

Whereas individual citizens of Wisconsin have played a crucial role in the history of the United States Navy, including— 

(1) Admiral Marc A. Mitscher, who was one of the 

first aviators of the United States Navy and was born in 

Hillsboro, Wisconsin; and 

(2) Green Bay native Vice Admiral James H. 

Flatley, Jr., who was a key figure in the Battle of the 

Coral Sea and the Guadalcanal campaign; 

Whereas 63 citizens of Wisconsin have been recipients of a 

Medal of Honor, including 10 citizens of Wisconsin who 

have received a Medal of Honor from the Department of 

the Navy; and 

Whereas there has not been a USS Wisconsin in service for 

nearly 3 decades: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 

2 concurring), That the Secretary of the Navy should name 

3 the next Virginia-class submarine of the United States 

4 Navy the ‘‘USS Wisconsin’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
http://pubs.usgs.gov/sim/3227/sim3227_readme.txt

Version 1.1, March, 2014
  - Minor edits were made to the geodatabase to correct geology
    and facilitate edgematch with adjacent USGS maps.
  - The database was upgraded from ArcGIS 9.3 to ArcGIS 10.2.
  - Changes made to the geodatabase are not reflected in the
    pamphlet or on map sheet PDFs.

U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Map SIM-3227
Geologic Map of the Tuba City 30' x 60' Quadrangle, Coconino
County, Northern Arizona

Description of digital dataset files posted on this website:

sim3227_readme.txt - this file

sim3227_metadata.txt - FGDC compliant metadata. Each Geodatabase
Feature Class also has its own metadata.

tuba_db.zip - zipped package of files necessary to create an
ArcMap Personal Geodatabase project.
   -- readme_tuba_db.txt
   -- tubacity100k_v1.1.mdb - ArcGIS Personal Geodatabase
   -- tubacity100k.style - ArcMap style for symbolizing data
   -- f36111a1.tif - 1:100,000-scale DRG base

tuba_shape.zip - zipped package of Feature Classes converted to
shapefiles to facilitate use of the data in ArcMap and other
applications.
   -- readme_tuba_shape.txt
   -- tuba_shapefiles_v1.1 - shapefiles folder
   -- tubacity100k.style - ArcMap style for symbolizing data
   -- f36111a1.tif - 1:100,000-scale DRG base
#### § 68.1 Scope of rules.

The rules of practice in this part are applicable to adjudicatory proceedings before Administrative Law Judges of the Executive Office for Immigration Review, United States Department of Justice, with regard to unlawful employment cases under section 274A of the INA, unfair immigration-related employment practice cases under section 274B of the INA, and document fraud cases under section 274C of the INA. Such proceedings shall be conducted expeditiously, and the parties shall make every effort at each stage of a proceeding to avoid delay. To the extent that these rules may be inconsistent with a rule of special application as provided by statute, executive order, or regulation, the latter is controlling. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure may be used as a general guideline in any situation not provided for or controlled by these rules, by the Administrative Procedure Act, or by any other applicable statute, executive order, or regulation.

[Order No. 2203-99, 64 FR 7073, Feb. 12, 1999]
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT

BILLY NOEL CATHERWOOD, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D18-4366 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ) Opinion filed December 6, 2019. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Barbara Twine Thomas, Judge. Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Brett S. Chase, Special Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Elba Caridad Martin, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

SILBERMAN, BADALAMENTI, and ATKINSON, JJ., Concur.
§ 16.201 Voting by the Commissioners without joint deliberation. ( a ) Whenever the Commission's Chairman so directs, any matter which ( 1 ) does not appear to require joint deliberation among the members of the Commission, or
( 2 ) by reason of its urgency, cannot be scheduled for consideration at a Commission meeting, may be disposed of by presentation of the matter separately to each of the members of the Commission. After consideration of the matter each Commission member shall report his vote to the Chairman.
( b ) Whenever any member of the Commission so requests, any matter presented to the Commissioners for disposition pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section shall be withdrawn and scheduled instead for consideration at a Commission meeting.
( c ) The provisions of § 16.206(a) of these rules shall apply in the case of any Commission determination made pursuant to this section.
§ 541.42 Designation of Hearing Administrator. ( a ) The Regional Director in the region where the inmate is located shall review the institution's recommendation for referral of an inmate for placement in a control unit. If the Regional Director concurs with the recommendation, the Regional Director shall forward a written request, together with the institution's referral material, to the Regional Director of the region where the control unit is located. The Regional Director of the region where the control unit is located shall designate a person in the Regional Office to review the referral material and to conduct a hearing on the appropriateness of an inmate's placement in a control unit.
( b ) The Hearing Administrator shall have the following qualifications: ( 1 ) Correctional experience, including institutional work with inmates, processing of inmate disciplinary actions, significant institutional experience in observing and evaluating inmate adjustment and disruptive behavior, and knowledge of the options available in the Bureau of Prisons for dealing with such conduct;
( 2 ) Lack of former personal involvement in an Institution Discipline Committee action involving the particular inmate in incident(s) referred; and
( 3 ) Familiarity with Bureau of Prisons policies and operations, including the criteria for placement of inmates in different institutions and in a control unit.
Pictured is a african-american princess washing her hands with the text “Everyone loves to have clean hands!”
### §410bb–3. Authorization of appropriations

