alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Order entered April 20 , 2020

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05
- 19
- 01449
- CV
DOUGLAS HUNDERMAN AN D DOROTHY HUNDERMAN, Appellant s V. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC, ET AL, A ppellee s On Appeal from the 101st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC
- 19
- 09043

ORDER Before the Court are appellants’ second motion for extension of time to file their opening brief and appellees’ response opposing the motion and seeking dismissal of the appeal. We DENY appellees’ request that the appeal be
dismissed. We GRANT the extension motion and ORDER appell a nt’s brief be
filed no later than May 20, 2020.

/s/ KEN MOLBERG JUSTICE
II

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 197

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 28, 1996

Received

JOINT RESOLUTION

Waiving certain enrollment requirements with respect to any

bill or joint resolution of the One Hundred Fourth Congress making general or continuing appropriations for

fiscal year 1997.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. WAIVER OF REQUIREMENT FOR PARCHMENT

4 PRINTING.

5 (a) WAIVER.—The provisions of sections 106 and

6 107 of title 1, United States Code, are waived with respect

7 to the printing (on parchment or otherwise) of the enroll8 ment of any appropriation measure of the One Hundred

9 Fourth Congress presented to the President after the en10 actment of this joint resolution.
2

HJ 197 RDS

1 (b) CERTIFICATION OF ENROLLMENT BY COMMIT2 TEE ON HOUSE OVERSIGHT.—The enrollment of any such

3 measure shall be in such form as the Committee on House

4 Oversight of the House of Representatives certifies to be

5 a true enrollment.

6 SEC. 2. APPROPRIATION MEASURE DEFINED.

7 For purposes of this joint resolution, the term ‘‘ap8 propriation measure’’ means a bill or joint resolution that

9 includes provisions making general or continuing appro10 priations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1997.

Passed the House of Representatives September 28,

1996.

Attest: ROBIN H. CARLE,

Clerk.

By LINDA NAVE,

Deputy Clerk.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

      ( print page 5662)    
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Initial Review Group; Developmental Biology Subcommittee.                    

*Date:*                         February 26-27, 2009.                    

*Time:*                         8 a.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         The Doubletree Hotel, 1515 Rhode Island Avenue, Washington, DC.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Norman Chang, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Division of Scientific Review, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, 6100 Executive Blvd., Room 5b01, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 496-1485,                         *changn@mail.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: January 23, 2009.

Jennifer Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. E9-1950 Filed 1-29-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
§ 54.4980D-1 Requirement of return and time for filing of the excise tax under section 4980D. Q-1: If a person is liable for the excise tax under section 4980D, what form must the person file and what is the due date for the filing and payment of the excise tax?
A-1: ( a ) *In general. See* §§ 54.6011-2 and 54.6151-1.
( b ) *Due date for filing of return by employers. See* § 54.6071-1(b)(1).
( c ) *Due date for filing of return by multiemployer plans or multiple employer health plans. See* § 54.6071-1(b)(2).
( d ) *Effective/applicability date.* In the case of an employer or other person mentioned in paragraph (b) of this Q & A-1, the rules in this Q & A-1 are effective for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2010. In the case of a plan mentioned in paragraph (c) of this Q & A-1, the rules in this Q & A-1 are effective for plan years beginning on or after January 1, 2010.
[T.D. 9457, 74 FR 45997, Sept. 8, 2009]
§ 31.3221-1 Measure of employer tax. ( a ) *General Rule* —The employer tax is measured by the amount of compensation paid by an employer to its employees. For provisions relating to compensation, see § 31.3231(e)-1. For provisions relating to the circumstances under which certain compensation is to be disregarded for purposes of determining the employer tax, see paragraphs (b) (1) and (2) of § 31.3231(e)-1.
( b ) *Payments by two or more employers in excess of annual compensation limitation.* For rules relating to payments by two or more employers in excess of the annual compensation limitation, see § 31.3121(a)(1)-1.
( c ) *Underpayments or overpayments.* Any underpayment or overpayment of employer tax resulting from the employer's inability to determine, at the time such tax is paid, the correct amount of compensation with respect to which the tax should be paid shall be corrected in accordance with the provisions of Subpart G of the regulations in this part relating to adjustments, credits, refunds, and abatements.
[T.D. 6516, 25 FR 13032, Dec. 20, 1960, as amended by T.D. 6541, 26 FR 555, Jan. 20, 1961; T.D. 8582, 59 FR 66190, Dec. 23, 1994]
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 23-0449 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff andAppellee, vs. AMANDA SHARYCE WALTON,

Defendant andAppellant. 

