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

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3119 

To suspend temporarily the duty on exterior emergency lights. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 25, 2006 

Mr. BROWNBACK introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on exterior emergency 

lights. 

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

3 SECTION 1. EXTERIOR EMERGENCY LIGHTS. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.94.05 Exterior emergency lights (provided for 

in subheading 9405.40.60) ...................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2009 ’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 


cchase on PROD1PC60 with BILLS
2 

•S 3119 IS 

1 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

2 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


cchase on PROD1PC60 with BILLS
#### § 75.6 Nondiscrimination.

The conduct of all services under these regulations shall be accomplished without discrimination as to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 300 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 300

To extend the temporary increase in payments under the medicare program 
          for home health services furnished in a rural area.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            February 7, 2005

 Ms. Collins (for herself, Mr. Feingold, Mr. Lugar, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. 
Burns, Ms. Murkowski, Mr. Bond, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Santorum, 
 Mrs. Lincoln, Mr. Jeffords, Mr. Conrad, and Mr. Leahy) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                                Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To extend the temporary increase in payments under the medicare program 
          for home health services furnished in a rural area.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Medicare Rural Home Health Payment 
Fairness Act of 2005''.

SEC. 2. TWO-YEAR EXTENSION OF TEMPORARY MEDICARE PAYMENT INCREASE FOR 
              HOME HEALTH SERVICES FURNISHED IN A RURAL AREA.

