alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Alphonso Tiller, Appellant. The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v William Tiller, Appellant.

Judgments, Supreme Court, Bronx County, rendered May 14, 1976, convicting defendants, after a nonjury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree (Penal Law, § 220.41), and sentencing them to indeterminate terms of imprisonment of six years to life, are unanimously reversed, on the law, and the indictments are dismissed. In our view, on the evidence in this case, there is a reasonable doubt as a matter of law whether the defendants were not acting solely as agents for the buyers (police officers). The third count of the indictment charging criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree *917(Penal Law, § 220.03), a misdemeanor, was dismissed by the trial court after the close of all the evidence. Concur—Birns, J. P.,' Silverman, Evans, Fein and Sandler, JJ.
PUBLIC LAW 115–365—DEC. 21, 2018 132 STAT. 5089 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 6167: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 164 (2018): 

Dec. 11, considered and passed House. 

Dec. 19, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 115–365 

115th Congress 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 5707 South 

Cass Avenue in Westmont, Illinois, as the ‘‘James William Robinson Jr. Memorial 

Post Office Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. JAMES WILLIAM ROBINSON JR. MEMORIAL POST OFFICE 

BUILDING. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 5707 South Cass Avenue in Westmont, Illinois, 

shall be known and designated as the ‘‘James William Robinson 

Jr. Memorial Post Office Building’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘James William Robinson Jr. Memorial Post Office Building’’. 

Approved December 21, 2018. 

Dec. 21, 2018 

[H.R. 6167] 


dkrause on DSKBC28HB2PROD with PUBLAWS
###### Editorial Note on Part 249

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 249 appear at 57 FR 36501, Aug. 13, 1992, and 57 FR 47409, Oct. 16, 1992.

#### § 249.103 Form 3, initial statement of beneficial ownership of securities.

This Form shall be filed pursuant to Rule 16a-3 (§ 240.16a-3 of this chapter) for initial statements of beneficial ownership of securities. The Commission is authorized to solicit the information required by this Form pursuant to sections 16(a) and 23(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78p(a) and 78w(a)); and sections 30(h) and 38 of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-29(h) and 80a-37), and the rules and regulations thereunder. Disclosure of information specified on this Form is mandatory. The information will be used for the primary purpose of disclosing the holdings of directors, officers and beneficial owners of registered companies. Information disclosed will be a matter of public record and available for inspection by members of the public. The Commission can use the information in investigations or litigation involving the federal securities laws or other civil, criminal, or regulatory statutes or provisions, as well as for referral to other governmental authorities and self-regulatory organizations. Failure to disclose required information may result in civil or criminal action against persons involved for violations of the federal securities laws and rules.

[56 FR 7274, Feb. 21, 1991, as amended at 72 FR 45112, Aug. 10, 2007]

###### Editorial Note

#### Editorial Note:

For Federal Register citations affecting Form 3, see the List of CFR Sections Affected, which appears in the Finding Aids section of the printed volume and at *www.govinfo.gov.*
FORM 13F COVER PAGE

Report for the Calendar Year or Quarter Ended: December 31,2004

Check here if Amendment [   ]; Amendment Number:
This Amendment (Check only one.):  [   ] is a restatement.
                                   [   ] adds new holdings entries.

Institutional Investment Manager Filing this Report:

Name:    Continental Casualty Company
Address: CNA Plaza
	 Chicago, IL 60685


13F File Number:  28-387

The institutional investment manager filing this report and the
person by whom it is signed hereby represent that the person
signing the report is authorized to submit it, that all
information contained herein is true, correct, and complete, and
that it is understood that all required items, statements,
schedules, lists, and tables, are considered integral parts of
this form.


Person Signing this Report on Behalf of Reporting Manager:

Name:  Lynne Gugenheim
Title: Senior Vice President and Deputy General Counsel
Phone: (312) 822 4921
Signature, Place, and Date of Signing:
February 14,2005
Chicago, Illinois,60685
I AM SIGNING THIS REPORT AS REQUIRED BY THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
ACT OF 1934

Report Type (Check only one.):

 [    ]              13F HOLDINGS REPORT.