# FILE DEC 212023 Bowen Grewswood Clerk of Supreme Court Stata of Montana
GRANT
Pursuant to authority granted under Mont. R. App. P. 26(1), the Appellant is given an extension oftime until January 26, 2024, to prepare, file, and serve the Appellant's openingbrief. 12/21/2023

Case Number: DA 23-0449
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 3 Introduced in House (IH)]

                                     

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 3

    Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States 
limiting the period of time United States Senators and Representatives 
                               may serve.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 1995

Mr. Inglis of South Carolina (for himself, Mr. Dornan, Mr. Sanford, Mr. 
 Armey, Mr. Goss, Mr. Hutchinson, Mr. Dickey, Mr. Royce, Mr. Hoekstra, 
Mr. Lewis of Kentucky, Mr. Salmon, Mr. Graham, Mr. Davis, Mr. Heineman, 
  Mr. Chabot, Mrs. Smith of Washington, Mr. Ganske, Mr. Chrysler, Mr. 
    Ensign, Mr. Cooley, Mr. Christensen, Mr. Fox, Mr. Calvert, Mr. 
  Nethercutt, Mr. Shadegg, Mr. Metcalf, Mr. Whitfield, Mr. Bass, Mr. 
  Solomon, Mr. Forbes, Mr. Blute, Mr. Smith of Texas, Mr. Bachus, Mr. 
Kim, Mr. Riggs, Mr. Longley, Mr. Cox, Mr. Smith of Michigan, Mr. Baker 
 of California, Mr. Weldon of Florida, Mr. Coburn, Mr. Radanovich, Mr. 
Roth, Mr. Packard, Mr. Stump, Mr. Everett, Mr. Thornberry, Mr. Allard, 
     Mr. Bono, Mr. Cunningham, Mr. Tate, Ms. Dunn, and Mr. Talent) 
 introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
    Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States 
limiting the period of time United States Senators and Representatives 
                               may serve.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House 
concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an 
amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be 
valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 
ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:

                              ``Article--

    ``Section 1. No person may serve in Congress more than 2 full terms 
as a Senator. No person may serve in Congress more than 3 full terms as 
a Representative.
    ``Section 2. Service as a Senator or Representative before this 
article takes effect shall not be taken into account in determining 
service under section 1.''.
                                 <all>
```
IA

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 67

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating

to voluntary prayer in public schools.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 3, 1995

Mr. STEARNS introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to

the Committee on the Judiciary

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United

States relating to voluntary prayer in public schools.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled

3 (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the fol4 lowing article is proposed as an amendment to the Con5 stitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all

6 intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when

7 ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several

8 States within seven years after the date of its submission

9 for ratification:
2

•HJ 67 IH

1 ‘‘ARTICLE—

2 ‘‘Nothing in this Constitution shall prohibit the inclu3 sion of voluntary prayer in any public school program or

4 activity. Neither the United States nor any State shall

5 prescribe the content of any such prayer.’’.

Æ
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION OF 10-Q REPORT

OF

WESTERN GAS RESOURCES, INC.

 

FOR THE QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2004

 

1.             The undersigned are the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of Western Gas Resources, Inc.  This Certification is made pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.  This Certification accompanies the 10-Q Report of Western Gas Resources, Inc. for the quarter ended September 30, 2004.

 

2.             We certify that such 10-Q Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such 10-Q Report fairly represents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Western Gas Resources, Inc.

 

This Certification is executed as of November 8, 2004.

 
|   | /s/ PETER A. DEA                             |   |
|--------|----------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Peter A. Dea, Chief Executive Officer        |
|   | and President                                |
|   |                                         |
|   |  /s/ WILLIAM J. KRYSIAK                 |   |
|   | William J. Krysiak, Executive Vice President |
|   | and Chief Financial Officer                  |

 

1

----
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Pedro AGUILAR-SANCHEZ, aka, Pedro Sanchez Aguilar, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 00-10498.

D.C. No. CR-00-00793-JMR.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted June 10, 2002 *.

Decided June 18, 2002.

Before RYMER, T.G. NELSON and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

*

This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Pedro Aguilar-Sanchez appeals his conviction, pursuant to a guilty plea, and sentence for illegal reentry after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).

Aguilar-Sanchez’s attorney has filed a brief pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493*912(1967), and has moved to withdraw as counsel of record. Aguilar-Sanchez has not filed a pro se supplemental brief.

Because our independent review of the record pursuant to *Penson v. Ohio,*488 U.S. 75, 83-84, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), indicates that the plea agreement, including the waiver of the right to appeal, was entered knowingly and voluntarily, *United States v. Aguilar-Muniz,*156 F.3d 974, 976 (9th Cir.1998) (waiver of right to appeal is valid if knowing and voluntary), we enforce the waiver, grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and dismiss the appeal.

DISMISSED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
CHARLES FRANCIS,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Respondent.

___________________________/

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D14-2552

Opinion filed July 16, 2014.

Petition for Writ of Prohibition -- Original Jurisdiction.

Charles Francis, pro se, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of prohibition is denied on the merits.

PADOVANO, WETHERELL, and MAKAR, JJ., CONCUR.
#### § 54.4980G-2 Employer contribution defined.

Q-1: Do the comparability rules apply to amounts rolled over from an employee's HSA or Archer Medical Savings Account (Archer MSA)?

A-1: No. The comparability rules do not apply to amounts rolled over from an employee's HSA or Archer MSA.

Q-2: If an employee requests that his or her employer deduct after-tax amounts from the employee's compensation and forward these amounts as employee contributions to the employee's HSA, do the comparability rules apply to these amounts?

A-2: No. Section 106(d) provides that amounts contributed by an employer to an eligible employee's HSA shall be treated as employer-provided coverage for medical expenses and are excludible from the employee's gross income up to the limit in section 223(b). After-tax employee contributions to an HSA are not subject to the comparability rules because they are not employer contributions under section 106(d).

[T.D. 9277, 71 FR 43058, July 31, 2006]
###### Editorial Note on Part 301

#### Editorial Note:

In the text of this part, integral section references are to sections of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954; decimal section references are to the Code of Federal Regulations.

References in the text to the “Code” are references to sections of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954.

#### § 301.6503(d)-1 Suspension of running of period of limitation; extension of time for payment of estate tax.

Where an estate is granted an extension of time as provided in section 6161 (a)(2) or (b)(2), or under the provisions of section 6166, for payment of any estate tax, the running of the period of limitations for collection of such tax is suspended for the period of time for which the extension is granted.
