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

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 233 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 233

                  For the relief of Akintomide Apara.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 7, 2003

  Mr. Wexler introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                  For the relief of Akintomide Apara.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR AKINTOMIDE APARA.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b) of section 
201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Akintomide Apara shall be 
eligible for issuance of an immigrant visa or for adjustment of status 
to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence upon 
filing an application for issuance of an immigrant visa under section 
204 of such Act or for adjustment of status to lawful permanent 
resident.
    (b) Adjustment of Status.--If Akintomide Apara enters the United 
States before the filing deadline specified in subsection (c), he shall 
be considered to have entered and remained lawfully and shall, if 
otherwise eligible, be eligible for adjustment of status under section 
245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act as of the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
    (c) Deadline for Application and Payment of Fees.--Subsections (a) 
and (b) shall apply only if the application for issuance of an 
immigrant visa or the application for adjustment of status is filed 
with appropriate fees within 2 years after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
    (d) Reduction of Immigrant Visa Number.--Upon the granting of an 
immigrant visa or permanent residence to Akintomide Apara, the 
Secretary of State shall instruct the proper officer to reduce by 1, 
during the current or next following fiscal year, the total number of 
immigrant visas that are made available to natives of the country of 
the alien's birth under section 203(a) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act or, if applicable, the total number of immigrant visas 
that are made available to natives of the country of the alien's birth 
under section 202(e) of such Act.
    (e) Denial of Preferential Immigration Treatment for Certain 
Relatives.--The natural parents, brothers, and sisters of Akintomide 
Apara shall not, by virtue of such relationship, be accorded any right, 
privilege, or status under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
                                 <all>
```
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court

generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order

and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

F I L E D

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

JUL 24 1998

PATRICK FISHER

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

ERNESTINE MAULTSBY,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES, sued as State of

Oklahoma,

Defendant-Appellee.

No. 97-6242

(D.C. No. CIV-96-1292-M)

(W.D. Okla.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before KELLY, BARRETT, and HENRY, Circuit Judges.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined

unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of

this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore

ordered submitted without oral argument.
-2-

Plaintiff appeals the district court’s decision granting defendant summary

judgment on plaintiff’s claims of race and age discrimination, asserted under Title

VII, see 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17, and the Age Discrimination in

Employment Act, see 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-34. This court reviews a summary

judgment decision de novo, viewing the record in the light most favorable to the

nonmoving party. See Sprague v. Thorn Americas, Inc., 129 F.3d 1355, 1360-61

(10th Cir. 1997). Summary judgment is appropriate only if there are no genuinely

disputed issues of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a

matter of law. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c).

Upon consideration of the record and the parties’ appellate arguments, we

affirm the district court’s decision for substantially the reasons stated in that

court’s order dated June 26, 1997. In doing so, we deny plaintiff’s motions

seeking to supplement the record on appeal with evidence not before the district

court. See John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Weisman, 27 F.3d 500, 506 (10th

Cir. 1994).

Plaintiff asserts that the district court’s summary judgment decision was the

result of her attorney’s incompetence. In a civil case such as this, however,

plaintiff’s remedy for incompetent representation is a malpractice action against

her attorney. See MacCuish v. United States, 844 F.2d 733, 735-36 (10th Cir.

1988). 
-3-

The judgment of the United States District Court for the Western District of

Oklahoma is, therefore, AFFIRMED. We grant plaintiff’s motion to supplement

her opening brief with an appendix of cited authority. The mandate shall issue

forthwith.

Entered for the Court

Paul J. Kelly, Jr.

Circuit Judge
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 221 (Wednesday, November 17, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 67385]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-25393]



[[Page 67385]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board

[STB Finance Docket No. 34607]


The Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company--Trackage 
Rights Exemption--Union Pacific Railroad Company

    Union Pacific Railroad Company (UP) has agreed to grant to The 
Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company (BNSF) approximately 
224.70 miles of overhead trackage rights between Stockton, CA, at UP's 
milepost 88.90 on UP's Fresno Subdivision, and Bakersfield, CA, at 
milepost 313.60 on UP's Mojave Subdivision.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The parties entered into a trackage rights agreement on 
October 27, 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The transaction was scheduled to be consummated on November 4, 
2004.
    The purpose of the trackage rights is to allow BNSF limited use of 
the joint trackage for the sole purpose of overhead movement of a 
limited number of BNSF's trains (up to 6 BNSF trains per day or, 
subject to capacity and fluidity of operations, potentially up to 8 
trains per day), to improve operating efficiency and flexibility in the 
area.
    As a condition to this exemption, any employees affected by the 
trackage rights will be protected by the conditions imposed in Norfolk 
and Western Ry. Co.--Trackage Rights--BN, 354 I.C.C. 605 (1978), as 
modified in Mendocino Coast Ry., Inc.--Lease and Operate, 360 I.C.C. 
653 (1980).
    This notice is filed under 49 CFR 1180.2(d)(7). If the notice 
contains false or misleading information, the exemption is void ab 
initio. Petitions to revoke the exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) may 
be filed at any time. The filing of a petition to revoke will not 
automatically stay the transaction.
    An original and 10 copies of all pleadings, referring to STB 
Finance Docket No. 34607, must be filed with the Surface Transportation 
Board, 1925 K Street, NW., Washington, DC 20423-0001. In addition, a 
copy of each pleading must be served on Sarah W. Bailiff, P.O. Box 
961039, Fort Worth, TX 76161-0039.
    Board decisions and notices are available on our Web site at http://www.stb.dot.gov.

    Decided: November 9, 2004.

    By the Board, David M. Konschnik, Director, Office of 
Proceedings.
Vernon A. Williams,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 04-25393 Filed 11-16-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915-01-P
#### Ida White, Respondent, v. International Diesel Electric Company, Incorporated, Appellant.

Present — Johnston, Acting P. J., Adel, Sneed, Wenzel and Mac-Crate, JJ. [See *ante,*p. 846.]
#### Opal Henrietta SIMMINGTON, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America.

Ben Shaver and Boyd Tackett, Texar-kana, Ark., for appellant.

No. 15106.

United States Court of Appeals Eighth Circuit.

June 30, 1954.

Charles W. Atkinson, U. S. Atty., Fort Smith, Ark., for appellee.

Appeal from District Court dismissed, without taxation of costs in favor of either of the parties, on stipulation of counsel.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-10693

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ANTONIO TRUJILLO,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:10-CR-8-1

Before JOLLY, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Antonio Trujillo has

moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th

Cir. 2011). Trujillo has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief

and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with

counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate

review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED,

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

April 19, 2011

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

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.

Case: 10-10693 Document: 00511450339 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/19/2011
No. 10-10693

counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS

DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

2

Case: 10-10693 Document: 00511450339 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/19/2011
V

108TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2281

For the relief of Asad Mohamed Alkurabi.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 22, 2003

Mr. MCNULTY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

For the relief of Asad Mohamed Alkurabi.

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

3 SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR ASAD

4 MOHAMED ALKURABI.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding subsections (a)

6 and (b) of section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality

7 Act, Asad Mohamed Alkurabi shall be eligible for issuance

8 of an immigrant visa or for adjustment of status to that

9 of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence

10 upon filing an application for issuance of an immigrant

11 visa under section 204 of such Act or for adjustment of

12 status to lawful permanent resident.
2

•HR 2281 IH

1 (b) ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS.—If Asad Mohamed

2 Alkurabi enters the United States before the filing dead3 line specified in subsection (c), he shall be considered to

4 have entered and remained lawfully and shall, if otherwise

5 eligible, be eligible for adjustment of status under section

6 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act as of the date

7 of the enactment of this Act.

8 (c) DEADLINE FOR APPLICATION AND PAYMENT OF

9 FEES.—Subsections (a) and (b) shall apply only if the ap10 plication for issuance of an immigrant visa or the applica11 tion for adjustment of status is filed with appropriate fees

12 within 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act.

13 (d) REDUCTION OF IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBER.—

14 Upon the granting of an immigrant visa or permanent res15 idence to Asad Mohamed Alkurabi, the Secretary of State

16 shall instruct the proper officer to reduce by 1, during the

17 current or next following fiscal year, the total number of

18 immigrant visas that are made available to natives of the

19 country of the alien’s birth under section 203(a) of the

20 Immigration and Nationality Act or, if applicable, the

21 total number of immigrant visas that are made available

22 to natives of the country of the alien’s birth under section

23 202(e) of such Act.

24 (e) DENIAL OF PREFERENTIAL IMMIGRATION

25 TREATMENT FOR CERTAIN RELATIVES.—The natural
3

•HR 2281 IH

1 parents, brothers, and sisters of Asad Mohamed Alkurabi

2 shall not, by virtue of such relationship, be accorded any

3 right, privilege, or status under the Immigration and Na4 tionality Act.

Æ
#### The People of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, *v.*Edward Hill *et al.,*Defendants-Appellants.

(No. 12207;

Fourth District

August 8, 1974.

Opinion by

Mr. PRESIDING JUSTICE SMITH.

*310Paul T. Manion and Associates, Ltd., of Hoopeston (Paul T. Manion and Rick E. Janov, of counsel), for appellants.

Richard J. Doyle, State’s Attorney, of Danville (John R. McClory, Assistant State’s Attorney, of counsel), for the People.
§ 842.903 Conditions for coverage in primary positions. ( a ) An employee's service in a position that has been determined by the Secretary of the Department of Energy to be a primary nuclear materials courier position is covered under the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 8412(d).
( b ) An employee who is not in a primary position, nor covered while in a secondary position, and who is detailed or temporarily promoted to a primary position is not covered under the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 8412(d).
No. IV-08-026 

Contact: Victor Dricks 

Phone: (817) 860-8128 

 

 June 11, 2008 

 E-Mail: opa4@nrc.gov

NRC TO HOLD PUBLIC MEETING 

ON PALO VERDE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION 

 The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with Arizona Public Service 

Co. officials on June 30, to discuss the status of performance improvements at the Palo Verde 

Nuclear Generating Station. APS operates the plant, located 55 miles west of Phoenix, Az. 

 The meeting, which will be open to public observation, will begin at 6:30 p.m. at the 

Tonopah Valley High School Auditorium, 38201 W. Indian School Road, Tonopah, Az. 

 APS officials will present a briefing on the status of performance improvements at Palo 

Verde. The public will have an opportunity to observe and ask questions of NRC staff before the 

meeting is adjourned. 

 ### 

 

 NRC news releases are available through a free list serve subscription at the following Web address: 

http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html . The NRC homepage at www.nrc.gov also offers a SUBSCRIBE 

link. E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's Web site.

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs Region IV 

 612 E. Lamar Blvd., Suite 400 

 Arlington, TX 76011-4125 

Telephone: (817) 860-8128
#### Henry Meinshausen, trading as German American Oil Company, Defendant in Error, v. American Shipping Company, Plaintiff in Error.

Gen. No. 21,520.

(Not to be reported in full.)

Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Joseph P. Rafferty, Judge, presiding.

Heard in this court at the October term, 1915.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed January 31, 1916.

Rehearing denied February 14, 1916.

Statement of the Case.

Action by Henry Meinshausen, trading as the German American Oil Company, plaintiff, against the American Shipping Company, a corporation, defendant, in the Municipal Court of Chicago, to recover back overpayment of insurance premiums. To reverse a judgment for plaintiff for $544.46, defendant prosecutes this writ or error.