There are hereby authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this subchapter, but not more than $2,655,000 for the acquisition of lands and interests in lands, and not more than $5,885,000 for development.

(Pub. L. 94–323, §4, June 30, 1976, 90 Stat. 719.)
#### Michael J. Motelson, Appellant, v Candon Court Homeowners Association, Inc., Respondent.

[824 NYS2d 388]

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Martin, J.), dated February 25, 2005, as, upon reargument, adhered to a prior determination in an order of the same court dated September 23, 2004, granting the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.

All of the issues raised on this appeal could have been raised on the plaintiffs prior appeal from the order dated September 23, 2004 granting the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, which appeal was dismissed by this Court on July 7, 2005, for failure to prosecute. The dismissal of that appeal constituted an adjudication on the merits with respect to all issues that could have been raised and we decline to consider those issues on this appeal *(see Rubeo v*
      *544
      *National Grange Mut. Ins. Co.,*93 NY2d 750 [1999]; *Bray v Cox,*38 NY2d 350 [1976]; *Hepner v New York City Tr. Auth.,*27 AD3d 418 [2006]; *Lang v Dachs,*22 AD3d 468 [2005]; *Tri-State Sol-Aire Corp. v Martin Assoc.,*7 AD3d 514 [2004]). Schmidt, J.P., Adams, Dillon and Covello, JJ., concur.
#### § 34.111 Compensation.

All peer reviewers will be eligible to be paid according to applicable regulations and policies concerning consulting fees and reimbursement for expenses. Detailed information is provided in the OJJDP “Peer Review Guideline”.
#### § 42.308 Noncompliance.

Failure to implement and maintain an equal employment opportunity program as required by these guidelines shall subject recipients of LEAA assistance to the sanctions prescribed by the Safe Streets Act and the equal employment opportunity regulations of the Department of Justice. (See 42 U.S.C. 3757 and 28 CFR 42.207.)
Exhibit 5
                            Richard A. Kalaher, Esq.
                   Vice President, General Counsel & Secretary
                        American Standard Companies Inc.
                              One Centennial Avenue
                          Piscataway, New Jersey 08854




                                                              November 18, 1997

American Standard Companies Inc.
One Centennial Avenue
Piscataway, New Jersey 08855-6420

Gentlemen:

                  You have asked me, as General  Counsel  of  American  Standard
Companies Inc.(the "Company"), to render my opinion regarding certain matters in
connection  with  a  Registration  Statement  on  Form  S-8  (the  "Registration
Statement")  to be  filed  by the  Company  with  the  Securities  and  Exchange
Commission  under the  Securities  Act of 1933, as amended,  covering  1,000,000
shares ("Shares") of the Common Stock, par value $0.01 per share, of the Company
issuable pursuant to the Company's Employee Stock Purchase Plan (the "Plan").

                  I have  examined,  or  caused  to be  examined,  the  Restated
Certificate of Incorporation  and Amended By-laws of the Company,  as amended to
date,  the records of its  corporate  proceedings,  the Plan,  the  Registration
Statement and such other documents as I have deemed necessary in connection with
the opinion hereinafter expressed.

                  Based on the  foregoing,  I am of the opinion that the Shares,
when  purchased  under  the  Plan,  will  be  validly  issued  and  outstanding,
fully-paid and nonassessable shares of the Company's Common Stock.

                  I hereby  consent to the filing of this  opinion as an exhibit
to the Registration Statement.

                                                               Very truly yours,
<PAGE>
III 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 156 

Supporting the goals and ideals of Take Our Daughters And Sons To Work 

Day. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 10, 2019 

Mr. BURR (for himself, Ms. SMITH, and Mr. TILLIS) submitted the following 

resolution; which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Supporting the goals and ideals of Take Our Daughters 

And Sons To Work Day. 

