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

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1117

To provide for the establishment of the Margaret Walker Alexander National

African-American Research Center.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 2, 1995

Mr. PARKER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Economic and Educational Opportunities

A BILL

To provide for the establishment of the Margaret Walker

Alexander National African-American Research Center.

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

3 SECTION 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE MARGARET WALKER

4 ALEXANDER NATIONAL AFRICAN-AMERICAN

5 RESEARCH CENTER.

6 (a) ESTABLISHMENT.—In recognition of, and to com7 memorate, the literary contributions of Margaret Walker

8 Alexander, the Secretary of Education shall make a grant

9 to Jackson State University to establish the Margaret

10 Walker Alexander National African-American Research
2

HR 1117 IH

1 Center (hereafter in this Act referred to as the ‘‘Center’’).

2 The Center shall be located at Jackson State University

3 in Jackson, Mississippi.

4 (b) REQUIREMENTS FOR GRANT.—A grant may not

5 be made under subsection (a) unless an application is

6 made to the Secretary of Education at such time and in

7 such manner as the Secretary may require. The applica8 tion shall contain provisions designed to ensure that—

9 (1) the Center will be located in the building

10 known as ‘‘Ayer Hall’’ on the campus of Jackson

11 State University;

12 (2) the building will serve as a national center

13 for the study, research, and teaching of African14 American literature and history and as a repository

15 for papers and memorabilia relating to the life of

16 Margaret Walker Alexander and other individuals

17 noted for their work in African-American literature

18 and history; and

19 (3) such other conditions as the Secretary

20 requires.

21 SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

22 (a) AMOUNT.—There are authorized to be appro23 priated not to exceed $8,000,000 for fiscal year 1996.
3

HR 1117 IH

1 (b) AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS.—Funds appropriated

2 pursuant to this Act are authorized to remain available

3 until expended.

Æ
§ 1010.205 Exempted anti-money laundering programs for certain financial institutions. ( a ) *Exempt financial institutions.* Subject to the provisions of paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section, the following financial institutions (as defined in 31 U.S.C. 5312(a)(2) or (c)(1)) are exempt from the requirement in 31 U.S.C. 5318(h)(1) concerning the establishment of anti-money laundering programs: ( 1 ) An agency of the United States Government, or of a State or local government, carrying out a duty or power of a business described in 31 U.S.C. 5312(a)(2); and
( 2 ) [Reserved]
( b ) *Temporary exemption for certain financial institutions.* ( 1 ) Subject to the provisions of paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section, the following financial institutions (as defined in 31 U.S.C. 5312(a)(2) or (c)(1)) are exempt from the requirement in 31 U.S.C. 5318(h)(1) concerning the establishment of anti-money laundering programs: ( i ) Pawnbroker;
( ii ) Travel agency;
( iii ) Telegraph company;
( iv ) Seller of vehicles, including automobiles, airplanes, and boats;
( v ) Person involved in real estate closings and settlements;
( vi ) Commodity pool operator;
( vii ) Commodity trading advisor; or
( viii ) Investment company.
( 2 ) — ( 3 ) [Reserved]
( c ) *Limitation on exemption.* The exemptions described in paragraph (b) of this section shall not apply to any financial institution that is otherwise required to establish an anti-money laundering program by this chapter.
( d ) *Compliance obligations of deferred financial institutions.* Nothing in this section shall be deemed to relieve an exempt financial institution from its responsibility to comply with any other applicable requirement of law or regulation, including title 31 of the U.S.C. and this chapter.
[75 FR 65812, Oct. 26, 2010, as amended at 77 FR 8157, Feb. 14, 2012; 85 FR 57137, Sept. 15, 2020]
www.gpo.gov

### §286e–1c. Additional increase in quota of United States

(a) The United States Governor of the Fund is authorized to consent to an increase of $1,540,000,000 in the quota of the United States in the Fund.

(b) In order to pay the increase in the United States quota in the Fund provided for in this section, there is hereby authorized to be appropriated $1,540,000,000, to remain available until expended.

(July 31, 1945, ch. 339, §22, as added Pub. L. 91–599, ch. 1, §1, Dec. 30, 1970, 84 Stat. 1657.)
#### Kay Waterproofing Corp., Respondent, v Ray Realty Fulton, Inc., Appellant, et al., Defendants.

