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

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 265 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 265

Supporting the goals and ideals of National Osteoporosis Awareness and 
                           Prevention Month.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 5, 2005

   Ms. Berkley (for herself and Mr. Burgess) submitted the following 
 resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Supporting the goals and ideals of National Osteoporosis Awareness and 
                           Prevention Month.

Whereas osteoporosis, a disease characterized by low bone mass, structural 
        deterioration of bone, and increased susceptibility to fractures, is a 
        public health threat for an estimated 44 million Americans;
Whereas in the United States, 10 million individuals already have the disease 
        and almost 34 million more are estimated to have low bone mass, placing 
        them at increased risk for osteoporosis;
Whereas one in two women and one in four men over age 50 will have an 
        osteoporosis-related fracture in her or his remaining lifetime;
Whereas building strong bones during childhood and adolescence can be the best 
        defense against developing osteoporosis later;
Whereas osteoporosis is often thought of as an older person's disease, but bone 
        health is a concern for any age;
Whereas substantial risk has been reported in people of all ethnic backgrounds;
Whereas osteoporosis is responsible for more than 1.5 million fractures 
        annually;
Whereas the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service says that caring for 
        bone fractures from osteoporosis costs America $18 billion annually;
Whereas the Surgeon General believes that bone health is critically important to 
        the overall health and quality of the life of Americans; that it is in 
        jeopardy and will only get worse if left unchecked; and that great 
        improvements in the bone health status of Americans can be made by 
        applying what is already known about early prevention, assessment, 
        diagnosis, and treatment;
Whereas optimum bone health and prevention of osteoporosis can be maximized by a 
        balanced diet rich in calcium and vitamin D; weight-bearing exercise; 
        and a healthy lifestyle with no smoking or excessive alcohol intake; and
Whereas May 2005 would be an appropriate month to observe National Osteoporosis 
        Awareness and Prevention Month: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives supports the goals and 
ideals of National Osteoporosis Awareness and Prevention Month and 
urges the people of the United States to observe appropriate programs 
and activities with respect to osteoporosis, including talking with 
their health care professionals about their bone health.
                                 <all>
```
Case 3:06-cr-00191-MHT-CSC Document 7 Filed 09/18/2006 Page 1 of 9
Case 3:06-cr-00191-MHT-CSC Document 7 Filed 09/18/2006 Page 2 of 9
Case 3:06-cr-00191-MHT-CSC Document 7 Filed 09/18/2006 Page 3 of 9
Case 3:06-cr-00191-MHT-CSC Document 7 Filed 09/18/2006 Page 4 of 9
Case 3:06-cr-00191-MHT-CSC Document 7 Filed 09/18/2006 Page 5 of 9
Case 3:06-cr-00191-MHT-CSC Document 7 Filed 09/18/2006 Page 6 of 9
Case 3:06-cr-00191-MHT-CSC Document 7 Filed 09/18/2006 Page 7 of 9
Case 3:06-cr-00191-MHT-CSC Document 7 Filed 09/18/2006 Page 8 of 9
Case 3:06-cr-00191-MHT-CSC Document 7 Filed 09/18/2006 Page 9 of 9
Case 2:06-cv-00790-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 1 of 10
Case 2:06-cv-00790-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 2 of 10
Case 2:06-cv-00790-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 3 of 10
Case 2:06-cv-00790-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 4 of 10
Case 2:06-cv-00790-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 5 of 10
Case 2:06-cv-00790-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 6 of 10
Case 2:06-cv-00790-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 7 of 10
Case 2:06-cv-00790-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 8 of 10
Case 2:06-cv-00790-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 9 of 10
Case 2:06-cv-00790-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 10 of 10
§ 25.37 Violations. ( a ) An injunction or other court order may be obtained to prohibit a violation of any provision of: ( 1 ) The Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended;
( 2 ) Title II of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended; or
( 3 ) Any regulation or order issued under these Acts.
( b ) National Security Information is protected under the requirements and sanctions of Executive Order 13526, as amended, or any predecessor or successor orders.
[48 FR 24320, June 1, 1983, as amended at 57 FR 55072, Nov. 24, 1992; 64 FR 15649, Apr. 1, 1999; 70 FR 32227, June 2, 2005; 75 FR 73941, Nov. 30, 2010]
# Subpart 2841.2 - Acquiring Utility Services

**Parent topic:**PART 2841 - ACQUISITION OF UTILITY SERVICES

## 2841.201 Policy.

The HCA or designee is the agency head for the purposes of FAR 41.201(d)(2)(i) and (d)(3).
PGI Part 252 - CLAUSES       PGI 252.1 -INSTRUCTIONS FOR USING PROVISIONS AND CLAUSES                                                         PGI 252.103 Identification of provisions and clauses.    **Parent topic:** PGI Defense Federal Acquisition RegulationPGI 252.1 -INSTRUCTIONS FOR USING PROVISIONS AND CLAUSES    PGI 252.103 Identification of provisions and clauses.       (c) Local provisions and clauses developed by departments and agencies for a single-use intended to meet the needs of an individual acquisition shall be identified by the title, date, and name of the department or agency that developed the local clause. For example, if “X” Agency negotiated a single-use clause for use of special government facilities during discussions, such clause would be identified in the contract as follows:          “Special Use of Government Facilities (DATE) X Agency”          (d)(1)(A) Local provisions and clauses that will be used on a repetitive basis shall be identified by—          (*1*) The chapter assigned to the department or agency under Title 48 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR);          (*2*) FAR subpart “52.2”;          (*3*) The applicable FAR part;          (*4*) A four-digit sequential number in the 9000 series for the suffix (see DFARS 252.101(b)(2)(ii)(B));          (*5*) Title; and          (*6*) Date.          (B) For example, if “Y” Agency is assigned a CFR chapter number 99, and has developed a provision regarding an evaluation factor for past performance to be used on a repetitive basis in negotiated acquisitions, such provision would be identified as follows:          “9952.215-9XXX Past Performance Evaluation Factor (DATE)”
```

[109th Congress Public Law 342]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

[DOCID: f:publ342.109]

[[Page 120 STAT. 1864]]

Public Law 109-342
109th Congress

                                 An Act

 
   To designate a parcel of land located on the site of the Thomas F. 
Eagleton United States Courthouse in St. Louis, Missouri, as the ``Clyde 
   S. Cahill Memorial Park''. <<NOTE: Oct. 13, 2006 -  [H.R. 1556]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The parcel of land described in section 3, and located on the site 
of the Thomas F. Eagleton United States Courthouse in St. Louis, 
Missouri, shall be known and designated as the ``Clyde S. Cahill 
Memorial Park''.
SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the parcel of land described in section 3 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Clyde S. Cahill Memorial 
Park''.
SEC. 3. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION.

    The parcel of land designated under section 1 is the parcel bounded 
by South 10th Street, Clark Avenue, South 9th Street, and Walnut Street 
in St. Louis, Missouri.

    Approved October 13, 2006.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 1556:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 152 (2006):
            Sept. 27, considered and passed House.
            Sept. 29, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2009-3073

FAE DRISCOLL,

Petitioner,

v.

UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE,

Respondent.

Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection Board

in SF075270409-I-1.

ON MOTION

Before LINN, Circuit Judge.

ORDER

Fae Driscoll moves for reconsideration of the court's order dismissing her petition

for review and for an extension of time to file her opening brief.

Driscoll petitioned this court for review in December of 2008. Counsel for Driscoll

attempted to submit documents to the court on behalf of Driscoll without having become

a member of the bar of the court and without having properly entered an appearance.

The court rejected the submissions and informed counsel that he must apply to become

a member of the ,court's bar. After the deadline for filing a brief had passed, the court

dismissed the petition for review on March 11, 2009, noting that counsel had not

become a member of the court's bar.
Counsel has now become a member of the court's bar. It appears that the

counsel's completed application arrived in the clerk's office in the afternoon after the

dismissal order, which issued in the morning.

Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

The motions will be granted, the mandate will be recalled, the dismissal order will

be vacated, and the petition for review will be reinstated, if Driscoll files her opening

brief within 30 days of the date of filing of this order.

FOR THE COURT

APR 13 2009

/s/ Jan Horbaly

Jan Horbaly

Clerk	COUgIttRIRALS FOR

THE F	CIRCUIT

cc:	Keith Goffney, Esq.

Michelle A. Windmueller, Esq.	 APR 1 3 2009

s8 ktiv oUildHLY

CLERK

Date

2009-3073	 - 2 -
Editorial Note on Part 51
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 51 appear at 80 FR 74980, Dec. 1, 2015.

§ 51.34 Preparation of finding of no significant impact. ( a ) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, the finding of no significant impact will be prepared by the NRC staff director authorized to take the action.
( b ) When a hearing is held on the proposed action under the regulations in part 2 of this chapter or when the action can only be taken by the Commissioners acting as a collegial body, the appropriate NRC staff director will prepare a proposed finding of no significant impact, which may be subject to modification as a result of review and decision as appropriate to the nature and scope of the proceeding. In such cases, the presiding officer, or the Commission acting as a collegial body, as appropriate, will issue the final finding of no significant impact.
[49 FR 9381, Mar. 12, 1984, as amended at 77 FR 46600, Aug. 3, 2012; 79 FR 66604, Nov. 10, 2014' 88 FR 80949, Nov. 21, 2023]
EXHIBIT 10.1

                              PRELIMINARY AGREEMENT


     WHEREAS, WaterChef, In, (WaterChef) a Delaware corporation domiciled at
1007 Glen Cove Avenue, Glen Head, New York 11545 is desirous of intRODUCING its
patented water purification products to emerging economies, and

     WHEREAS, Samaritan Group International Corporation (501), a Delaware
corporation domiciled in New York, New York is desirous of providing
humanitarian project consulting services to WaterChef to advance its
humanitarian project goals, and

     WHEREAS, the International Multiracial Shared Cultural Organization
(IMSCO), an international non-governmental organization (NGO) in consultative
status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations, with offices
at One United Nations Plaza, New York, New York 10017, is desirous of working
cooperatively with WaterChef and SGI to provide access to United Nations member
countries and organizations for the sale and placement of WaterChef's water
purification products,

     IT IS AGREED, that WaterChef, SGI and IMSCO will enter into a definitive
agreement to work cooperatively toward the successful funding and placement of
WaterChef products in emerging economies in need of pure water resources. Under
the terms of the "Proposed Agreement", through its relationships with SGI and
IMSCO, WaterChef will be vested with authorization to pursue certain
humanitarian projects, and the certification and funding required for their
successful completion, under the auspices of, and with the certification of,
IMSCO.

     IT IS FURTHER AGREED that the parties will utilize all best efforts to
enter into a series of definitive agreements within thirty days of the signing
of this preliminary agreement and that during the thirty day period while the
definitive agreement is being prepared, this preliminary agreement will
authorize WaterChef in concert with IMSCO, to proceed with the certification
and, funding of the humanitarian water projects for the Republic of Honduras and
the Republic of Bangladesh.

     This Preliminary Agreement is made among the parties signing below on this
8th day of September, 2004.

For WaterChef, Inc.                         For Samaritan Group Intl. Corp

/s/  David A. Conway                        /s/  Kurt Mahoney
-----------------------------               -----------------------------------
     David A. Conway                             Kurt Mahoney
     President & CEO                             President/CEO

For the International Multiracial Shared Cultural Organization

/s/  Frank Weston
-----------------------------
     Frank Weston
     Chairman
1216.603-4 Contract clauses.       The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1252.216–74, Settlement of Letter Contract, in all definitized letter contracts.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 1216.6—Time-and-Materials, Labor-Hour, and Letter Contracts
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION

J.B., a minor child, by and )

through his next friend, )

Addie Ward, on behalf of )

himself and all others )

similarly situated, )

)

Plaintiff, )

) CIVIL ACTION NO.

v. ) 2:06cv755-MHT

) 

WALTER WOOD, in his )

individual capacity, )

)

Defendant. )

J.B., a minor child, by and )

through his next friend, )

Addie Ward, on behalf of )

himself and all others )

similarly situated, )

)

Plaintiff, )

) CIVIL ACTION NO.

v. ) 2:06cv908-MHT

) 

WALTER WOOD, in his )

individual capacity, )

)

Defendant. )

Case 2:06-cv-00755-MHT-CSC Document 61 Filed 08/15/2007 Page 1 of 2
ORDER

Because of a scheduling conflict, it is ORDERED the

uniform scheduling order (Doc. No. 15) is modified in the

following respects:

(1) The pretrial is reset for October 18, 2007, at

10:00 a.m., and the trial is reset for the term

of court beginning on November 26, 2007, with

all deadlines expressly tied to these two dates

adjusted accordingly.

(2) All other deadlines are unchanged.

DONE, this the 15th day of August, 2007.

 /s/ Myron H. Thompson 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00755-MHT-CSC Document 61 Filed 08/15/2007 Page 2 of 2
§ 19.15 Consultation with workers during inspections. ( a ) Commission inspectors may consult privately with workers concerning matters of occupational radiation protection and other matters related to applicable provisions of Commission regulations and licenses to the extent the inspectors deem necessary for the conduct of an effective and thorough inspection.
( b ) During the course of an inspection any worker may bring privately to the attention of the inspectors, either orally or in writing, any past or present condition which he has reason to believe may have contributed to or caused any violation of the act, the regulations in this chapter, or license condition, or any unnecessary exposure of an individual to radiation from licensed radioactive material under the licensee's control. Any such notice in writing shall comply with the requirements of § 19.16(a).
( c ) The provisions of paragraph (b) of this section shall not be interpreted as authorization to disregard instructions pursuant to § 19.12.
MEDIATION REFERRALS

The following case has been referred to mediation pursuant to S.Ct.Prae.R. XIV(6):

2007-2281.

#### HealthSouth Corp. v. Levin.

Board of Tax Appeals, No. 2005-A-1386.
§ 217.61 Rating Authorizations. ( a ) A Rating Authorization is an official action granting specific priority rating authority that: ( 1 ) Permits a person to place a priority rating on an order for an item or service not normally ratable under this part; or
( 2 ) Authorizes a person to modify a priority rating on a specific order or series of contracts or orders.
( b ) To request priority rating authority, see § 217.41.
#### § 984.2 Act.

*Act* means Public Act No. 10, 73d Congress, as amended and as reenacted and amended by the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.*).
exv10w63





Exhibit 10.63



FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE

PATRIOT COAL CORPORATION

EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN




     WHEREAS, Patriot Coal Corporation (the “Company”) adopted the Patriot Coal Corporation
Employee Stock Purchase Plan (the “Plan”);



     WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 7.1 of the Plan, the Company has the power to amend the Plan,
subject to certain limitations set forth therein;



     WHEREAS, the Plan currently provides for the automatic enrollment of all employees of the
Company who are eligible for Plan participation as of January 1, 2008;



     WHEREAS, the Company desires to allow its employees who are eligible for participation in the
Plan as of January 1, 2008 the opportunity to elect to participate in the Plan;



     WHEREAS, the Company desires to amend the Plan to eliminate the automatic enrollment
provisions provided for under Section 3.2(a) of the Plan with respect to the offering period under
the Plan scheduled to begin on January 1, 2008 and end on June 30, 2008;



     NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended, effective as of November 15, 2007, as follows:



I.





Section 3.1(b) is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:




“The Committee or its designee will notify an Employee that the Employee is first eligible
to enroll in the Plan and make available to each eligible Employee the necessary enrollment
forms before the Offering Date.”



II.




     Section 3.2(a) of the Plan is hereby amended by deleting the last sentence thereof.



III.