 [  x ]              13F NOTICE.

 [    ]              13F COMBINATION REPORT.

List of Other Managers Reporting for this Manager:

The securities on which Continental Casualty Company exercises
shared investment discretion have been reported upon by CNA
Financial Corporation on behalf of Continental Casualty Company.
<Page>
SIXTEENTH CENSUS OF THE UNITED STATES: 1940

POPULATION

Special Report on

INSTITUTIONAL POPULATION

14 years old and over

Characteristics of Inmates in Penal Institutions,

and in Institutions for the Delinquent,

Defective, and Dependant

Interactive Table of Contents

Click on the title of the section you wish to view. Document will appear with a “bookmarks” column on

the left side. Use the “Table of Contents” bookmark to navigate back to this page.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Section Title Page Number

I Title Page, Letter of Transmittal, Table of Contents i—iv

1 Introduction 1—6

2 Tables 1—15 7—132

3 Tables 16—19 133—274

4 Table 20 275—361
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Frank Parler, Jr., Appellant.

This court, on May 23, 1960 *(ante,*p. 991), having unanimously affirmed an order of the County Court, Queens County, entered May 26, 1959, denying defendant’s *coram nobis*application, the defendant, pursuant to section 520 of the Code of Criminal Procedure now makes application to the Honorable Gerald Nolan, Presiding Justice of this court, for leave to take a further appeal to the Court of Appeals. Such application for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals is denied by Presiding Justice Nolan.
FORM 13F COVER PAGE

Report for the Calendar Year or Quarter Ended: December 31,2004

Check here if Amendment [   ]; Amendment Number:
This Amendment (Check only one.):  [   ] is a restatement.
                                   [   ] adds new holdings entries.

Institutional Investment Manager Filing this Report:

Name:    Continental Assurance Company
Address: CNA Plaza
	 Chicago,IL 60685


13F File Number: 28-386

The institutional investment manager filing this report and the
person by whom it is signed hereby represent that the person
signing the report is authorized to submit it, that all
information contained herein is true, correct, and complete, and
that it is understood that all required items, statements,
schedules, lists, and tables, are considered integral parts of
this form.


Person Signing this Report on Behalf of Reporting Manager:

Name:  Lynne Gugenheim
Title: Senior Vice President and Deputy General Counsel
Phone: (312) 822 4921
Signature, Place, and Date of Signing:
February 14,2005
Chicago, Illinois, 60685
I AM SIGNING THIS REPORT AS REQUIRED BY THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
ACT OF 1934

Report Type (Check only one.):

 [    ]              13F HOLDINGS REPORT.

 [  x ]              13F NOTICE.

 [    ]              13F COMBINATION REPORT.

List of Other Managers Reporting for this Manager:

The securities on which Continental Assurance Company exercises
shared investment discretion have been reported upon by CNA Financial
Corporation on behalf of Continental Assurance Company.
<Page>
#### § 275.206(4)-9 [Reserved]
### §16922. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 16922 was editorially reclassified as section 20924 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.
### §290ii–2. Regulations and enforcement

#### (a) Training

Not later than 1 year after October 17, 2000, the Secretary, after consultation with appropriate State and local protection and advocacy organizations, physicians, facilities, and other health care professionals and patients, shall promulgate regulations that require facilities to which the Protection and Advocacy for Mentally Ill Individuals Act of 1986 1 (42 U.S.C. 10801 et seq.) applies, to meet the requirements of subsection (b).

#### (b) Requirements

The regulations promulgated under subsection (a) shall require that—

(1) facilities described in subsection (a) ensure that there is an adequate number of qualified professional and supportive staff to evaluate patients, formulate written individualized, comprehensive treatment plans, and to provide active treatment measures;

(2) appropriate training be provided for the staff of such facilities in the use of restraints and any alternatives to the use of restraints; and

(3) such facilities provide complete and accurate notification of deaths, as required under section 290ii–1(a) of this title.