    Section 421 of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and 
Modernization Act of 2003 (42 U.S.C. 1395fff note) is amended--
            (1) in the section heading, by striking ``one-year'' and 
        inserting ``temporary''; and
            (2) in subsection (a), by striking ``2005'' and inserting 
        ``2007''.
                                 <all>
```
#### § 795.24 Relief.

If a producer relied on a county committee and/or State committee “person” determination for a crop year and higher reviewing authority makes a more restrictive determination, the Deputy Administrator may grant relief only for such crop year if the producer was not afforded an opportunity to exercise other alternatives with respect to the producer's farming operation and the program provisions and the county committee has determined that the producers acted in good faith based upon the original “person” determination.

[51 FR 8454, Mar. 11, 1986; 51 FR 36905, Oct. 16, 1986]
§ 614.14 Computation of time. ( a ) The word “days” as used in this final rule means calendar days, unless specifically stated otherwise.
( b ) Deadlines for any action under this part, including deadlines for filing and decisions which fall on a Saturday, Sunday, Federal holiday, or other day on which the relevant NRCS office is closed during normal business hours, will be extended to close of business the next working day.
Case 1:03-cv-00734-MEF-SRW Document 46-2 Filed 10/02/2006 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:03-cv-00734-MEF-SRW Document 46-2 Filed 10/02/2006 Page 2 of 2
47.207-5 Contractor responsibilities.

Contractor responsibilities vary with the kinds of freight to be shipped and services required. The

contracting officer shall specify clearly those service requirements that are not considered normal

transportation or transportation-related requirements.

(a) Type of equipment. If appropriate, the contracting officer shall specify the type and size of

equipment to be furnished by the contractor. Otherwise, state that the contractor shall furnish clean

and sound closed-type equipment of sufficient size to accommodate the shipment.

(b) Supervision, labor, or materials. The contracting officer shall insert a clause substantially the

same as the clause at 52.247-12, Supervision, Labor, or Materials, when the contractor is required

to furnish supervision, labor, or materials.

(c) Accessorial services-moving contracts. The contracting officer shall insert a clause substantially

the same as the clause at 52.247-13, Accessorial Services-Moving Contracts, in contracts for the

transportation of household goods or office furniture.

(d) Receipt of shipment. The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.247-14, Contractor

Responsibility for Receipt of Shipment.

(e) Loading and unloading. The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.247-15, Contractor

Responsibility for Loading and Unloading, when the contractor is responsible for loading and

unloading shipments.

(f) Return of undelivered freight. The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.247-16,

Contractor Responsibility for Returning Undelivered Freight, when the contractor is responsible for

returning undelivered freight.

Parent topic: 47.207 Solicitation provisions, contract clauses, and special requirements.
37.303 Payments.

(a) The contract may provide that the-

(1) Government pay the contractor for the dismantling or demolition of structures; or

(2) Contractor pay the Government for the right to salvage and remove the materials resulting from

the dismantling or demolition operation.

(b) The contracting officer shall consider the usefulness to the Government of all salvageable

property. Any of the property that is more useful to the Government than its value as salvage to the

contractor should be expressly designated in the contract for retention by the Government. The

contracting officer shall determine the fair market value of any property not so designated, since the

contractor will get title to this property, and its value will therefore be important in determining

what payment, if any, shall be made to the contractor and whether additional compensation will be

made if the contract is terminated.

Parent topic: Subpart 37.3 - Dismantling, Demolition, or Removal of Improvements
EX-10.2



 Exhibit 10.2 

SECOND AMENDMENT TO 

FRANCHISE AGREEMENT 

THIS SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDED AND RESTATED FRANCHISE AGREEMENT (the “Amendment”) is effective as of
                 (the “Amendment Date”) between: 

(1)    
                            (“Franchisee”), a limited liability company organized and
existing under the laws of United Mexican States with its registered office and principal place of business located at                     ; and 

(2)    HYATT FRANCHISING LATIN AMERICA, L.L.C. (“Hyatt”), a limited liability company organized
and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware (U.S.A.) with its principal place of business located at 150 North Riverside Plaza, Chicago, Illinois 60606, U.S.A. 

Hyatt and Franchisee are hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Parties” and each individually as a
“Party”. 
 BACKGROUND 