     Section 3.2(b) of the Plan is hereby amended by deleting the last sentence thereof and
replacing it with the following:




“The contribution rate for an Employee who is automatically enrolled for an Offering Period
pursuant to this Section will be the contribution rate in effect for the immediately
preceding Offering Period, unless the Employee files with the Company an amended enrollment
form designating a different contribution rate at least fifteen (15) calendar days prior to
the next Offering Period.”



 









 





IV.




     Section 3.3(a) of the Plan is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:




“To enroll for the first time in the Plan for an Offering Period, an Employee must elect to
make a contribution under the Plan, subject to the terms and conditions described below, by
means of payroll deduction for each payroll period within the Offering Period.”



V.




     Section 3.3(d) of the Plan is hereby amended by deleting the last sentence thereof.



VI.




     Section 4.1(d) of the Plan is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:




“The payment by an Employee for the shares of Stock purchased upon exercise of an Option
will be made only through payroll deduction in accordance with Section 3.3.”



VII.




     Section 5.1(a)(ii) is deleted in its entirety and Sections 5.1(a)(iii), (iv) and (v) are
renumbered as Sections 5.1(a)(ii), (iii) and (iv) respectively.



VIII.




     The Plan shall otherwise remain unchanged and in full force and effect.



	 	 	 	 	 
	 	PATRIOT COAL CORPORATION

 	 
	 	By:  	//Richard M. Whiting//
 	 
	 	 	Richard M. Whiting 	 
	 	 	Chief Executive Officer 	 



2
#### JOYNER, Appellant, v. PULSIFER et al., Respondents.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

June 26, 1914.)

Action by Edward A. Joyner against Ella L. Pulsifer and others.

H. J. Witte, of New York City, for appellant.

G. S. Mittendorf, of New York City, for respondents.

No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Order filed.
exv10w6










Exhibit 10.6




AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT




     This amendment (the “Amendment”), effective as of January 1, 2009, amends the
Agreementiii between Kevin Stevenson (“Employee”) and the Company, dated November 14,
2008.



     If, during the term of the Agreement, an event that would be considered a Separation from
Service (as that term is defined by the Internal Revenue Service) occurs that makes Employee
eligible to receive a form of termination paymentiv, the Company shall not issue such
payment prior to the expiration of six (6) months from the Date of Termination.



     If there is any conflict between this Amendment and the Agreement, the Amendment shall
prevail. Except as provided herein, the terms of the Agreement remain unchanged.



     IN WITNESS HEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment.



Dated: December 30, 2008




PORTFOLIO RECOVERY ASSOCIATES, INC.




	 	 	 	 	 
	By: 

Name:

	 	/s/ Judith S. Scott
 

Judith S. Scott
	 	 
	Title:

	 	General Counsel	 	 






EMPLOYEE




Kevin Stevenson




	 	 	 
	/s/ Kevin Stevenson
 


	 	 








 




			
	iii	 	Capitalized terms not defined herein shall
have the same meanings ascribed to them in the Agreement.
	 
	iv	 	Such events may include, but are not limited
to termination for disability, constructive termination and or non-renewal of
the Agreement, if applicable.
#### FRABONI, Respondent, v. NEW YORK CENT. & H. R. R. Co., Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

July 31, 1914.)

Action by Ernesto Fraboni, *1116as administrator etc., against the New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Company.

PER CURIAM.

This court is of opinion that the proofs of the plaintiff did not establish a cause of actionable negligence against the defendant. The order appealed from is therefore reversed, with costs, and the judgment unanimously reinstated.
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER R EINSTATING A PPEAL

Appellate case name: Kevoughn Dontrell v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01

- 20

- 00280

- CR

Trial court case number: 1519214

Trial court: 184th District Court of Harris County

This appeal was abated to resolve issues relating to a missing trial exhibit, specifically

State’s Exhibit 182. The trial court reporter subsequently filed a copy of the missing exhibit with

the Court. Accordingly, we lift the abatement ordered by this Court and reinstate the appeal on the

Court’s active docket.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature:

___

/s/ Sar ah B. Landau

_______ Acting individually

Date: ___ April 12, 2022

___