#### (c) Enforcement

A facility to which this part applies that fails to comply with any requirement of this part, including a failure to provide appropriate training, shall not be eligible for participation in any program supported in whole or in part by funds appropriated to any Federal department or agency.

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title V, §593, as added Pub. L. 106–310, div. B, title XXXII, §3207, Oct. 17, 2000, 114 Stat. 1196.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Protection and Advocacy for Mentally Ill Individuals Act of 1986, referred to in subsec. (a), was Pub. L. 99–319, May 23, 1986, 100 Stat. 478. Pub. L. 99–319 was renamed the Protection and Advocacy for Individuals with Mental Illness Act by Pub. L. 106–310, div. B, title XXXII, §3206(a), Oct. 17, 2000, 114 Stat. 1193, and is classified generally to chapter 114 (§10801 et seq.) of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 10801 of this title and Tables.

1 See References in Text note below.
### §2153f. Savings clause; Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act of 1978

(a) All orders, determinations, rules, regulations, permits, contracts, agreements, certificates, licenses, and privileges—

(1) which have been issued, made, granted, or allowed to become effective in the exercise of functions which are the subject of this Act, by (i) any agency or officer, or part thereof, in exercising the functions which are affected by this Act, or (ii) any court of competent jurisdiction, and

(2) which are in effect at the time this Act takes effect,

shall continue in effect according to their terms until modified, terminated, superseded, set aside, or repealed as the case may be, by the parties thereto or by any court of competent jurisdiction.

(b) Nothing in this Act shall affect the procedures or requirements applicable to agreements for cooperation entered into pursuant to sections 2121(c), 2164(b), or 2164(c) of this title or arrangements pursuant thereto as it was in effect immediately prior to March 10, 1978.

(Pub. L. 95–242, title VI, §603(a), (b), Mar. 10, 1978, 92 Stat. 152.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This Act, referred to in text, means the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act of 1978, Pub. L. 95–242, Mar. 10, 1978, 92 Stat. 120, which is classified principally to chapter 47 (§3201 et seq.) of Title 22, Foreign Relations and Intercourse. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 3201 of Title 22 and Tables.

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act of 1978, and not as part of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 which comprises this chapter.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Section effective Mar. 10, 1978, except as otherwise provided and regardless of any requirements for the promulgation of implementing regulations, see section 603(c) of Pub. L. 95–242, set out as a note under section 3201 of Title 22, Foreign Relations and Intercourse.

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Performance of Functions Pending Development of Procedures

The performance of functions the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act of 1978, Pub. L. 95–242, Mar. 10, 1978, 92 Stat. 120, not to be delayed pending development of procedures even though as many as 120 days [after Mar. 10, 1978] are allowed for establishing those procedures, see section 5(b) of Ex. Ord. No. 12058, May 11, 1978, 43 F.R. 20947, set out under section 3201 of Title 22, Foreign Relations and Intercourse.
1

STIPULATION TO EXTEND FACT DISCOVERY CUT-OFF AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

USDC NDCA Case No.: CV 08 0114 CRB

508768.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

THOMAS M. HERLIHY (SBN 83615)

Email: thomas.herlihy@wilsonelser.com

FRANCIS TORRENCE (SBN 154653)

Email: francis.torrence@wilsonelser.com

WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, EDELMAN & DICKER LLP

525 Market Street, 17th Floor

San Francisco, California 94105

Telephone: (415) 433-0990

Facsimile: (415) 434-1370

Attorneys for Defendant

PROVIDENT LIFE AND ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY

J. DAVID OSWALT (SBN 073439)

Email: doswalt@kantor.law.net

CHRISTINA J. SMITH (SBN 193509)

Email: csmith@kantorlaw.net

KANTOR & KANTOR

19839 Nordhoff Street

Northridge, California 91324

Telephone: (818) 886-2525

Facsimile: (818) 350-6272

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

MARGARET HALL, 

Plaintiff,

vs.

