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

# MEMm

M February24 , 201 0 Th e Honorabl e Ra

yLaHoo d Secretary Unite d State s Departmen t o fTransportatio n 120 0 Ne wJerseyAvenue , S E Washington , D.C
. 

### 2059 0 Subject : Haned a Combinatio n Service s Allocatio n Proceedin g DOT-OST-2010-001 8 Dea rSecretaryLaHood : A s a dedicate d trave l partne ro fAmerica n Airlines , I a m writin g i n suppor to fAmerican' s applicatio n t o provid e ne wservic e fro m Ne wYork' s Joh n F. Kenned yInternationa l Airpor t an d Lo s Angele s Internationa l Airpor t t o Tol<y o Internationa l Airpor t a tHaneda . I recogniz e an d applau d yo u an d th e Obam a administratio n fo ryou rsucces s las tDecembe ri n reachin g a landmar k

Ope n Skie s agreemen t wit h Japan , whic h open s u p Haned a t o servic e b yU.S
. airlines . I encourag e you rselectio n o fAmerica n Airline s t o provid e nonsto p servic e fro m Ne wYor k an d Lo s Angele s t o Haned a i n orde rt o provid e a n essentia l connectio n betwee n thre e o fth e world' s financia l an d commerc e centers . Recen t events , includin g th e successfu l preservatio n o fJapa n Airlines ' oneworl d Allianc e membership , hav e underscore d American' s stron g commitmen tt o th e trans-Pacifi cmarket . America n i s likewis e committe d t o Ne wYor k

an d Lo s Angle s - bot h vita l foca l point s o fbusiness , trade , entertainment , technolog yan d educatio n

- providin g unsurpasse d ai rservic e sinc e th e mid-1900 s Bot h th e Ne wYor k

an d Lo s Angele s metr o area s wil l gai n significan t economi cbenefit s fro m thes e propose d ne wflights , a

s wil l American' s customer s an d employees . However , w e nee d you rhel p t o mak e th e JFK/Haned a connectio n a reality . Therefo/:©;^ ! strongl yurg e yo u t o sa yye s t o America n Airline s an d it s reques tfo rslot s t o fl yfro m Kenned yt o Har^a ! / jincereh^ , /(// ^ /\A. K_t )y^/ V^•'•^ - Intemationa l Tour s (NY) , Inc . 

# Ourrfou^ O
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Louis Blackman, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, rendered March 26, 1976, convicting defendant on his plea of guilty to criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, unanimously reversed, on the law and on the facts, the plea of guilty is vacated, the motion to suppress is granted, and the indictment is dismissed. On the suppression hearing, the police officer testified that he observed the defendant talking to someone in a car and noticed a "large bulge” protruding from the defendant’s right front pants pocket, which was "skin tight.” Concluding that he had a gun, the officer approached, placed his hand on the bulge, at which point the defendant pushed the officer’s hand away and emptied his pockets disclosing, among other things, a tinfoil packet of cocaine. Thereafter, an additional amount of cocaine was found on the defendant. The officer described the bulge as a "bunched fist of some kind.” The rule is well established that a frisk pursuant to CPL 140.50 may not be predicated merely on the observation of a bulge in a pants pocket unless the bulge exhibits the outline of a gun. (See *People v Batino,*48 AD2d 619; *People v Graves,*49 AD2d 844; *People v Otero,*51 AD2d 705.) *People v Prochilo*(41 NY2d 759), relied upon by the District Attorney, is entirely consistent with this principle. (See *Matter of Allan L.,*59 AD2d 865.) Concur—Lupiano, J. P., Lane, Markewich and Sandler, JJ.
#### § 239.1 Purpose.