A.    Hyatt and Franchisee are parties to that certain Franchise Agreement, as amended (the “FA”) for the
operation of a Hyatt All-Inclusive Resort at                     . Capitalized terms used in this Second
Amendment but not otherwise defined shall have the meanings given to them in the FA. 
 B.    The Parties have agreed to
make certain amendments to the FA. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, mutual benefits to be derived, and the
representations and warranties, conditions and promises contained herein and in the FA, and intending to be legally bound, the Parties hereby agree as follows: 
  

	1.	TERRITORIAL RIGHTS AND RESTRICTIONS 

 Section 2.2.5 is hereby deleted in its
entirety. 
 [signature page to follow] 







 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed and delivered this Second Amendment on the
day and year first above written. 
  

									
	FRANCHISEE:	 		 	 HYATT:
  

HYATT FRANCHISING LATIN
 AMERICA,
L.L.C.

					
	By:	 	  
	 		 	By:	 	  

	Name:	 		 		 	Name:	 	
	Title:	 		 		 	Title:	 	
					
	Date:	 	  
	 		 	Date:
Exhibit 4.2


 


	
   

  	
  STATE OF DELAWARE

  
	
   

  	
  SECRETARY OF STATE

  
	
   

  	
  DIVISION OF CORPORATIONS

  
	
   

  	
  FILED 09:00 AM 05/28/2002

  
	
   

  	
  020340098 - 2280967

  



 


Certificate of Amendment

to the

Restated Certificate of Incorporation

of

Aldila, Inc.


 


Aldila, Inc.,
a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the General
Corporation Law of the State of Delaware (the “Corporation”), does hereby
certify that:


 


(1)   The name of the Corporation is Aldila, Inc. The date of the
filing of its original Certificate of Incorporation (the “Original Certificate”)
with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware was December 6, 1991,
under the name Aldila Holdings Corp.. The Original Certificate was  amended on December 11, 1991 and January 8, 1992, and
Restated Certificates of Incorporation became effective on April 23, 1993
and June 11, 1993.


 


(2)   Pursuant to Section 242(b) of the Delaware General
Corporation Law the Board of Directors of the Corporation has duly adopted, and
a majority of the outstanding stock entitled to vote thereon has approved, the
amendments to the Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the Corporation set
forth in this Certificate of Amendment.


 


(3)   Article FOURTH of the Restated Certificate of Incorporation
of the Corporation is amended to insert the following paragraph as the second
paragraph of Article FOURTH:


 


“Effective on June 3, 2002 at 11:59 p.m., Eastern Daylight Time,
every three outstanding shares of Common
Stock shall without further action by this Corporation or the holder thereof be
combined into and automatically become one share of Common Stock. The
authorized shares of the Corporation shall remain as set  forth in this Certificate of Incorporation. No fractional share shall
be issued in connection with the foregoing stock split; all shares of Common
Stock so split that are held by a stockholder will be aggregated and each
fractional share resulting from
such aggregation shall be rounded down to the nearest whole share. In lieu of
any interest in a fractional share of Common Stock to which a stockholder would
otherwise be entitled as a result of the foregoing split, the Corporation shall
pay a cash amount to such stockholder equal to the fair value as determined by
the Board of Directors of such fractional share as  of the effective date of the foregoing split.”


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has  executed this Certificate of Amendment of the
Restated Certificate of Incorporation on this 28th day of May, 2002.


 


	
   

  	
  ALDILA,
  INC.

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
  /s/
  Peter R. Mathewson

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Peter
  R. Mathewson

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Chairman,
  Chief Executive Officer and President

  



 


	
  Attest:

  
	
   

  
	
   

  
	
  By:

  	
  /s/
  Robert J. Cierzan

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Robert
  J. Cierzan

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Secretary
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR

THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

HAROLD KELLY MURPHY, )

)

Plaintiff, )

v. ) CASE NO. 2:06-cv-618-MEF

)

SOUTHERN ENERGY HOMES, INC., )

)

Defendant. )

O R D E R

Upon consideration of the Defendant's Motion for Leave to File Sur-Reply in Support

of Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. #59) filed on August 15, 2007, and the

Plaintiff's Motion to Strike or, in the Alternative, Opposition to Defendant's Sur-Reply (Doc.

# 61) filed on August 16, 2007, it is hereby ORDERED as follows:

(1) The Defendant's Motion (Doc. # 59) is GRANTED.

(2) The Plaintiff's Motion (Doc. # 61) is DENIED. 

DONE this the 20th day of August, 2007.

 /s/ Mark E. Fuller 

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00618-MEF-SRW Document 62 Filed 08/20/2007 Page 1 of 1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

RAHEEM HUTCHINSON,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 3 EAL 2024

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 14th day of May, 2024, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
NotesFAQContact Us

Collection

Thesaurus
AdvancedSearch Tips

Collection

Thesaurus
BrowseThesaurus

 Download full text

**ERIC Number:**

**Record Type:**

**Publication Date:**

**Pages:**

**Abstractor:**

**ISBN:**

**ISSN:**

**EISSN:**

Adult EducationCareer DevelopmentCareer EducationCareer ExplorationEducational ResearchElementary Secondary EducationFamily InvolvementFamily LifeParent Child RelationshipParent InfluenceParenting SkillsParenting Styles

**Publication Type:**

**Education Level:**

**Audience:**

**Language:**

**Sponsor:**

**Authoring Institution:**

**Grant or Contract Numbers:**

PrivacyCopyrightContact UsSelection PolicyAPI
JournalsNon-JournalsDownloadSubmitMultimediaWidget
Case 3:03-cr-00135-LC Document 31 Filed 04/13/05 Page 1 of 14
Case 3:03-cr-00135-LC Document 31 Filed 04/13/05 Page 2 of 14
Case 3:03-cr-00135-LC Document 31 Filed 04/13/05 Page 3 of 14
Case 3:03-cr-00135-LC Document 31 Filed 04/13/05 Page 4 of 14
Case 3:03-cr-00135-LC Document 31 Filed 04/13/05 Page 5 of 14
Case 3:03-cr-00135-LC Document 31 Filed 04/13/05 Page 6 of 14
Case 3:03-cr-00135-LC Document 31 Filed 04/13/05 Page 7 of 14
Case 3:03-cr-00135-LC Document 31 Filed 04/13/05 Page 8 of 14
Case 3:03-cr-00135-LC Document 31 Filed 04/13/05 Page 9 of 14
Case 3:03-cr-00135-LC Document 31 Filed 04/13/05 Page 10 of 14
Case 3:03-cr-00135-LC Document 31 Filed 04/13/05 Page 11 of 14
Case 3:03-cr-00135-LC Document 31 Filed 04/13/05 Page 12 of 14
Case 3:03-cr-00135-LC Document 31 Filed 04/13/05 Page 13 of 14
Case 3:03-cr-00135-LC Document 31 Filed 04/13/05 Page 14 of 14
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR

THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

DAVID W. JAIIN, )

)

Ptaintiff, )

)

vs. ) Civit Action No.: 2:06-cv-623

)

REGINALD JAMES WASHINGTON, )

individually and )

GROCERY SUPPLY COMPAI\-Y, )

)

Defendants. )

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND COMPLAINT

COMES NOW the Plaintiff, David Jahn, in the above styled cause and respectfully

requests leave from this Honorable Court to file the attached Amended Complaint. In support

thereof, Plaintiff states as follows:

1. The decision to grant leave to arnend a Complaint is within the sole discretion of the

district court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15. However, Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure limits that discretion by mandatingthat "leave shall be freely given when

justice so requires." See Halliburton & Associations v. Henderson. Few & Co., 774

F.2d 441(1lth Cfu. 1985). Therefore, there must be a substantial reason to deny a

motion to amend, id., such as "uÍì.due delay, bad faith, dilatory motive on the part of

the movant, . . . undue prejudice rb the opposing party by virtue of allowance of the

amendment, [and] futility of amendment," Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178,182

(re62\.

2. Plaintiff states that he has not unduly delayed in amending his Complaint and that

Defendant will not be prejudiced by virtue of allowance of the amendment.

Case 2:06-cv-00623-MEF-SRW Document 12 Filed 12/28/2006 Page 1 of 3
3. The attached Complaint has been amended to state with the correct fulIname of

the defendant company, GSC Enterprises, Inc., d/b/a Grocery Supply Company.

4. The primary attorney for this case was out of town for the holidays and upon my

return to the office today I noticed this correction.

5. Allowing Plaintiff to amend complaint today would alleviate the necessity of

having to dismiss and refile the claim under the correct name.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, Plaintiff requests this Honorable Court grant him

leave to file the attached Amended Complaint and to direct the Clerk of the Court to file the

attached Amended Complaint.

Dated: December 28,2006 Respectfully submitted,

cocHRAN, CHERRY, GMNS,

sMrTH, LANE & TAYLOR, P.C.

/s/ Teny Kev

. CHRISTEN L. HAYES

TERRY KEY

163 W. Main Street

P. O.Box927

Dothan, 4L 36302

(334) 793-1555 - Phone

(334) 793-8280 - Facsimile

CERTIF'ICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on December 28,2006,I electronically filed Plaintiff s Motion for

Leave to Amend Complaint with the Clerk of the District Court using the CI\4/ECF system,

which sent notification of such filing to:

Shane M. Oncale

Attorney for Defendants

2

Case 2:06-cv-00623-MEF-SRW Document 12 Filed 12/28/2006 Page 2 of 3
oncale(ôc larkdolan. c om

/s/ Terry Ke)¡

Case 2:06-cv-00623-MEF-SRW Document 12 Filed 12/28/2006 Page 3 of 3
§ 760.210 Honeybee payment calculations. ( a ) An eligible honeybee producer may receive payments for honeybee feed losses due to an eligible adverse weather or loss condition, as provided in § 760.203(g), based on 60 percent of the producer's actual cost for honeybee feed that was: ( 1 ) Damaged or destroyed due to an eligible adverse weather or eligible loss condition and
( 2 ) Intended as feed for an eligible honeybee colony, as provided in § 760.204(g);
( b ) An eligible honeybee producer may receive payments for honeybee colony losses due to an eligible adverse weather or eligible loss condition, as provided in § 760.203(h), based on 60 percent of the average fair market value for the number of honeybee colonies that were damaged or destroyed due to an eligible adverse weather or eligible loss condition, as computed using nationwide prices unless some other price data is approved for use by the Deputy Administrator, for losses in excess of normal honeybee mortality, as determined by the Deputy Administrator.
( c ) An eligible honeybee producer may receive payments for honeybee hive losses due to an eligible adverse weather or eligible loss condition, as provided in § 760.203(h), based on 60 percent of the average fair market value for the number of honeybee hives that were damaged or destroyed due to an eligible adverse weather or eligible loss condition, as computed using nationwide prices unless some other price data is approved for use by the Deputy Administrator.
( d ) Payments calculated in this section are subject to the adjustments and limits provided for in this part.
[74 FR 46673, Sept. 11, 2009, as amended at 75 FR 19188, Apr. 14, 2010]
#### § 63.12 Under Secretary for Research, Education, and Economics.

*Under Secretary for Research, Education, and Economics* means the Under Secretary for Research, Education, and Economics of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, or any other officer or employee of the Department designated by the Under Secretary to act in the Under Secretary's stead.
Subpart 252.1 - INSTRUCTIONS FOR USING PROVISIONS AND CLAUSES    **Parent topic:** Part 252 - SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES252.101 Using part 252.       (b) *Numbering.*          (2) *Provisions or clauses that supplement the FAR.*          (ii)(B) DFARS provisions or clauses use a four digit sequential number in the 7000 series, e.g., -7000, -7001, -7002. Department or agency supplemental provisions or clauses use four digit sequential numbers in the 9000 series.252.103 Identification of provisions and clauses.       For guidance on numbering department or agency provisions and clauses, see PGI 252.103
160 So.2d 229

#### Mrs. Winfred V. WHITMAN et al. v. CENTURY INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD., OF SCOTLAND et al.

No. 47106.

Feb. 14, 1964.

In re: Mrs. Winfred V. Whitman and her husband, Leon H. Whitman, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, Parish of Bienville. 159 So.2d 319.

Writ refused. On the facts found by the Court of Appeal we find no error of law in its judgment.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ELIZABETH TEODORO, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

SMITH'S FOOD & DRUG STORES, INC., 

DBA Smith's Food & Drugs #311, 

Defendant-Appellee.

No. 20-15629 

D.C. No. 

2:19-cv-00401-JAD-EJY 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Nevada

Jennifer A. Dorsey, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted June 9, 2021**

Portland, Oregon

Before: WARDLAW, TALLMAN, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

Elizabeth Teodoro (Teodoro) appeals the district court’s grant of summary 

judgment on her slip-and-fall claim under Nevada law. We have jurisdiction, 28 

U.S.C. § 1291, and review that grant of summary judgment de novo, Braunling v. 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

JUN 16 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 

Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 220 F.3d 1154, 1156 (9th Cir. 2000). We reverse 

and remand.

Teodoro offered no evidence before the district court suggesting that Smith 

Food & Drug Stores, Inc. (Smith) or its agents caused the liquid she slipped on to 

wind up on the floor. Therefore, “liability will lie only if the business had actual 

or constructive notice of the condition and failed to remedy it.” Sprague v. Lucky 

Stores, Inc., 849 P.2d 320, 323 (Nev. 1993) (per curiam). Because Teodoro has 

never argued that Smith had actual notice of that liquid, she had to raise a dispute 

of material fact as to whether Smith “had constructive notice of the hazardous 

condition” in order to survive summary judgment. Id. Whether a business 

possesses constructive notice is generally “a question of fact properly left for the 

jury.” Id. 

Viewing the record in the light most favorable to Teodoro, such a dispute

existed here based on the witness statement of Franklin Haley. While working at 

his station 15 feet away from Teodoro, Haley “watched [Teodoro] step” and saw 

“her foot slip[] out from under her.” He then “looked to the floor and saw a puddle 

of clear water approximately 4 inches in diameter.” He then “grabbed a roll of 

paper towels” and went over to Teodoro. This series of events sufficed to raise a 

triable issue as to Smith’s constructive notice given that Haley apparently could 

see the puddle of water from his workstation. See 62A Am. Jur. 2d Premises 
3 

Liability § 503 (“Constructive knowledge may also be shown where, because of 

the location of the accident, it can be inferred that the store’s employees could and 

should have seen the actual spilling of the liquid or the liquid on the floor after it 

was spilled, in time to remove or alert others to its existence.”); id. § 505

(“Constructive knowledge of . . . debris or litter constituting [a] dangerous 

condition may . . . be shown where a store employee was in the immediate vicinity 

of the dangerous condition and could have easily seen and removed the hazard.”).

REVERSED AND REMANDED.