Whereas the Take Our Daughters To Work program was created in New York City as a response to research that 

showed that, by the 8th grade, many girls were dropping 

out of school, had low self-esteem, and lacked confidence; 

Whereas, in 2003, the name of the program was changed to 

‘‘Take Our Daughters And Sons To Work’’ so that boys 

who face many of the same challenges as girls could also 

be involved in the program; 

Whereas, in 2019, the mission of the program, to develop 

‘‘innovative strategies that empower girls and boys to 

overcome societal barriers to reach their full potential’’, 

fully reflects the addition of boys; 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•SRES 156 ATS 

Whereas the Take Our Daughters And Sons To Work Foundation, a nonprofit organization, has grown to be one of 

the largest public awareness campaigns, with more than 

40,000,000 participants annually in more than 3,500,000 

organizations and workplaces representing each State; 

Whereas, in 2007, the Take Our Daughters To Work program transitioned to Elizabeth City, North Carolina, became known as the Take Our Daughters And Sons To 

Work Foundation, and received national recognition for 

its dedication to future generations; 

Whereas, every year, mayors, Governors, and other private 

and public officials sign proclamations and lend support 

to Take Our Daughters And Sons To Work Day; 

Whereas the fame of the Take Our Daughters And Sons To 

Work program has spread overseas, with requests and inquiries being made from around the world on how to operate the program; 

Whereas 2019 marks the 26th anniversary of the Take Our 

Daughters And Sons To Work program; 

Whereas Take Our Daughters And Sons to Work Day will 

be observed on Thursday, April 25, 2019; and 

Whereas, by offering opportunities for children to experience 

activities and events, Take Our Daughters And Sons To 

Work Day is intended to continue helping millions of 

girls and boys on an annual basis to examine their opportunities and strive to reach their fullest potential: Now, 

therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) recognizes the goals of introducing daugh3 ters and sons to the workplace; and 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
3 

•SRES 156 ATS 

1 (2) commends all participants of Take Our 

2 Daughters And Sons To Work Day for— 

3 (A) the ongoing contributions that the par4 ticipants make to education; and 

5 (B) the vital role that the participants play 

6 in promoting and ensuring a brighter, stronger 

7 future for the United States. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
§ 527.41 Definitions. For the purpose of this subpart, the following definitions apply. ( a ) *Treaty nation.* A country with which the United States has a transfer treaty relationship either through a bilateral treaty or a multilateral transfer convention.
( b ) *State prisoner.* An inmate serving a sentence imposed in a court in one of the states of the United States, or in a territory or commonwealth of the United States.
( c ) *Departure institution.* The Bureau of Prisons institution to which an eligible inmate is finally transferred for return to the country of which the inmate is a citizen or national.
( d ) *Admission institution.* The Bureau of Prisons institution where a United States citizen or national-inmate is first received from a treaty nation.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

December 9, 2011

d1206

Order 

December 9, 2011

143552

CITY OF ROOSEVELT PARK,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 143552

COA: 295588

Muskegon CC: 09-046817-CL

POLICE OFFICERS LABOR COUNCIL,

Defendant-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 12, 2011 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
Editorial Note on Subpart C of Part 42
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to subpart C of part 42 appear by Order No. 2679-2003, 68 FR 51364, Aug. 26, 2003.

§ 42.107 Conduct of investigations. ( a ) *Periodic compliance reviews.* The responsible Department official or his designee shall from time to time review the practices of recipients to determine whether they are complying with this subpart.
( b ) *Complaints.* Any person who believes himself or any specific class of individuals to be subjected to discrimination prohibited by this subpart may by himself or by a representative file with the responsible Department official or his designee a written complaint. A complaint must be filed not later than 180 days from the date of the alleged discrimination, unless the time for filing is extended by the responsible Department official or his designee.
( c ) *Investigations.* The responsible Department official or his designee will make a prompt investigation whenever a compliance review, report, complaint, or any other information indicates a possible failure to comply with this subpart. The investigation should include, whenever appropriate, a review of the pertinent practices and policies of the recipient, the circumstances under which the possible noncompliance with this subpart occurred, and other factors relevant to a determination as to whether the recipient has failed to comply with this subpart.
( d ) *Resolution of matters.* ( 1 ) If an investigation pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section indicates a failure to comply with this subpart, the responsible Department official or his designee will so inform the recipient and the matter will be resolved by informal means whenever possible. If it has been determined that the matter cannot be resolved by informal means, action will be taken as provided for in § 42.108.
( 2 ) If an investigation does not warrant action pursuant to paragraph (d)(1) of this section, the responsible Department official or his designee will so inform the recipient and the complainant, if any, in writing.
( e ) *Intimidatory or retaliatory acts prohibited.* No recipient or other person shall intimidate, threaten, coerce, or discriminate against any individual for the purpose of interfering with any right or privilege secured by section 601 of the Act or this subpart, or because he has made a complaint, testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing under this subpart. The identity of complainants shall be kept confidential except to the extent necessary to carry out the purpose of this subpart, including the conduct of any investigation, hearing, or judicial proceeding arising thereunder.
[Order No. 365-66, 31 FR 10265, July 29, 1966, as amended by Order No. 519-73, 38 FR 17955, July 5, 1973]
Prepared by MERRILL CORPORATION www.edgaradvantage.com