The purpose of the regulations in this part is to prescribe the procedures and standard terms and conditions applicable to loan guarantees issued for the benefit of the Borrower, pursuant Section 7034(o) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2016 (Div. K, Pub. L. 114-113). The loan guarantees will be issued as provided herein pursuant to the Loan Guarantee Agreement, dated June 6, 2016, between the United States of America and the Republic of Tunisia (the “Loan Guarantee Agreement”). The loan guarantee will apply to sums borrowed during a period beginning on the date that the Loan Guarantee Agreement enters into force and ending thirty days after such date, not exceeding an aggregate total of five hundred million United States Dollars (U.S. $500,000,000) in principal amount. The loan guarantees shall ensure the Borrower's repayment of 100% of principal and interest due under such loans. The full faith and credit of the United States of America is pledged for the full payment and performance of such guarantee obligations.
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,

J ustices

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.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk December 3, 2009 

# Order

December 3, 2009

137111(156)

ANTHONY PELLEGRINO, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of SHIRLEY ANN PELLEGRINO, Plaintiffs-Appellees, SC: 137111 v COA: 274743 Wayne CC: 03-325462-NI AMPCO SYSTEMS PARKING, Defendant-Appellant.

___________________ ___________________

On order of the Chief Jus tice, the motion by defendant-a ppellant for extension to November 5, 2009 for filing its reply br ief is considered and it is GRANTED.
### IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 21

- 00155

- CV
IN THE INTEREST OF T.R.S.U., A CHILD

From the 170th District Court McLennan County, Texas Trial Court No. 2017

- 2405

- 4

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On August 12, 2021, the Clerk of this Court notified Appellant that we have not
received the docketing statement and that this appe al would be dismissed if the
docketing statement was not filed within twenty

- one days of the date of the letter. No
response has been received from Appellant. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. See

T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3(c).

MATT JOHNSON Justice

Be fore Chief Justice Gray, Justice Johnson , and Justice Smith Dismissed Opinion delivered and filed September 22 , 2021 [CV 06 ]
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

JOSEPH RUSSONIELLO (CSBN 44332)

United States Attorney

THOMAS MOORE (ASBN 4305-O78T)

Assistant United States Attorney

Chief, Tax Division

BLAKE D. STAMM (CTBN 301887)

 Assistant United States Attorney

 9 Floor Federal Building th

 450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055

 San Francisco, California 94102

 Telephone: (415) 436-7063

Attorneys for the United States of America

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff,

v.

DOUGLAS R. CARAWAY, et al.,

Defendants

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. C-08-04371-MMC

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE CASE

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND 

[proposed] ORDER THEREON

 It is hereby stipulated by and between Plaintiff United States of America and

Defendants, Douglas Caraway, Franchise Tax Board and Employment Development

Department, through their respective counsel, that the case management conference be

continued from May 14, 2010 to June 18, 2010 at 10:30 a.m.

Though the Court has granted several prior continuances, counsel for defendant

Caraway and a retained accountant are finalizing tax returns for the years at issue. An

additional and limited continuance would allow defendant Caraway adequate time to

complete the tax returns for the years at issue, and provide them to the IRS along with the

supporting documentation.

//

//

//

Case 3:08-cv-04371-MMC Document 34 Filed 05/06/10 Page 1 of 2
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

Stipulation and [proposed] Order,

Case No. CV-08-04371 MMC

2

EDMUND G. BROWN, JR. JOSEPH P. RUSSONIELLO

Attorney General of the State of California United States Attorney

 /s/ /s/

KAREN YIU BLAKE D. STAMM

Deputy Attorney General Assistant United States Attorney

Attorneys for Franchise Tax Board Attorneys for the United States

and Employment Development Department

 /s/

BARBARA MORRISON

TAGGART & HAWKINS, PC

Attorney for Douglas Caraway

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

 Dated: ______________

THE HONORABLE MAXINE M. CHESNEY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

May 6, 2010

Case 3:08-cv-04371-MMC Document 34 Filed 05/06/10 Page 2 of 2
THE STATE OF TEXAS

MANDATE

TO THE 71ST DISTRICT COURT OF HARRISON COUNTY, GREETINGS:

Before the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Court of Appeals District of Texas, on the 16th 

day of September, A.D. 2015, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your Judgment was 

determined; and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

Cedric Jamar Hill, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

No. 06-15-00005-CR

Trial Court No. 12-0317X

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find that the motion of the appellant to 

dismiss the appeal should be granted. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal.

We note that the appellant, Cedric Jamar Hill, has adequately indicated his inability to pay 

costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court in this 

behalf, and in all things to have it duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS, the Hon. Josh R. Morriss, III, Chief Justice of our said Court of Appeals, with 

the seal thereof annexed, at the City of Texarkana, this the 12th day of November, A.D. 2015.

DEBRA K. AUTREY, Clerk
### §3796ii–7. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 3796ii–7 was editorially reclassified as section 10478 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.
PG&E Corp. 2010 Executive Stock Ownership Guidelines



 Exhibit 10.3 
 PG&E CORPORATION 
 2010 EXECUTIVE STOCK OWNERSHIP GUIDELINES

 (As adopted effective January 1, 2011) 

 

	1.	Description. The 2010 Executive Stock Ownership Guidelines (“Guidelines”) was approved by the Compensation Committee of the PG&E Corporation Board
of Directors effective January 1, 2011. The Guidelines are an important element of the Committee’s compensation policy of aligning executive interests with those of the Corporation’s shareholders. The Guidelines are administered by
the PG&E Corporation Senior Human Resources Officer. 

  

	2.	Ownership Targets. The applicable total stock ownership targets (“Target”) are: 


 

					
	 Officer Band
	 	 Position
	 	 Total Stock

Ownership Target

			
	 1
	 	Chairman, CEO and President, PG&E Corporation	 	6× base salary
			
	 2
	 	 President, Pacific Gas
 and Electric Company
 SVP and Chief Operating Officer

SVP and Chief Financial Officer
 SVP, Corporate Strategy
 and Development

SVP and General Counsel
	 	3× base salary
			
	 3
	 	SVPs of PG&E Corporation and Pacific Gas and Electric Company (Utility)	 	1.5× base salary


Conformance with the applicable Targets will be determined as of December 31 of each calendar year (“Measurement Date”).
Targets will be based on base salary in effect on the Measurement Date. 
  

	3.	Retention Ratio. Under the Guidelines, Officers are expected to hold 50 percent of their net shares realized from options exercises or stock or stock unit
vesting, after withholding for the exercise price and taxes, until the applicable Target is met. 

  

	4.	 Calculation of Stock Ownership Levels. The value of the stock or stock equivalents owned by the Eligible Executive, as of the Measurement Date,
is based on the average closing price of PG&E Corporation common stock as traded on the New 










	 	 
York Stock Exchange for the last thirty (30) trading days of the year, (“Measurement Value”). 



 

	 	a)	The value of stock beneficially owned by the Eligible Executive is determined by multiplying the number of shares owned beneficially on the Measurement Date times the
Measurement Value. 

  

	 	b)	The value of PG&E Corporation phantom stock units credited to the Eligible Executive’s account in the PG&E Corporation Supplemental Retirement Savings Plan
(“SRSP”) is determined by multiplying the number of phantom stock units in the Eligible Executive’s SRSP account on the Measurement Date times the Measurement Value. 


 

	 	c)	The value of stock held in the PG&E Corporation stock fund of any defined contribution plan maintained by PG&E Corporation or any of its subsidiaries is
determined by multiplying the number of shares in such fund on the Measurement Date times the Measurement Value. 

  

	 	d)	The value of unvested restricted stock and/or restricted stock units held by an Eligible Executive is determined by multiplying the number of shares that the Eligible
Executive would be entitled to receive if the Eligible Executive voluntarily terminated his or her employment on the Measurement Date. 


  
 2
### §4527. General powers of Secretary

In the performance of, and with respect to, the functions, powers, and duties vested in him by this part, the Secretary, in addition to any authority otherwise vested in him, shall—

(1) have the functions, powers, and duties (including the authority to issue rules and regulations) set forth in section 1749a,1 except subsections (c)(2), (c)(4), (d), and (f), of title 12: Provided, That subsection (a)(1) of section 1749a 1 of title 12 shall not apply with respect to functions, powers, and duties under section 4520 1 of this title;

(2) have the power, notwithstanding any other provision of law, in connection with any assistance under this part, whether before or after any default, to provide by contract for the extinguishment upon default of any redemption, equitable, legal, or other right, title, or interest of the private new community developer or State land development agency in any mortgage, deed, trust, or other instrument held by or on behalf of the Secretary for the protection of the security interests of the United States; and

(3) have the power to foreclose on any property or commence any action to protect or enforce any right conferred upon him by law, contract, or other agreement, and bid for and purchase at any foreclosure or other sale any property in connection with which he has provided assistance pursuant to this part. In the event of any such acquisition, the Secretary may, notwithstanding any other provision of law relating to the acquisition, handling, or disposal of real property by the United States, complete, administer, remodel and convert, dispose of, lease, and otherwise deal with, such property. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary shall also have power to pursue to final collection by way of compromise or otherwise all claims acquired by him in connection with any security, subrogation, or other rights obtained by him in administering this part.