#### § 801.4 Customer satisfaction measures.

The customer satisfaction goals and accomplishments of operating units within the IRS will be determined on the basis of information gathered through various methods. For example, questionnaires, surveys and other types of information gathering mechanisms may be employed to gather data regarding customer satisfaction. Information to measure customer satisfaction for a particular work unit will be gathered from a statistically valid sample of the customers served by that operating unit and will be used to measure, among other things, whether those customers believe that they received courteous, timely, and professional treatment by the IRS personnel with whom they dealt. Customers will be permitted to provide information requested for these purposes under conditions that guarantee them anonymity. For purposes of this section, customers may include individual taxpayers, organizational units, or employees within the IRS and external groups affected by the services performed by the IRS operating unit.

[T.D. 8830, 64 FR 42835, Aug. 6, 1999. Redesignated by T.D. 9426, 73 FR 60626, Oct. 14, 2008]
#### Paul F. Vitale, Inc., Respondent, v Parker’s Grille, Inc., et al., Appellants.

[803 NYS2d 872]

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Cayuga County (Peter E. Corning, A.J.), entered December 17, 2004. The order, after a nonjury trial, awarded judgment in favor of plaintiff and against defendants in the amount of $10,452.28 plus interest.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed with costs.

Memorandum: Plaintiff, a construction contractor, commenced this action alleging that defendants, the owners of a commercial building, failed to pay plaintiff for demolition work performed pursuant to an alleged oral contract. Following a bench trial, Supreme Court determined that there had been no meeting of the minds between the parties concerning the cost of the work but that plaintiff nonetheless was entitled to recover the sum of $10,452.28 on a theory of quantum meruit. Defendants’ sole contention on appeal is that plaintiff failed to establish that the amount charged to defendants was the fair and reasonable value of the services rendered, as required for recovery in quantum meruit *(see Landcom, Inc. v Galen-Lyons Joint Landfill Commn.,*259 AD2d 967, 968 [1999]; *Heller v Kurz,*228 AD2d 263 [1996]; *Moors v Hall,*143 AD2d 336, 337-338 [1988]). We reject that contention. The court properly determined the fair and reasonable value of plaintiffs services based on evidence concerning the amount that plaintiff had billed defendants for such services *(see United Bldg. Maintenance Assoc., Inc. v 510 Fifth Ave. LLC,*18 AD3d 333 [2005]) and the amount that a subcontractor had billed plaintiff for the subcontractor’s services. We thus conclude that the evidence of the value of plaintiffs services is sufficient to support the court’s award of damages to plaintiff in quantum meruit *(see id.; MMG Group v Planned Mgt. Constr. Corp.,*294 AD2d 284 [2002]) and that “[e]quity requires that plaintiff recover for its services in quantum meruit in order to avoid the unjust enrichment of defendants at its expense” *(Curtis Props. Corp. v Greif Cos.,*236 AD2d 237, 239 [1997]). Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Scudder, Kehoe, Smith and Pine, JJ.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

MIDDLE DISTRICT 

GAUGHEN LLC, 

 Respondent 

 v. 

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF THE 

BOROUGH OF MECHANICSBURG, 

 Petitioner 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 81 MAL 2016 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Commonwealth Court 

 

GAUGHEN LLC, 

 Respondent 

 v. 

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF THE 

BOROUGH OF MECHANCISBURG, 

 Petitioner 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 82 MAL 2016 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Commonwealth Court 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 10th day of May, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED, and Respondent’s Request for Cost, Fees, and Delay Damages is 

STRICKEN.
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION OF 10-Q REPORT

OF

WESTERN GAS RESOURCES, INC.

 

FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 2004

 

1.             The undersigned are the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of Western Gas Resources, Inc.  This Certification is made pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.  This Certification accompanies the 10-Q Report of Western Gas Resources, Inc. for the quarter ended March 31, 2004.

 

2.             We certify that such 10-Q Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such 10-Q Report fairly represents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Western Gas Resources, Inc.

 

This Certification is executed as of May 7, 2004.

 

 
|   | /s/  PETER A. DEA                                                  |   |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Peter A. Dea, Chief Executive Officerand President                      |
|   |                                                                    |
|   |                                                                    |
|   | /s/  WILLIAM J. KRYSIAK                                            |   |
|   | William J. Krysiak, Executive Vice Presidentand Chief Financial Officer |
NAGAO
      GROUP HOLDINGS LIMITED

     

    _____________
      ___, 2007

    


    Value
      Creation Partners Company Ltd.

    12B,
      Lippo Leighton Tower

    103
      Leighton Road

    Hong
      King

    


    Gentlemen:

    


    This
      letter will confirm our agreement that, commencing on the effective date
      (“Effective Date”) of the registration statement for the initial public offering
      (“IPO”) of the securities of Nagao Group Holdings Limited (“NGHL”) and
      continuing until the consummation by NGHL of a “Business Combination” (as
      described in NGHL’s IPO prospectus) or NGHL’s liquidation, Value Creation
      Partners Company Ltd. (“Value Creation”) shall make available to NGHL certain
      office and secretarial services as may be required by NGHL from time to time,
      situated at 12B, Lippo Leighton Tower, 103 Leighton Road, Hong Kong. In exchange
      therefore, NGHL shall pay Value Creation the sum of $7,500 per month on the
      Effective Date and continuing monthly thereafter.

    


    
      	 	 	 
	 	
              Very
                truly yours,

            
	 	 
	 	
              NAGAO
                GROUP HOLDINGS LIMITED

            
	 
 	 
 	 
 
	
            	By:  	
            
	 	
              

              Name:

            
	 	
              Title:
                

            


    

     

    AGREED
      TO
      AND ACCEPTED BY:

    


    VALUE
      CREATION PARTNERS COMPANY LTD.

     

     

    By:  

    
      

    

    Name:

    Title: