alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §796f–6. Authorization of appropriations

There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this subpart $78,305,000 for fiscal year 2015, $84,353,000 for fiscal year 2016, $86,104,000 for fiscal year 2017, $88,013,000 for fiscal year 2018, $90,083,000 for fiscal year 2019, and $91,992,000 for fiscal year 2020.

(Pub. L. 93–112, title VII, §727, as added Pub. L. 105–220, title IV, §410, Aug. 7, 1998, 112 Stat. 1237; amended Pub. L. 113–128, title IV, §484, July 22, 2014, 128 Stat. 1693.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 796f–6, Pub. L. 93–112, title VII, §727, as added Pub. L. 102–569, title VII, §701(2), Oct. 29, 1992, 106 Stat. 4464, authorized appropriations, prior to the general amendment of this subchapter by Pub. L. 105–220.

Prior sections 796g to 796i were repealed by Pub. L. 102–569, title VII, §701(1), Oct. 29, 1992, 106 Stat. 4443.

Section 796g, Pub. L. 93–112, title VII, §731, as added Pub. L. 95–602, title III, §301, Nov. 6, 1978, 92 Stat. 3000; amended Pub. L. 99–506, title I, §103(h)(2), Oct. 21, 1986, 100 Stat. 1811; Pub. L. 100–630, title II, §208(h), Nov. 7, 1988, 102 Stat. 3314, provided for grants to States to establish systems to protect and advocate for rights of individuals with severe handicaps.

Section 796h, Pub. L. 93–112, title VII, §732, as added Pub. L. 95–602, title III, §301, Nov. 6, 1978, 92 Stat. 3000; amended Pub. L. 99–506, title I, §103(d)(2)(C), Oct. 21, 1986, 100 Stat. 1810, related to affirmative action on part of recipients of assistance to employ and advance in employment qualified individuals with handicaps.

Section 796i, Pub. L. 93–112, title VII, §741, formerly §731, as added Pub. L. 95–602, title III, §301, Nov. 6, 1978, 92 Stat. 3001; renumbered §741 and amended Pub. L. 98–221, title I, §172(a)(1), (b), Feb. 22, 1984, 98 Stat. 32; Pub. L. 99–506, title VIII, §806, Oct. 21, 1986, 100 Stat. 1840; Pub. L. 100–630, title II, §208(i), Nov. 7, 1988, 102 Stat. 3315; Pub. L. 102–52, §8, June 6, 1991, 105 Stat. 262, provided for appropriations.

#### Amendments

2014—Pub. L. 113–128 substituted "$78,305,000 for fiscal year 2015, $84,353,000 for fiscal year 2016, $86,104,000 for fiscal year 2017, $88,013,000 for fiscal year 2018, $90,083,000 for fiscal year 2019, and $91,992,000 for fiscal year 2020." for "such sums as may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 1999 through 2003."
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 199 (Friday, October 15, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 61223]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-23114]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Renewal of the Planning and Steering Advisory Committee (Navy)

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Planning and Steering Advisory Committee (PSAC) has been 
renewed in consonance with the public interest, and in accordance with 
the provisions of Public Law 92-463, the ``Federal Advisory Committee 
Act.''
    The PSAC provides an avenue of communications by which a 
distinguished group representing scientific, academic engineering and 
intelligence communities advises the Chief of Naval Operations on 
questions related to SSBN Security. Their mission is to make in-depth 
technical assessments of U.S. and foreign threat ASW developments and 
related technologies, to critically review programs which potentially 
impact SSBN survivability, and to evaluate intelligence efforts to 
identify and define ASW and SSBN survivability threats.
    The Committee will continue to be composed of selected Group 
members to conduct detailed examinations of matters related to SSBN 
security.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura Wurzer, telephone: 301-693-0934.

    Dated: October 8, 2004.
L.M. Bynum,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 04-23114 Filed 10-14-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-M
<PAGE>
 
  [LOGO APPEARS HERE]
  Sight Resource Corp.                                 INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM

  Date:  8/3/98

  To:    Steve Blinn

  From:  Bill Sullivan

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

Outlined below are the terms that we have agreed upon with regard to your
employment role with Sight Resource Corporation.