[804 NYS2d 815]

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract and to foreclose a mechanic’s lien, the . defendant Ray Realty Fulton, Inc., appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (M. Garson, J.), dated April 8, 2005, as granted that branch of the plaintiffs motion which was for leave to enter judgment against it upon its default in answering the complaint and denied its cross application to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it pursuant to CPLR 3215 (c), and (2) a judgment of the same court entered April 28, 2005, as, upon the order, is in favor of the plaintiff and against it.

Ordered that the appeal from the order is dismissed; and it is further,

Ordered that the judgment is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, that branch of the plaintiff’s motion which was for leave to enter judgment against Ray Realty Fulton, Inc., is denied, the cross application is granted, the complaint is dismissed insofar as asserted against Ray Realty Fulton, Inc., the action against the remaining defendants is severed, and the order is modified accordingly; and it is further,

Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the appellant.

The appeal from the intermediate order must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of judgment in the action *(see Matter of Aho,*39 NY2d *625241, 248 [1976]). The issues raised on the appeal from the order are brought up for review and have been considered on appeal from the judgment *(see*CPLR 5501 [a] [1]).

When a plaintiff fails to seek leave to enter a default judgment within one year after the default has occurred, the action is deemed abandoned *(see*CPLR 3215 [c]; *Geraghty v Elmhurst Hosp. Ctr. of N.Y. City Health & Hosps. Corp.,*305 AD2d 634 [2003]). To avoid dismissal of the complaint as abandoned under such circumstances, a plaintiff must offer a reasonable excuse for the delay in moving for leave to enter a default judgment, and must demonstrate that the complaint is meritorious *(see London v Iceland Inc.,*306 AD2d 517 [2003]; *Geraghty v Elmhurst Hosp. Ctr. of N.Y. City Health & Hosps. Corp., supra).*Here, the plaintiff did not move for leave to enter judgment against the defendant Ray Realty Fulton, Inc. (hereinafter Ray Realty), until more than four years after that defendant defaulted in answering the complaint, and the plaintiff failed to offer a reasonable excuse for this extensive delay. Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have denied that branch of the plaintiffs motion which was for leave to enter judgment against Ray Realty and exercised its authority pursuant to CPLR 3215 (c) to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against Ray Realty *(see London v Iceland Inc., supra; Geraghty v Elmhurst Hosp. Ctr. of N.Y. City Health & Hosps. Corp., supra; Piccirillo v Greenspan,*291 AD2d 486 [2002]; *Lombardo v Kam Yong Yuen,*285 AD2d 630 [2001]; *Opia v Chukwu,*278 AD2d 394 [2000]). H. Miller, J.P., Crane, Krausman, Rivera and Lifson, JJ., concur.
!LED 

DEC 0 2 nu 

Emma BROV414 

OF UPREME COufri 

CLERK 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA 

CHARLES N. BELSSNER, I, No. 85664 

Appellant, 

vs. 

SIERRA COMMUNITY 

MANAGEMENT, 

Res • ondent. 

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL 

This is a pro se appeal from an "Order Re: Affidavit Seeking 

Disqualification of Judge." Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; 

Jerry A. Wiese, Judge. 

Review of the documents submitted to this court pursuant to 

NRAP 3(g) reveals a jurisdictional defect. Specifically, the order designated 

in the notice of appeal is not substantively appealable. See NRAP 3A(b). 

This court has jurisdiction to consider an appeal only when the appeal is 

authorized by statute or court rule. Brown v. MHC Stagecoach, LLC, 129 

Nev. 343, 345, 301 P.3d 850, 851 (2013). No statute or court rule provides 

for an appeal from an order denying disqualification of a judge. See Towbin 

Dodge, LLC v. Dist. Ct., 121 Nev. 5, 112 P. 3d 1063 (2005) (noting that a 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

z 
writ petition is the appropriate vehicle for challenging judicial 

disqualification rulings). 

This court lacks jurisdiction and 

ORDERS this appeal DISMISSED.1

Cadish 

Sr. J. 

cc: Hon. Jerry A. Wiese, