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

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 295 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 295

                 For the relief of Konstantinos Ritos.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 20, 2005

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                 For the relief of Konstantinos Ritos.

    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 KONSTANTINOS RITOS.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b) of section 
201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Konstantinos Ritos 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 Konstantinos Ritos 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 Konstantinos Ritos, 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 Konstantinos 
Ritos shall not, by virtue of such relationship, be accorded any right, 
privilege, or status under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
                                 <all>
```
### §1200e. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, act July 6, 1954, ch. 463, §8, 68 Stat. 453, which authorized appropriations for relocation of the members of the Yankton Sioux Tribe, South Dakota, was omitted from the Code as being of special and not general application.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JUNE 24, 2015

NO. 03-14-00129-CV

City of New Braunfels, Gale Pospisil, Robert Camereno, 

Tom Wilber and Mary Quinones, Appellants

v.

Garrison Maurer, d/b/a Comal Towing; Jeramie Hernandez, d/b/a JJ Towing; and 

Robert Fleming, d/b/a Pro Care Wrecker Service, Appellees

APPEAL FROM THE 433RD DISTRICT COURT OF COMAL COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, GOODWIN, AND FIELD

DISMISSED ON APPELLANTS’ MOTION -- OPINION BY JUSTICE FIELD

This is an appeal from the interlocutory order signed by the trial court on February 13, 2014. 

City of New Braunfels, Gale Pospisil, Robert Camereno, Tom Wilber and Mary Quinones have

filed a motion to dismiss the appeal, and having considered the motion, the Court agrees that the 

motion should be granted in part. Therefore, the Court grants the motion in part and dismisses 

the appeal. The appellants shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and in the 

court below.
Unassociated Document


    Ginseng
Planting Agreement

    


    


    


    Party A:
Yanbian Huaxing Ginseng Planting Co. Ltd.

    


    Party B:
____________________________________

    


    


    
      	
               
      

            	
              1.

            	
              Managing
      planting area 85,240 square meter

            


    

    


    
      	
               
      

            	
              2.

            	
              Contracting
      period is three years (from April 1, 2010 to December 31,
      2012)

            


    

    


    
      	
               
      

            	
              3.

            	
              Party
      A provides planting land, seeds and seedlings with a
      fee.  Contracting fee for every square meter is 10 RMB, seeds
      and seedling is based on the current market price.  Based on the
      planting area, party A shall pay Party B land management fee 4 RMB per
      square meter every year

            


    

    


    
      	
               
      

            	
              4.

            	
              Party
      B produces 2 kg fresh ginseng for every square meter; Party A pays for
      ginseng harvest based on the market price.  Party A pays Party B
      20 RMB per kilo for any excess quantities above 2kg/square
      meter.

            


    

    


    
      	
               
      

            	
              5.

            	
              Party
      B agrees to follow party A’s production standard in pest control;
      fertilizer, field management and  90% survival rate of returning
      the ginseng land to forest after
harvest.

            


    

    


    
      	
               
      

            	
              6.

            	
              If
      during the contract terms, should any incontrollable natural disasters
      such as storm, hail or flood occur, the loss will be born by Party A,
      other manmade loss shall also be born by Party
  A.

            


    

    


    
      	
               
      

            	
              7.

            	
              The
      ownership of planting right is part of party A’s liquid assets, party B
      can not change crop items without Party A’s prior
      approval.  After the contract is expired, the planting right is
      still owned by party A.

            


    

    


    
      	
               
      

            	
              8.

            	
              Land
      management fee and fresh ginseng harvest reimbursement to party B will be
      calculated every year. And the land using cost and seeds/seedling charges
      will be deducted from the total
payment.

            


    

    


    
      	
               
      

            	
              9.

            	
              If
      any items not being covered in the agreement, both parties can negotiate
      the terms.  This contract is executed in two copies, each party
      keeps one copy.

            


    

    


    Party
A:  Yanbian Huaxing Ginseng Planting Co., Ltd.

    


    Party
B:

    


    Date:
April 1, 2010
§ 3.310 Recruitment. ( a ) *Nondiscriminatory recruitment.* A recipient to which §§ 3.300 through 3.310 apply shall not discriminate on the basis of sex in the recruitment and admission of students. A recipient may be required to undertake additional recruitment efforts for one sex as remedial action pursuant to § 3.110(a), and may choose to undertake such efforts as affirmative action pursuant to § 3.110(b).
( b ) *Recruitment at certain institutions.* A recipient to which §§ 3.300 through 3.310 apply shall not recruit primarily or exclusively at educational institutions, schools, or entities that admit as students only or predominantly members of one sex, if such actions have the effect of discriminating on the basis of sex in violation of §§ 3.300 through 3.310.
Exhibit 11
                                     
                  Metris Companies Inc. and Subsidiaries
                     Computation of Earnings Per Share
              (in thousands, except share and per share data)

                                                 Quarters Ended March 31,
                                               1997                 1996
Primary:
Net Income                                 $    7,738         $      3,855

Weighted average shares of common stock
  outstanding (1)                           19,225,000          15,966,667
Common stock equivalents (2)                   944,109             497,261

Weighted average common and common
  equivalent shares                         20,169,109          16,463,928

Net income per share                       $       .38        $        .23

Fully Diluted:
Net income                                 $     7,738        $      3,855

Weighted average shares of common
  stock outstanding (1)                     19,225,000          15,966,667
Common stock equivalents                       947,808             509,521

Weighted average common and common
  equivalent shares                         20,172,808          16,476,188

Net income per share                       $       .38        $        .23

(1)  Assume shares outstanding as if the Company reorganization had
  occurred at the beginning of the periods shown.
Based on the treasury stock method using the average market price for primary 
earnings per share and the higher of the average or year-end market price for
fully diluted earnings per share.  Prior to October 25, 1996, the initial 
public offering price of $16 was used.
1

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

________________

NO. 09-16-00230-CV 

________________

IN THE MATTER OF C.W.G. JR.

__________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 279th District Court

Jefferson County, Texas

Trial Cause No. F-12437-J

__________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On August 11, 2016, we notified the parties that the appeal would be 

dismissed for want of prosecution unless appellant remitted the filing fee for the 

appeal. By separate letter on the same date, we also notified the parties that the 

appeal would be dismissed unless arrangements were made for filing the record or 

the appellant explained why additional time was needed to file the record.

The appellant did not respond to the Court’s notices. The appellant also did 

not file an affidavit of indigence and is not entitled to proceed without payment of 

costs. See Tex. R. App. P. 20.1. There being no satisfactory explanation for the 
2

failure to file the record, and there being no reasonable explanation for the failure 

to pay the filing fee for the appeal, the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. 

See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b); Tex. R. App. P. 42.3. Costs are assessed against the 

appellant.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

______________________________

 CHARLES KREGER

 Justice

Submitted on September 28, 2016

Opinion Delivered September 29, 2016

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Johnson, JJ.
###### Editorial Note on Part 200

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 200 appear at 69 FR 18803, Apr. 9, 2004.

#### § 200.929a Fair Housing Accessibility Guidelines.

Builders and developers may use the Department's Fair Housing Accessibility Guideline when designing or constructing covered multifamily dwelling units in order to comply with the Fair Housing Act. The Guidelines may be found in the 24 CFR Chapter I, Subchapter A, Appendix II, titled Fair Housing Accessibility Guidelines—Design Guidelines for Accessible/Adaptable Dwellings.

[58 FR 60250, Nov. 15, 1993]
### §316b. Grazing districts

(a) The Secretary may establish grazing districts upon any public lands outside of the Aleutian Islands Reservation, national forests, and other reservations administered by the Secretary of Agriculture and outside of national parks and monuments which, in his opinion, are valuable for the grazing of livestock. Such districts may include such areas of surveyed and unsurveyed lands as he determines may be conveniently administered as a unit, even if such areas are neither contiguous nor adjacent.

(b) The Secretary, after the establishment of a district, is authorized to lease the grazing privileges therein in accordance with the provisions of this subchapter.1

(Mar. 4, 1927, ch. 513, §3, 44 Stat. 1452.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This subchapter, referred to in subsec. (b), was in the original "this title" and has been translated as if the reference was to "this Act" to reflect the probable intent of Congress inasmuch as the act of Mar. 4, 1927, was not divided into titles.

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 471b of Title 48, Territories and Insular Possessions.

1 See References in Text note below.
Case 3:09-cv-01613-BZ Document 83 Filed 04/07/10 Page 1 of 1
#### § 146.21 General responsibilities.

Each recipient has primary responsibility to ensure that its programs and activities that receive Federal financial assistance from HUD comply with the provisions of the Act, the government-wide regulation, and this part, and shall take steps to eliminate violations of the Act. A recipient also has responsibility to maintain records, provide information, and to afford HUD access to its records to the extent HUD finds necessary to determine whether a program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance from HUD is in compliance with the Act and this part.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 2529-0030)

[51 FR 45266, Dec. 17, 1986, as amended at 52 FR 7408, Mar. 11, 1987]
#### § 203.426 Inapplicability to housing in older declining urban areas.

The provisions of §§ 203.420 through 203.425 shall not apply to mortgages financing housing in declining urban areas meeting the requirements of § 203.43a.
REGULATORY EVALUATION

Directorate Identifier: 2009-NM-261-AD

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a "significant regulatory action"?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific

requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of

transpoI1ation?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)
§ 241.560 Agreed interest rate. ( a ) The mortgage shall bear interest at the rate agreed upon by the lender and the borrower.
( b ) Interest shall be payable in monthly installments on the principal amount of the loan outstanding on the due date of each installment.
[45 FR 57983, Aug. 29, 1980, as amended at 49 FR 19459, May 8, 1984]
#### In the Matter of Dominick Bretti, Respondent, v. Archie G. Eastman, as Sheriff of Oneida County, Appellant.

Order unanimously reversed, without costs of this appeal to either party and proceeding dismissed, without costs. Memorandum: This was a proceeding to compel the Sheriff of Oneida County to amend his notation on the commitment of the respondent to Elmira Reception Center by increasing his jail term credit from 75 days to 85 days. Respondent was indicted by an Oneida County Grand Jury. He pleaded guilty to the crime charged on the 12th day of November 1954, and was sentenced to Elmira Reception Center on the same day. He was received at the Reception' Center on November 23,1954 with a notation on his commitment of an allowance of 75 days’ jail time. He claims that the time from sentence to delivery to the Elmira Reception Center should be credited on his sentence. Special Term directed that such time intervening between sentencing and delivery to the correctional institution be credited to the petitioner. Section 231 of the Correction Law provides that the time of imprisonment of a prisoner shall begin on the date of his actual incarceration in the reception center. Section 2193 of the Penal Law provides that the time spend in jail after arrest and before sentence constitutes jail time for which the prisoner is to be given credit and it is calculated as part of the sentence imposed. There is no provision of law for crediting time spent in jail after sentence and before being received in a State correctional institution. (Cf. *People ex rel. Jackson*v. *Weaver,*279 App. Div. 88.) The proceeding herein was not one in habeas corpus although the final paragraph of the order might so indicate. The order is procedurally improper but we prefer to answer the question on its merits. The legislative attempt to meet the problem and the Governor’s veto message indicates the very real question presented. It also indicates that the remedy is to be sought not in the judicial forum but' in the legislative. The order was improper and should be reversed. (Appeal from order of Oneida Special Term directing the respondent Sheriff to credit 10 days of time in Oneida County Jail after date of sentencing and discharging defendant from Attica.) Present.— Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, Halpern and McClusky, JJ.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Joseph Michael William Brady, Appellant.

Cross motion by appellant: (l) to consolidate his appeal from a judgment of conviction, his appeal from the order denying his *coram nobis*application and his appeal from the order made upon reargument; and (2) to dispense with printing, for assignment of counsel and enlargement of time to perfect his appeals. Cross motion granted. The consolidated appeals will be heard on the original papers and on appellant’s typewritten brief, which shall include a copy of any decision or opinion rendered by the court below. The appellant is directed to file six copies of his typewritten brief and to serve one copy on the District Attorney. The appellant’s time to perfect the consolidated appeals is enlarged to the May Term, beginning April 24, 1961; the consolidated appeals are ordered on the calendar for said term. Anthony F. Marra, Esquire, 100 Centre Street, New York 13, New York, having been previously assigned to prosecute the appeal from the judgment, is also assigned as counsel to prosecute these consolidated appeals. Beldock, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.
### §1241. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 1241 was editorially reclassified as section 2701 of this title.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Stanley Wieczorek, Appellant.

Judgment of conviction unanimously reversed on the law and facts and a new trial granted. Memorandum: The defendant-appellant was convicted of criminally receiving stolen property, as a felony, in Niagara County. Part of the goods claimed to have been stolen was recovered at the home of the appellant’s mother in Erie County where the appellant left them on the day following the burglary and where the appellant sometimes stayed. When arrested, the appellant was visiting his wife in Niagara County and a *899Polaroid camera, claimed to be one of the items stolen, was found lying openly on the front seat of his automobile. Later a print eoater for polaroid film was found in the appellant’s room in Niagara County. Since the value of the property found in Niagara County was less than $100, the conviction as a felony may be sustained only if the jury was justified in finding that the goods discovered in Erie County were received in Niagara County. Receiving is a local offense and must be tried in the county where the receipt took place. *(People*v. *Zimmer,*174 App. Div. 470, affd. 220 N. Y. 597; *People*v. *Spirak,*237 N. Y. 460, affg. 206 App. Div. 739.) In *Wills*v. *People*(3 Park. Crim. Rep. 473) attempted sale of stolen goods by sample from a pawnshop was held to justify an inference that criminal receipt took place in the county where the attempted sale and defendants’ place of business were, although the bulk of the goods were recovered in another county. However, more proof of the theft and proof of possession in a jurisdiction other than that of the prosecution is not sufficient *(People*v. *Fein,*292 N. Y. 10). Where there has been acquittal of the larceny and all that remains is proof of possession in another jurisdiction, there is no basis for the inference that receipt took place in any other jurisdiction than that where the goods were found *(People*v. *Spivak,*237 N. Y. 460). Here, after acquittal on counts of burglary and larceny, all tnat remained was the discovery of one camera in the appellant’s automobile which was temporarily parked in the street in front of his wife’s home. Any inference therefrom that all of the property had been received in Niagara County is speculative and too remote. (Appeal from judgment of Niagara County Court convicting defendant of the crime of criminally receiving stolen property, a felony.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, McClusky and Henry, JJ.
### §300ff–66. Provision by Secretary of supplies and services in lieu of grant funds

#### (a) In general

Upon the request of a grantee under this part, the Secretary may, subject to subsection (b), provide supplies, equipment, and services for the purpose of aiding the grantee in providing early intervention services and, for such purpose, may detail to the State any officer or employee of the Department of Health and Human Services.

#### (b) Limitation

With respect to a request described in subsection (a), the Secretary shall reduce the amount of payments under the grant involved by an amount equal to the costs of detailing personnel and the fair market value of any supplies, equipment, or services provided by the Secretary. The Secretary shall, for the payment of expenses incurred in complying with such request, expend the amounts withheld.

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title XXVI, §2666, as added Pub. L. 101–381, title III, §301(a), Aug. 18, 1990, 104 Stat. 614; amended Pub. L. 109–415, title VII, §703, Dec. 19, 2006, 120 Stat. 2820; Pub. L. 111–87, §2(a)(1), (3)(A), Oct. 30, 2009, 123 Stat. 2885.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2009—Pub. L. 111–87 repealed Pub. L. 109–415, §703, and revived the provisions of this section as in effect on Sept. 30, 2009. See 2006 Amendment note and Effective Date of 2009 Amendment; Revival of Section note below.

2006—Pub. L. 109–415, §703, which directed repeal of this section effective Oct. 1, 2009, was itself repealed by Pub. L. 111–87, §2(a)(1), effective Sept. 30, 2009.

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

#### Effective Date of 2009 Amendment; Revival of Section

For provisions that repeal by section 2(a)(1) of Pub. L. 111–87 of section 703 of Pub. L. 109–415 be effective Sept. 30, 2009, and that the provisions of this section as in effect on Sept. 30, 2009, be revived, see section 2(a)(2), (3)(A) of Pub. L. 111–87, set out as a note under section 300ff–11 of this title.