alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT

EASTERN DIVISION

EARL MILLOY, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) Case No. 12 C 4368

)

CHICAGO BOARD OF EDUCATION, )

)

Defendant. )

MEMORANDUM ORDER

Earl Milloy (“Milloy”) has brought this action against Chicago Board of Education (“Board”), 

charging it with employment discrimination (including a related charge of retaliation). This

memorandum order is issued sua sponte to require Milloy’s counsel to explain how federal

jurisdiction now exists under the circumstances described in the Complaint.

Although Milloy properly launched his efforts to obtain relief by filing administrative charges

(see Complaint ¶ 12 and 13 and Ex. A), Complaint ¶ 14 expressly confirms that his request for a

right-to-sue letter has not yet been acted upon by EEOC. But to this Court’s knowledge the

issuance of such a letter is a precondition to any lawsuit of the type that Milloy seeks to advance.1

Accordingly Milloy’s lawyer is ordered to file a statement, supported by appropriate authorities,

explaining the predicate for bringing this action at this time. Failure to file such a statement (with

a courtesy copy to this Court’s chambers) on or before June 18, 2012 will result in a withoutprejudice dismissal of this action.

___________________________________

Milton I. Shadur

Senior United States District Judge

Date: June 8, 2012

Absent the existence of an anchor in federal subject matter jurisdiction, of course, Milloy 1

has nothing to which he can attach any supplemental jurisdiction contention. And the Complaint

¶ 3 request for declaratory relief is not a separate source of federal jurisdiction either.

Case: 1:12-cv-04368 Document #: 4 Filed: 06/08/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:22
NO. 07-04-0340-CR IN THE COUR

T OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVEN TH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO PANEL D AUGUST 24, 2004

______________________________ TROY DANTE STEPTOE, AP PELLANT

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, A PPELLEE

_________________________________ FROM THE 3 20TH DI STRICT COURT OF PO TTER CO UNTY; NO. 34,247-D; HONORABLE D ON EMERSON , JUDGE

_______________________________ Before QUINN and REAVIS an d CAMPBELL, JJ. MEMORANDUM OPIN ION Troy Dante Steptoe atte mpts to bring an appeal from hi s 1996 prosecuti on for conspiracy

to commit murder . Finding we haveno jurisdi ction, we will d ismiss. Steptoe filed a notice of app eal with the district cl erk in trial cour t cause number 34,247-D on April 7, 2004. His notice of appe al alleged he was convicted o f conspiracy to commit murder on June 3, 1996, and r equested an out- of-time appeal. It also requested1 The same deadlines appl ied under former Rule 41(b)( 1) applicabl e atthe time of appellant’s conviction. -2- appointment

of counsel and a free record on appeal. The notice of appeal w as forwarded to this court and filed June 29, 2004. The record cons ists of a June 13, 1996 motion and order dismissing cause number 34,247- D for the reason that Steptoe had been convicted of another offense in cause n umber 36,425-C and sentenced to 40 years confinement. By letter dated July 23, 2004, we informed Steptoe this court has no aut hority to grant an out- of-timeappeal and that an un timely notice of appeal does no t vest this court with jurisdic

tion. See Slaton v. State , 981 S.W .2d 2 08, 2 10 (T ex.Cri m.A pp. 1 998 ); Te x. R. App. P. 26.2(a). W e also advised him this court’s jurisdiction is limited to judgments of guilt or other appealable orders. See T ex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). W e requested a response showing why t he appeal should not be dismissed for

want of juri sdiction. The o nly respo n se we have receive d is a “Mot ion for Docketi ng Statement” fil ed Augu st2, 2004. This doc ument seeks to pr ovide the i nformation requi red by Rule o f Appellate Procedure 32.2. Unlike the matters rais ed in our Jul y 23, 2004 letter, the failure to file a docketi ng statement does not affect our ju risdicti on. See Tex. R. App. P. 32.4. Steptoe’s resp onse fail s to p rovid e any b asis on wh ich we can f ind we have jurisdic tion over his appe al. T o be t imel y, a no tice of a ppe al mu st be file d with in 30 days after the day sentence is imposed unl ess a timely motion for new trial is filed, in which case appeal must be perfected wi thin 90 daysafter the imposit ion of sentence. Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a). 1 A motion for new tri al must be filed no later than 30 day s after impositi on of the sentence. Tex. R. App. P. 21.4. In the abse nce of jurisdi ction we can take no action other than to-3-

dismiss the appeal. Slaton , 981 S.W .2d a t 210 . Lac king ju risdi ctio n over the a ppe al, we dismiss it.

Per Curiam

Do not publish
.
July 30 , 2015

Mr. M ichael Wilson

102 Plaza de Luke Square

Clayton, NC 27527

Dear Mr. Wilson :

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we can not process your

request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can No t Process Your Request

We entered your May 1 3 , exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA

- 20 15

- 16 4 8 ), but

we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does no t comply

with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any further,

you must send us all of the following:

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how i t would

benefit the public as a whole.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described

earlier to reach us w ithin 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.2

If We Do No t Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the doc ket without notifying you

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267

- 9677.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and

Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
Select an Office to see that Office's Functional Statement and Delegations of Authority. These statements represent the contents of the Department's Mission and Organization Manual, Part B of the Administrative Communications System.

These statements were developed for internal use and frequently use acronyms which are understandable within the Department but may not be clear to others. We have attached a listing of commonly used acronyms for the use of the reader.

### Management

- Office of the Secretary
- Office of the Deputy Secretary 
- Office of the Under Secretary

### Program Offices

- Federal Student Aid
- Institute of Education Sciences
- Office for Civil Rights
- Office of Elementary and Secondary Education
- Office of English Language Acquisition
- Office of Postsecondary Education
- Office of Special Educational and Rehabilitative Services
- Office of Career, Technical, and Adult Education

### Staff Offices

- Office of Finance and Operations
- Office of the Chief Information Officer
- Office of Communications and Outreach
- Office of the General Counsel
- Office of Inspector General
- Office of Legislation and Congressional Affairs
- Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development

### White House Initiatives 

- White House Initiative on Advancing Educational Equity, Excellence, and Economic Opportunity for Native Americans and Strengthening Tribal Colleges and Universities
- White House Initiative on Advancing Educational Equity, Excellence, and Economic Opportunity for Black Americans
- Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships
- White House Initiative on Advancing Educational Equity, Excellence, and Economic Opportunity for Hispanics
- White House Initiative on Advancing Educational Equity, Excellence, and Economic Opportunity through Historically Black Colleges and Universities
# C_2017187EN.01000401.xml

| 13.6.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 187/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.6.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 187/4

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

12 June 2017

(2017/C 187/04)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1221 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 123,30 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4367 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,88545 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,7803 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0857 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,4985 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 26,198 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 307,18 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,1899 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,5620 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 3,9459 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4875 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5078 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,7510 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,5583 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5531 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 270,17 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 14,3757 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,6284 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,4115 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 14 921,69 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,7858 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 55,624 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 63,9585 |
| THB | Thai baht | 38,219 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 3,6840 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 20,3762 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 72,3080 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1221

JPY

Japanese yen

123,30

DKK

Danish krone

7,4367

GBP

Pound sterling

0,88545

SEK

Swedish krona

9,7803

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0857

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,4985

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

26,198

HUF

Hungarian forint

307,18

PLN

Polish zloty

4,1899

RON

Romanian leu

4,5620

TRY

Turkish lira

3,9459

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4875

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5078

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,7510

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,5583

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5531

KRW

South Korean won

1 270,17

ZAR

South African rand

14,3757

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,6284

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,4115

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

14 921,69

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,7858

PHP

Philippine peso

55,624

RUB

Russian rouble

63,9585

THB

Thai baht

38,219

BRL

Brazilian real

3,6840

MXN

Mexican peso

20,3762

INR

Indian rupee

72,3080

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
#### 222.1704 Violations and remedies.

Follow the procedures at PGI 222.1704 for notifying the Combatant Commander if a violation occurs.

[73 FR 4115, Jan. 24, 2008]
III 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 282 

Commending the National Archives and Records Administration and its staff 

for working to comply with the President John F. Kennedy Assassination 

Records Collection Act of 1992 and release all records related to the 

assassination of President John F. Kennedy by October 26, 2017. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 4, 2017 

Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself and Mr. LEAHY) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

RESOLUTION 

Commending the National Archives and Records Administration and its staff for working to comply with the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection 

Act of 1992 and release all records related to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy by October 26, 

2017. 

Whereas the President John F. Kennedy Assassination 

Records Collection Act of 1992 (44 U.S.C. 2107 note; 

Public Law 102–526) directed the National Archives and 

Records Administration (commonly known as ‘‘NARA’’) 

to establish a collection of records to be known as the 

President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection (referred to in this preamble as the ‘‘Collection’’); 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 282 IS 

Whereas the Collection includes all Federal Government 

records relating to the 1963 assassination of President 

John F. Kennedy, including records of Presidential commissions, congressional committees and investigations, executive branch agencies, and the judiciary, in addition to 

a variety of donated historical materials; 

Whereas NARA has compiled a JFK Master System database of 319,106 documents comprising 5,000,000 pages 

of assassination-related records, photographs, motion pictures and recordings, and artifacts; and 

Whereas the processing team at NARA, including archivists 

and technicians from the Special Access and Freedom of 

Information Act staff, staff from the Office of Innovation, and Public Affairs staff, have worked diligently to 

fully release records related to the assassination of President Kennedy: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate commends the National 

2 Archives and Records Administration and its staff for 

3 working to comply with the President John F. Kennedy 

4 Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992 and release 

5 all records related to the assassination of President John 

6 F. Kennedy by October 26, 2017. 

Æ 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
ex10_10.htm


    
      

    

    
      Exhibit 10.10 - Amendment To Employment Agreement Between the
Registrant and Mark D. Curtis

       

      


      June 1,
2009

      


      Mr. Mark
D. Curtis

      


      
        	
                 
      

              	
                Re:

              	
                Letter
      Employment Agreement dated January 1, 2005 (the “Agreement”), as
      amended

              


      

      


      Dear Mr.
Curtis:

      


      This will
serve to confirm that we have agreed to further amend the captioned Agreement,
effective as of January 1, 2009, in the following respects:

      


      1.            
Section “1” of the Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety, and the
following section is hereby substituted therefor:

      


      
        	
                 
      

              	
                “1.

              	
                TERM;
      RENEWAL

              


      

      


      The Term
of the Agreement shall be two (2) years.  If not terminated as
described below, the term shall, on January 1 of each year during the Term,
automatically be extended for an additional year, resulting in a new two (2)
year term (the “Renewal Terms”), with such modifications hereto as the parties
shall agree in writing; provided, however, that the Agreement shall not be so
extended in the event that you or FLIC provides written notice of non-extension
to the other party no later than October 31 of the preceding
year.  Notwithstanding the foregoing, FLIC may not provide such notice
of non-extension during any period of time in which the Board of Directors of
FLIC is actively negotiating a transaction, the consummation of which would
constitute a Change of Control Event (as hereinafter defined).”

      


      2.             Section
4(A) of the Agreement is hereby amended by the deletion of “One Hundred Twenty
Five Per Cent (125%)” and the insertion of “Two Hundred Per Cent (200%)” in
place thereof.

      


      3.            
Section 8.1 of the Agreement is hereby amended by the deletion of “eighteen
(18)” and the insertion of “twenty-four (24)” in place thereof.

      


      Please
confirm that the foregoing accurately sets forth our understanding by signing
and returning the enclosed copy of this letter.  The Agreement will
thereupon be deemed amended in the foregoing respects and, except as amended
hereby, its terms will continue in full force and effect.

      


      


      Very
truly yours,

      


      THE FIRST
OF LONG ISLAND CORPORATION

      


      By: /s/ MICHAEL N.
VITTORIO

      Michael
N. Vittorio,

      President
and Chief Executive Officer

      Date
Executed - October 15, 2009

      


      Accepted
and agreed:

      By: /s/ MARK D.
CURTIS

      Mark D.
Curtis

      Date
Executed - October 15, 2009

       

      
2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 5.0.3

Eastern Division

Lorenzie Humphreys

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:12−cv−04671

Honorable Virginia M. Kendall

Santander Consumer USA, Inc.

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Friday, June 22, 2012:

 MINUTE entry before Honorable Virginia M. Kendall:Initial status hearing set for

9/12/2012 @ 9:00 a.m. Joint Status Report due by 9/6/2012. (See Judge Kendall's web

page found at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov for information about status reports). The parties are

to report on the following: (1) Possibility of settlement in the case; (2) if no possibility of

settlement exists, the nature and length of discovery necessary to get the case ready for

trial. Plaintiff is to advise all other parties of the Court's action herein. Lead counsel is

directed to appear at this status hearing.Mailed notice(tsa, )

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:12-cv-04671 Document #: 4 Filed: 06/22/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:15
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT

Everett McKinley Dirksen UnitedStatesCourthouse

 Room 2722 - 219 S. Dearborn Street

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Office of the Clerk

Phone: (312) 435-5850

www.ca7.uscourts.gov

NOTICE OF ISSUANCE OF MANDATE

January 14, 2019

To: Thomas G. Bruton

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 Northern District of Illinois

 Chicago , IL 60604-0000

No. 18-3387

GRANT BIRCHMEIER, et al., on behalf of themselves and classes of

others similarly situated, 

Plaintiffs - Appellees

v.

CARIBBEAN CRUISE LINE, INCORPORATED, et al., 

Defendants

APPEAL OF: KEVIN MCCABE, Objector,

 Originating Case Information:

 District Court No: 1:12-cv-04069

Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division

District Judge Matthew F. Kennelly

Herewith is the mandate of this court in this appeal, along with the Bill of Costs, if any. A

certified copy of the opinion/order of the court and judgment, if any, and any direction as to

costs shall constitute the mandate.

 RECORD ON APPEAL STATUS: No record to be returned

Case: 18-3387 Document: 00713351164 Filed: 01/14/2019 Pages: 2

Case: 1:12-cv-04069 Document #: 752 Filed: 01/14/19 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:15851
NOTE TO COUNSEL:

If any physical and large documentary exhibits have been filed in the above-entitled cause, they are

to be withdrawn ten (10) days from the date of this notice. Exhibits not withdrawn during this period

will be disposed of.

Please acknowledge receipt of these documents on the enclosed copy of this notice.

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

Received above mandate and record, if any, from the Clerk, U.S. Court of Appeals for the

Seventh Circuit.

Date: Received by:

_________________________ ____________________________________

form name: c7_Mandate(form ID: 135)

Case: 18-3387 Document: 00713351164 Filed: 01/14/2019 Pages: 2

Case: 1:12-cv-04069 Document #: 752 Filed: 01/14/19 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:15852
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

July 31, 2024

No. 04

- 24

- 00443

- CR

William James BALLEST E RO

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 379th Judicial District Court

, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2022CR9581

Honorable Ron Rangel , Judge Presiding

ORDER

In accordance with the court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED FOR LACK

OF JURISDICTION

.

It is so ORDERED on July 31, 2024

.

_____________________________ Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 31st day of July, 2024

.

_____________________________ Luz Estrada , Chief Deputy Clerk
#### 216.405-1 Cost-plus-incentive-fee contracts.

See PGI 216.405-1 for guidance on the use of cost-plus-incentive-fee contracts.

[71 FR 39007, July 11, 2006]
# C_2017087EN.01000501.xml

| 21.3.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 87/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.3.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 87/5

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8259 — Groupe HIG/Guillaume Dauphin/Ecore)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2017/C 87/02)

On 3 January 2017, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in French and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8259. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8259. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
From: "Antonella Zanobetti" <AZANOBET@hsph.harvard.edu>

To: Zachary Pekar/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: Bryan Hubbell/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Pradeep Rajan/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 12/22/2011 11:15 AM

Subject: Re: Request for adjusted (weighted) city-specific effect estimates for use in the ozone NAAQS risk 

assessment (and clarification on the nature of the study areas used)

Hi Zach,

I attach the paper that show how to compute these estimates, I used formula 1 and 2

thanks

Antonella

Antonella Zanobetti, PhD

Senior Research Scientist

Department of Environmental Health

Exposure, Epidemiology, and Risk Program

Harvard School of Public Health

Landmark Center - Rm. 415 K West

401 Park Drive

Boston, MA 02215

USA

phone +1 617 384 8751

fax +1 617 384 8745

email azanobet@hsph.harvard.edu

>>> Zachary Pekar <Pekar.Zachary@epamail.epa.gov> 12/22/2011 10:26 AM >>>

It does - one follow-up question. If we wanted to formally describe

those shrunken estimates, how would we describe them (e.g., MLE random

effects-based estimates, with the random effects allowing for a

city-specific effect to be intergrated into the estimate? I am sure that

is not quite right, but you see the type of descriptor I am wanting to

make sure we have). Just wanting to make sure we describe the shrunken

estimates correctly when presenting our methodology. Thanks!

zach

Zachary Pekar, MSPH, PhD

Human Health Risk Assessment

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

tele: (919) 541-3704

e-mail: pekar.zachary@epa.gov
(See attached file: urban study area definition - MSA counties.xlsx)(See

attached file: city specific shrunken.xlsx)