(Pub. L. 91–609, title VII, §726, Dec. 31, 1970, 84 Stat. 1801.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Section 1749a of title 12, referred to in par. (1), was repealed by Pub. L. 99–498, title VII, §702, Oct. 17, 1986, 100 Stat. 1545.

Section 4520 of this title, referred to in par. (1), was repealed by Pub. L. 98–181, title I [title IV, §474(e)], Nov. 30, 1983, 97 Stat. 1239.

1 See References in Text note below.
Order Continuing Summ. J. Deadlines 

Villalta v. CCSF, USDC No. C08-4958 

n:\labor\li2009\090736\00605317.doc 

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 

DENNIS J. HERRERA, State Bar #139669

City Attorney 

ELIZABETH SALVESON, State Bar #83788 Chief Labor Attorney 

RAFAL OFIERSKI, State Bar #194798 

Deputy City Attorneys 

Fox Plaza 

1390 Market Street, Fifth Floor 

San Francisco, California 94102-5408 

Telephone: (415) 554-4244 

Facsimile: (415) 554-4248 

E-Mail: rafal.ofierski@sfgov.org 

Attorneys for Defendant 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

CARLOS VILLALTA, ANTHONY 

PADILLA, GILBERT GUERRA AND 

DANIEL PEREZ, 

 Plaintiffs, 

 vs. 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN 

FRANCISCO, 

 Defendants. 

Case No. CVC 08-4958 CRB 

[PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING 

SUMMARY JUDGMENT DEADLINE

Date Action Filed: October 29, 2008 

Trial Date: May 10, 2010 

AMENDEED

Case 3:08-cv-04958-CRB Document 26 Filed 01/25/10 Page 1 of 2
Order Continuing Summ. J. Deadlines 

Villalta, Case No. C08-4958 

1 n:\labor\li2009\090736\00605317.doc 

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 that the Hearing on Motions for 

Summary Judgment is continued to March 15, 2010. Accordingly, the filing deadline for motions for 

summary judgment is extended to February 8, 2010. 

Dated: January ___, 2010 

 

 ____________________________________ 

 HON. CHARLES R. BREYER 

March 26 22

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Charles R. Breyer

Case 3:08-cv-04958-CRB Document 26 Filed 01/25/10 Page 2 of 2
### §2991f. Submission of plans to State and local officials

#### (a) Submission to governing body of Indian reservation or Alaska Native village

No financial assistance may be provided to any project under section 2991b of this title or any research, demonstration, or pilot project under section 2991d of this title, which is to be carried out on or in an Indian reservation or Alaska Native village, unless a plan setting forth the project has been submitted to the governing body of that reservation or village and the plan has not been disapproved by the governing body within thirty days of its submission.

#### (b) Notification to chief executive officer of State or Territory

No financial assistance may be provided to any project under section 2991b of this title or any research, demonstration, or pilot project under section 2991d of this title, which is to be carried out in a State or Territory other than on or in an Indian reservation or Alaska Native village or Hawaiian Homestead, unless the Commissioner has notified the chief executive officer of the State or Territory of the decision of the Commissioner to provide that assistance.

#### (c) Notification to local governing officials of political subdivision

No financial assistance may be provided to any project under section 2991b of this title or any research, demonstration, or pilot project under section 2991d of this title, which is to be carried out in a city, county, or other major political subdivision of a State or Territory, other than on or in an Indian reservation or Alaska Native village, or Hawaiian Homestead, unless the Commissioner has notified the local governing officials of the political subdivision of the decision of the Commissioner to provide that assistance.