EXHIBIT 10.24


[LETTERHEAD]


October 18,
1999        


Xyros
Systems, Inc.

Mr. Ken Weiss, CEO

10005 Old Columbia Road, Suite P170

Columbia, MD 21046


Dear
Ken:


    The
Columbia Bank (the LENDER) is pleased to inform you that the maturity date of Xyros Systems, Inc.'s (the BORROWER) revolving line of credit loan (the "LOAN") has been extended to
February 1, 2000. It is expected that the LOAN will be paid off prior to February 1, 2000.


    Except
as hereinabove provided, the provisions of the Note and the other Loan Documents referred to in the letter have not been altered, and the modification(s) set forth herein shall
not be deemed to constitute a novation of any of the obligations of the Borrower to the Bank. Unless otherwise provided in this letter, all terms described herein shall have the meaning set forth in
the Note or the other Loan Documents.


Sincerely,

/s/ BRIAN ISRAEL   








Brian Israel

Vice President, Commercial Lending

(410) 730-5521
Order filed A ugust 30 , 201 9



### In The 

# Eleventh Court of Appeals

__________ 

### No. 11

- 1 9

- 00 2 6 0

- CV

__________ 

### GEORGINA RENDON , Appellant
V. BOBBY SWANSON, BOBBY SWANSON, INC., AND MODEL CLEANERS , Appellee s

On Appeal from the 70 th District Court Ector County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. A

- 17

- 07

- 0806

- CV

O R D E R
On A ugust 19 , 201 9 , Georgina Rendon filed a notic e of appeal from a judgment sign ed on March 22, 2019

. When the appeal was filed in this court, we
noted that the notice of appeal appeared to be untimely under T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 26.1.
Rendon indicated in h er notice of appeal that it was timely filed because she did not
receive notice of the trial court’s final judgment until May 20 , 201 9, on which date
she filed a motion for new trial

. See T EX

. R. C IV

. P. 306a ; see also T EX

. R.
A PP

. P. 26.1(a)(1)

. We abate this appeal.2 T EX

. R. C IV

. P. 306a provides that
, if within twenty days after a judgment is signed, a party adversely affected by it has neither received the required notice nor acquired actual knowledge of the judgment, the appellate deadlines shall begin to run from the date that such party received no tice or acquired actual knowledge of the rendition of judgment. T EX

. R. C IV

. P. 306a

. 4; see also T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 4.2(a). In order to establish the application of the rule, the adversely affected party must

“ prove in the trial court
, on sworn motion and n otice
, the date on which the party or his attorney first either received a notice of the judgment or acquired actual knowledge of the signing and that this date was more than twenty days after the judgment was signed. ” T EX

. R. C IV

. P. 306a

. 5; see also T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 4.2(b). After hearing the motion, the trial court shall sign a written order indicating the date when the party first received notice or acquired actual knowledge of the signing of the judgment. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 4.2(c).
Rendon has not pre sented this c ourt with any finding by the trial court reflecting the date that Rendon or h er attorney received notice or acquired actual knowledge of the judgment. W e abate this appeal to provide Rendon an opportunity to file with the trial court the appr opriate motion and obtain the requisite findings
from that court. If this matter is pursued by Rendon i n the trial court, t he trial court
clerk is direct ed to furnish the trial court’s findings to this court on or before September 30 , 2019. The appeal is abated.

August 30 , 2019 PER CURIAM
Panel consists of: Bailey
, C. J., Stretcher , J., and Wright, S.C.J. 1 Willson, J., not participating.

1 Jim R. Wright, Senior Chief Justice (Retired), Court of Appeals, 11th District of Texas at Eastland, sitting by assignment.