Plaintiff was the resident agent of Botho Farenholtz of Magdeburg, Germany, a manufacturer of oils. Defendant was a custom house' broker, having places of business in New York and Chicago. Plaintiff had charge, as such agent, of consignments of oils shipped by Farenholtz to this country. Defendant, at the instance of plaintiff, did the brokerage business connected with the oils shipped by Farenholtz to Atlantic ports. Plaintiff was paid a commission by Farenholtz on the sale of all such oils. Among plaintiff’s duties as the agent of Farenholtz was the placing of sea and leakage insurance upon the oil shipped by Farenholtz. Plaintiff arranged with defendant to place insurance.

Defendant was in no way obligated to Farenholtz, its dealings being wholly with plaintiff. To him defendant rendered bills and plaintiff paid them. Farenholtz subsequently reimbursed plaintiff.

*621Abstract of the Decision.

1. Principal and agent, § *8*
      ***
      *—when evidence sufficient to establish that contract was with person individually and not as agent.*In an action to recover back the amount of marine insurance premiums overpaid to defendant, evidence *held*to show .that the contract for insurance was with plaintiff, although it appeared that the goods insured were owned by plaintiff’s principal, it also appearing that the contract sued on was with plaintiff, defendant not being obligated to such principal thereunder, and defendant rendering bills to plaintiff which plaintiff paid, it being immaterial that plaintiff was later reimbursed by such principal for such payments.

2. Principal and agent, § *220*
      ***
      *—when agent may maintain action to recover overpayments of money.*Where a principal through his agent, pays moneys for insurance premiums which ought not to have been paid, the agent may maintain an action to recover it back.

Silber, Isaacs, Silber & Woley, for plaintiff in error; James D. Woley, of counsel.

Alexander H. Heyman, for defendant in error.

See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.
# L_2021067EN.01004301.xml

| 25.2.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 67/43 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.2.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 67/43

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE

No 150/2018

of 6 July 2018

amending Annex XI (Electronic communication, audiovisual services and information society) to the EEA Agreement [2021/212]

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (‘the EEA Agreement’), and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/2077 of 10 November 2017 amending Decision 2005/50/EC on the harmonisation of the 24 GHz range radio spectrum band for the time-limited use by automotive short-range radar equipment in the Community (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/2077 of 10 November 2017 amending Decision 2005/50/EC on the harmonisation of the 24 GHz range radio spectrum band for the time-limited use by automotive short-range radar equipment in the Community (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.

| (2) | Annex XI to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Annex XI to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following indent is added in point 5cr (Commission Decision 2005/50/EC) of Annex XI to the EEA Agreement:

| ‘— | 32017 D 2077: Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/2077 of 10 November 2017 (OJ L 295, 14.11.2017, p. 75).’ |
| --- | --- |

‘—

32017 D 2077: Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/2077 of 10 November 2017 (OJ L 295, 14.11.2017, p. 75).’

Article 2

The text of Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/2077 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 7 July 2018, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement have been made (*1).

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 6 July 2018.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Oda Helen SLETNES

---

(1)  
  OJ L 295, 14.11.2017, p. 75.

1

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
EXHIBIT 31.1

           CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF TECHNOLOGY OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL
           ACCOUNTING OFFICER OF IMAGE TECHNOLOGY LABORATORIES, INC.

I, Lewis M. Edwards, certify that:

1) I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Image Technology
Laboratories, Inc.;

2) Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3) Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4) I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15 (e) and 15d-15 (e)) for the
Registrant and have:

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the Registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to me by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report my conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this annual report based on such evaluation; and

c) Disclosed in this annual report any change in the Registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the Registrant's most
recent fiscal quarter (the Registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the Registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and

5) I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the Registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
Registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions);

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operations of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the Registrant'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 a significant role in the Registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.



                               /S/ LEWIS M. EDWARDS
                               ------------------------
                               LEWIS M. EDWARDS,
                               CHIEF TECHNOLOGY OFFICER
                               AND PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING OFFICER
                               APRIL 15, 2008


                                      -51-