Base Salary
-----------

Effective August 1, 1998, base salary will be $3,750 per pay period ending April
28, 2000.

Bonus
-----

1998 - Determined by CEO and Compensation Committee.
1999 - 0

Automobile
----------

Your current auto and associated expenses will remain as is until April 24,
1999, at which time the auto will return to the company.

Health Benefits
---------------

Your current benefit plans and participating payments will remain in place until
April 24, 1999.  After that time, and at your expense, you may continue to
remain on the health plans under COBRA by paying the total costs.

Other
-----

1.  I want your active involvement with Bill Mancini until we are comfortable
with his indoctrination period.  Effective August 1, 1998, you will also remain
available, as requested, to work on projects, assignments, or other activities.

2.  You will be excluded from 40l (k) plan effective August 1, 1998.


Steve Blinn
<PAGE>
 
Page 2


3.   The key man life insurance policy will be cancelled effective 
     August 1, 1998.  If you desire to convert this policy, the Company 
     will assist you.

4.   Office space will be provided for you at the Washington Street store until
     April, 2000.

5.   Reinforce the non-compete to expire April, 2001, which is one (1) year from
     April, 2000.

6.   Continue current indemnification and D & O insurance as appropriate.

7.   Stock options remain in place until July, 2000, ninety days after
     employment ceases.

8.   Effective August 1, 1998, any expenses being direct billed to the Company
     will cease (cell phone, credit card, gas card). Convert these to individual
     name.

9.   Business expenses will be reimbursed with advance approval.



                                Stephen M. Blinn______________________
0-cr-06219-WDF Document 4 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2000 P
§ 209.4 Allocation and availability of funds. ( a ) We will allocate available funds based on the number and value of properties that meet the eligibility criteria and whose owners want to participate in an acquisition or elevation project.
( b ) We may reallocate funds for which we do not receive and approve adequate applications. We will obligate most available funds within 12 months following the deadline for submitting applications, unless extenuating circumstances exist.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                       3,112,008
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               14,283,065
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  9,491,636
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            28,989,318
<PP&E>                                      19,750,094
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              67,136,011
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       13,141,555
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        46,496
<OTHER-SE>                                  37,733,027
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                67,136,011
<SALES>                                     59,875,846
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            59,875,846
<CGS>                                       50,767,197
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               50,767,197
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             5,701,919
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             769,849
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,862,080
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,122,437
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,739,643
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,739,643
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .39
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .38


</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of Hotel Siwanoy, Inc., Petitioner. State Liquor Authority, Respondent.

No opinion. Present:—Martin, P. J., Townley, Glennon, Untermyer and Dore, JJ.
DECLARATI N OF PAMELA A. FLEETWOOD

I, the undersigned, Pamela A. Fl

1. My name is Pamela A. Fl

PerSOnal knowledge of the matters set

2. Together with my husband

Services, LLC (the “Company’’), Whic

etwood, PurSuant tO 28 U.S.C. § 1746, declare that:

etwood, I am over twenty-One yearS Of age, and I have

h herein.

obert L. Fleetwood, I own a company called Fleetwood

located in Dallas, Texas.

3. In January 2017, Completel Business Solutions Group (“CBSG”) made a loan to the

Company in the amount of $370,000

advance’’(``MCA’’) business.

4. My husband and I applied

CBSG on behalf of our Company du

PrOCeSS.

5. The Loan was underwritten

6. Atno time did CBSG offer

7. CBSGdid notperfom an

8. CBSG did notperfom a

any time prior to approving the Loan.

9. CBSG did notperfom ap

any time prior to approving the Loan.

10. CBSG did not request a de

or at any other time prior to approvin

11. CBSG didnotassignme or

I declare under penalty ofperju

Ex。。u,。d 。n July玉., 2020, in D。Il。

the “Loan,,) through what CBSG ca11s its “merchant capital

o cBSG for the Loan and we were the sole contacts with

ing the Loan application process and CBSG,s underwTiting

y cBSG in less than 48 hours from the time we applied.

or the Company mSuranCe Of any kind.

ite inspection ofthe Company prior to approving the Loan.

ground check on me during the underwriting process or at

rsonal interview of me during the underwriting process or at

t schedule for the Company during the underwriting process

the Loans.

the Company a liaison.

y that the foregoing is true and correct.

Texas・

Pamela A. Fleetwood

Case 9:20-cv-81205-RAR Document 29-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/27/2020 Page 1 of 1
----

Publication of decisions by Member States to grant or revoke operating licenses pursuant to Article 13(4) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2407/92 on licensing of air carriers (1) (2)

(2006/C 17/04)

(Text with EEA relevance)

GERMANY

Operating licences granted

Category B:   Operating licences including the restriction of Article 5(7)(a) of Regulation (EEC) No 2407/92

----

(1)OJ L 240, 24.8.1992, p. 1.

(2)  Communicated to the European Commission before 31.8.2005.

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                         680,805
<SECURITIES>                                    64,504
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,190,350
<ALLOWANCES>                                   219,747
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,758,363
<PP&E>                                      13,384,252
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,816,059
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              18,846,585
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,408,177
<BONDS>                                      6,190,613
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        15,359
<OTHER-SE>                                   7,232,436
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                18,846,585
<SALES>                                     18,511,305
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            18,511,305
<CGS>                                       15,270,634
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               15,270,634
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (446,313)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             691,350
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                593,978
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            593,978
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   593,978
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.08
        

</TABLE>
Motion GRANTED AND Order filed October 17, 2016. 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-16-00804-CV

____________

IN RE DONNA O. JAHN, Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

WRIT OF MANDAMUS

295th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2010-31372

ORDER

On October 10, 2016, relator Donna O. Jahn filed a petition for writ of 

mandamus asking this court to compel the Honorable Caroline Baker, Judge of the 

295th District Court, in Harris County, Texas, to vacate her Order denying relator’s 

Amended Plea to the Jurisdiction signed on August 5, 2016 in trial court number 

2010-31372, styled Comerica Bank v. Sidmar Corporation and Donna O. Jahn. On 
July 22, 2016, the trial court signed a scheduling order resetting the case for trial on 

November 7, 2016. Relator’s petition argues that the Order signed by the trial court 

on November 26, 2013 was a final appealable judgment and the trial court’s plenary 

jurisdiction therefore expired before it reset the case for trial on November 7, 2016.

Relator has also filed an Emergency Motion for Temporary Relief, asking our 

court to stay the trial set for November 7, 2016 pending a decision on the petition 

for writ of mandamus. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(b), 52.10.

It appears from the facts stated in the petition and motion that relator’s request 

for relief requires further consideration and that relator will be prejudiced unless 

immediate temporary relief is granted. We therefore GRANT relator’s motion and 

issue the following order:

We ORDER the trial set for November 7, 2016 in trial court cause number 

2010-31372, Comerica Bank v. Sidmar Corporation and Donna O. Jahn, STAYED

until a final decision by this court on relator’s petition for writ of mandamus, or until 

further order of this court.

In addition, the court requests Comerica Bank, the real party-in-interest, to 

file a response to the petition for writ of mandamus on or before October 31, 2016. 

See Tex. R. App. P. 52.4.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Busby, Donovan, and Brown.
### §130j. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 130j was editorially reclassified as section 5531 of this title.
NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200

Washington, DC 20555-001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov

Web Site: http://www.nrc.gov/OPA

No. 00-144 September 22, 2000

NRC APPROVES OKLAHOMA AGREEMENT TO REGULATE

USE OF CERTAIN RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approved an agreement with the State of Oklahoma

that allows the State to assume part of NRC’s regulatory authority over the use of certain radioactive

materials. The agreement was published for public comment in the Federal Register once a week for

four consecutive weeks beginning June 7, and will become effective September 29.

Under the agreement, NRC will transfer to Oklahoma the responsibility for licensing,

rulemaking, inspection and enforcement concerning (1) materials made radioactive in nuclear research

reactors; (2) uranium and thorium source materials used as shielding in certain medical and industrial

instruments; and (3) special nuclear material in quantities too small to support a nuclear reaction.

The agreement also allows the state to regulate the land disposal of low-level radioactive waste.

Approximately 220 current NRC licenses, most of them for medical and industrial uses, will be

transferred to Oklahoma’s jurisdiction. The Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality will

administer the regulatory program.

The NRC will retain jurisdiction over regulation of nuclear reactors and other major nuclear

facilities in Oklahoma. It will also continue to regulate Federal agencies that use certain nuclear

materials in the State.

The NRC has determined that Oklahoma’s radiation control program is adequate to protect

public health and safety and is compatible with the agency’s own program for regulating the

radioactive materials covered in the agreement.

Oklahoma is the 32nd State to sign such an agreement with the NRC. Other states that

previously have assumed this authority are: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado,

Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Mississippi,

Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Maine,

Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, and Washington.
Following execution of the agreement, NRC staff will continue a program of active interaction

with the new Agreement State that includes the exchange of regulatory information (incident reports,

policy changes, rule and guidance development), and periodic onsite reviews of the Agreement State

program.

###

.
#### Oscar M. PEARSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Susan YEARWOOD; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 01-16847.

D.C. No. CV-99-01172-FCD-DAD.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 13, 2002 *.

Decided May 28, 2002.

Before FERNANDEZ, RYMER, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument, and denies Pearson’s motion for oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Oscar M. Pearson appeals pro se the district court’s judgment dismissing with prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that prison officials violated his constitutional rights by using excessive force against him and failing to protect him from attack by other inmates. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for abuse of discretion a dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(f), *Malone v. United States Postal Serv.,*833 F.2d 128, 130 (9th Cir.1987), and we affirm.

Based on our independent review of the record, we conclude that the district court properly dismissed Pearson’s action because Pearson failed to file a pretrial statement despite the district court’s explicit warning that such failure could result in dismissal of his action. *See Malone,*833 F.2d at 130-31.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Pearson’s motion for appointment of counsel because Pearson failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances. *See Terrell v. Brewer, 935*F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir.1991).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

September 24, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
134301 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 134301 COA: 275648 Oakland CC: 00-175776-FC TOM MILES, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 8, 2007 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has failed to meet the burden of establishing ent itlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).

s0917 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

September 24, 2007

Clerk
### §130e. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 130e was editorially reclassified as section 2172 of this title.
```
                             EXHIBIT 32.2

                                   Ener1, Inc.
                     550 West Cypress Creek Road, Suite 120
                            Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33309

                                November 14, 2003

Securities and Exchange Commission
450 5th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20549

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen:

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of
Ener1, Inc., for the quarter ended September 30, 2003, I, Ronald Stewart,
Chief Financial Officer of Ener1, Inc., hereby certify pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1) such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Ener1, Inc., for the
quarter ended Septembe 30, 2003, 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
of Ener1, Inc., for the quarter ended September 30, 2003, fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of Ener1, Inc.

                       By:     /s/Ronald Stewart
                                  Ronald Stewart
                                  Chief Financial Officer
                                  (Principal Financial Officer and Duly
                                  Authorized Officer)

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906,
or other document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Ener1, Inc.
and will be retained by Ener1, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

In accordance with Item 601 of Regulation S-B, this certification is
being"furnished" as Exhibit 32.2 to Ener1, Inc's quarterly report and
shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act") or otherwise subject to the
liabilities of that section, nor shall it be deemed incorporated by
reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Exchange
Act, except as expressly set forth by specific reference in such a filing.
```
Case 9:20-cv-81175-RAR Document 3 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/20/2020 Page 1 of 1