PROVIDENT LIFE AND ACCIDENT 

INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendant

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: CV 08 0114 CRB

STIPULATION TO TAKE DEPOSITIONS 

BEYOND THE DISCOVERY CUT-OFF 

AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by the parties, through their attorneys of 

record, that the following depositions may be taken beyond the discovery cut-off of January 29, 

2010, as follows:

Dr. David Rittinger February 5, 2010 at 1:00 pm

Case 3:08-cv-00114-CRB Document 73 Filed 02/08/10 Page 1 of 3
2

STIPULATION TO EXTEND FACT DISCOVERY CUT-OFF AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

USDC NDCA Case No.: CV 08 0114 CRB

 508768.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Dr. James Eichel February 10, 2010 at 11:30 am

Dr. Christina Campbell February 12, 2010 at 2:00 pm

Plaintiff does not agree that any other fact discovery may be taken after the discovery

cut-off.

Dated: February 2, 2010 WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, EDELMAN &

DICKER LLP

By: /s/

Francis J. Torrence

Lisa S. Passalacqua

Attorneys for Defendant

Provident Life and Accident Insurance Company

Dated: February 2, 2010 KANTOR & KANTOR LLP

By: /s/

J. David Oswalt

Christina J. Smith

Attorneys for Plaintiff Margaret Hall

Case 3:08-cv-00114-CRB Document 73 Filed 02/08/10 Page 2 of 3
3

STIPULATION TO EXTEND FACT DISCOVERY CUT-OFF AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

USDC NDCA Case No.: CV 08 0114 CRB

 508768.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. The following depositions 

may go forward beyond the discovery cut-off of January 29, 2010:

Dr. David Rittinger February 5, 2010 at 1:00 pm

Dr. James Eichel February 10, 2010 at 11:30 am

Dr. Christina Campbell February 12, 2010 at 2:00 pm

Date: ________________, 2010 ________________________________

United States District Judge

February 05

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Charles R. Breyer

Case 3:08-cv-00114-CRB Document 73 Filed 02/08/10 Page 3 of 3
### §2325. Sales price

#### (a) Government-owned single or duplex houses

In the sale to priority purchasers of properties on which are located Government-owned single or duplex houses, the sales price shall be the appraised value less a deduction of 15 per centum of the appraised value and less the deductions provided by section 2326 of this title.

#### (b) Other properties

In all other cases the sales price to priority purchasers shall be the appraised value less the deductions provided by section 2326 of this title, except that sales made under sections 2343(b) and 2343(c) of this title shall be made at the prices set forth therein.

#### (c) Appraised value of interest in commercial property

The appraised value of the Government's interest in commercial property shall, in the cases where renegotiation of the lease is requested by the lessee under the provisions of section 2201(e) of this title be based upon the renegotiated lease if any is agreed on. Where such renegotiations are requested, the sales proceedings shall not be initiated until the completion of the renegotiation.

(Aug. 4, 1955, ch. 543, ch. 3, §35, 69 Stat. 474; Pub. L. 85–162, title II, §202, Aug. 21, 1957, 71 Stat. 410.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1957—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 85–162 added subsec. (c).

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Report With Respect to Renegotiations, Reappraisals, and Sales Proceedings

Pub. L. 85–162, title II, §203, Aug. 21, 1957, 71 Stat. 410, required Atomic Energy Commission, Federal Housing Administration, and Housing and Home Finance Agency to report to Joint Committee by Jan. 31, 1958, with respect to renegotiations, reappraisals, and sales proceedings authorized under subsec. (c) of this section.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-7276