(Pub. L. 88–452, title VIII, §808, formerly §807, as added Pub. L. 93–644, §11, Jan. 4, 1975, 88 Stat. 2325; amended Pub. L. 95–568, §17(a)(40), Nov. 2, 1978, 92 Stat. 2443; renumbered §808 and amended Pub. L. 100–175, title V, §§502(3), 504(b)(3), Nov. 29, 1987, 101 Stat. 973, 975; Pub. L. 102–375, title VIII, §822(8), (21), Sept. 30, 1992, 106 Stat. 1298, 1300.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 808 of Pub. L. 88–452 was renumbered section 809 and is classified to section 2991g of this title.

#### Amendments

1992—Pub. L. 102–375 substituted "Alaska Native village" for "Alaskan Native village" and "Commissioner" for "Secretary" wherever appearing.

1987—Subsecs. (b), (c). Pub. L. 100–175, §504(b)(3), inserted "or territory" after "State" wherever appearing.

1978—Subsecs. (b), (c). Pub. L. 95–568 substituted "the decision of the Secretary" for "his decision".

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

#### Effective Date of 1987 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 100–175 effective Oct. 1, 1987, see section 701(a) of Pub. L. 100–175, set out as a note under section 3001 of this title.
§ 72.29 Real property overseas belonging to deceased United States citizen or national. ( a ) If a consular officer becomes aware that the estate of a deceased United States citizen or national includes an interest in real property located within the consular officer's district that will not pass to any person or entity under the applicable local laws of intestate succession or testamentary disposition, and if local law provides that title may be conveyed to the Government of the United States, the consular officer should notify the Department.
( b ) If the Department decides that it wishes to retain the property for its use, the Department will instruct the consular officer to take steps necessary to provide for title to the property to be conveyed to the Government of the United States.
( c ) If title to the real estate is conveyed to the Government of the Unites States and the property is of use to the Department of State, the Department may treat such property as if it were an unconditional gift accepted on behalf of the Department of State under section 25 of the State Department Basic Authorities Act (22 U.S.C. 2697) and section 9(a)(3) of the Foreign Service Buildings Act of 1926 (22 U.S.C. 300(a)(3)).
( d ) If the Department of State does not wish to retain such real property the Department may treat it as foreign excess property under title IV of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (40 U.S.C. 511 *et seq.*).
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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DOTSON,

Plaintiff,

 v.

 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ET AL,

Defendant. /

No. C 08-04291 SI

SECOND

PRETRIAL PREPARATION ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED pursuant to F.R.C.P. and the Local Rules of this Court:

FURTHER CASE MANAGEMENT: June 25, 2010 at 3:00 p.m.

Counsel must file a joint case management statement seven days in advance of the conference.

DISCOVERY PLAN: Per F.R.Civ.P and Local Rules, subject to any provisions below.

NON-EXPERT DISCOVERY CUTOFF is July 30, 2010.

DESIGNATION OF EXPERTS: 8/27/10; REBUTTAL: 9/17/10. Parties SHALL conform to Rule 26(a)(2).

EXPERT DISCOVERY CUTOFF is October 15, 2010.

DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS SHALL be filed by November 12, 2010; 

Opp. Due November 26, 2010; Reply Due December 3, 2010;

 and set for hearing no later than December 20, 2010 at 9:00 AM.

PRETRIAL CONFERENCE DATE: February 15, 2011 2010 at 3:30 PM.

JURY TRIAL DATE: February 28, 2011 at 8:30 AM., Courtroom 10, 19th floor.

TRIAL LENGTH is estimated to be days.

SPECIAL DISCOVERY AND PRETRIAL PROVISIONS:

The Court continued the trial schedule as indicated above.

The parties shall participate in a further settlement conference with Magistrate-Judge Vadas in July

2010.

The pretrial conference SHALL be attended by trial counsel prepared to discuss all aspects of the case,

including settlement. Parties SHALL conform to the attached instructions. Plaintiff is ORDERED to

serve a copy of this order on any party subsequently joined in this action.

Dated: 

SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:08-cv-04291-SI Document 47 Filed 02/23/10 Page 1 of 1