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus ROGER THEODORE ATWOOD, II, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Lacy H. Thornburg, District Judge. (CR-99-44) Submitted: December 19, 2001 Decided: January 11, 2002 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Roger Theodore Atwood, II, Appellant Pro Se. Brian Lee Whisler,Thomas Gray Walker, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the dates appearing on Atwood’s pleadings are the earliest dates they could have been given to prison officials for mailing. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack , 487 U.S. 266 (1988).
2 PER CURIAM: Roger Theodore Atwood, II, appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2001) motion and denying reconsideration of that order. In an action in which the United States is a party, parties are accorded sixty days after entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, see Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). This appeal period is mandatory and jurisdictional. Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corr. , 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). The district court’s order dismissing Atwood’s § 2255 motion was entered on May 24, 2001. To be timely, Atwood would have had to note an appeal no later than July 23, 2001. Atwood’s notice of appeal was filed on July 26, 2001. * Atwood filed his motion to reconsider pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) more than ten days after the entry of the district court’s order dismissing his § 2255 motion, so the time period for filing his appeal of that order was not tolled. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4). Therefore, Atwood’s3 appeal is only timely as to the district court’s order denying his subsequent motion for reconsideration. This court reviews denial of a Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for abuse of discretion. See NOW v. Operation Rescue , 47 F.3d 667, 669 (4th Cir. 1995) (per curiam). We have reviewed the record and conclude the district court’s order denying Atwood’s motion for reconsideration was not an abuse of discretion. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, dismiss as untimely Atwood's appeal as to the denial of his § 2255 motion,and dismiss as meritless his appeal as to the order denying reconsideration. 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.

DISMISSED
CHEMICALS – PLASTICS - FIBERSEastman Chemical CompanyA global manufacturer of chemicals, plastics and fibersheadquartered in KingsportTennesseeheadquarteredinKingsport,TennesseeFounded in 1920 in Kingsport, TN by George EastmanSpun off from Eastman Kodak in 1994 and becameSpunofffromEastmanKodakin1994andbecamepublically-traded companyProduces over 1200 products2010 Sales Revenue of $5.8 billion10,000 employees worldwideTennessee Operations – Kingsport, TNOne of 10 largestwithdrawers of cooling waterintheOneof10largestwithdrawersofcoolingwaterUS manufacturing sector (up to 500 MGD)Located on South Fork of the Holston River,aheadwater stream to the Tennessee River system3 CWIS located 4-5.8 km below a TVA dam whichl ld t ith f t d i ifi treleases coldwater withfrequentandsignificantfluctuations in flow volume and velocity caused bytheir hydroelectricgeneration schedulegUtilize un-modified course mesh traveling screensImpingement Costs• Costs do not include the 4 required entrainment studies,peer reviews,potential entrainment controls,,p ,p ,permitting, operation & maintenance, facility downtime, business interruption, or impingement mortalitymonitoring.** Engineering cost estimate to replace Ristroph screens, reduce velocity and reduce potentialentrapment = $120MAcademy of Natural Sciences River StudiesSi 1965th Phil d l hi A d f N t lSince1965,thePhiladelphiaAcademy ofNaturalSciences has conducted biological surveys of the river,upstream and downstream from Eastman.Academy of Natural Sciences Fish StudyLow species diversity at both the upstream reference site and nearthe CWIS attributed to Patrick Henry dam.Predominate species near CWIS are nongame fish: white suckers(42%), Tennessee snubnose darters (18%), common carp (17%),and central stonerollers (9%). Other species≤3% of total catch.“The structure of the fish assemblage at Zone 2A does not appear tobe particularly vulnerable to impingement,based on habitat and size structure offish caught.”Third PartyIminement StudypgCollected impinged fish from B-269 and B-63 CWIS(approximately half of the total intake volume) over two24 hi dour peros.One minnow caught resulting inan impingement rate ofanimpingementrateof0.0023 fish/MG or 378 fish/year.Eastman’s Position on Proposed CWIS RuleEPA should not impose 316(b) standards where the costsexceed the benefitsexceedthebenefits.Impingement control requirements should be based on asite specificdetermination or ademinimusimpingementsitespecificdeterminationorademinimusimpingementrate.Eastmancannot pass along the costs to our customersnotpassalongthecoststoourcustomers.Manufacturing facilities are unique and different than theutility sectorEPA should not impose the same standardsutilitysector.EPAshouldnotimposethesamestandardson existing manufacturing facilities and existing utilities.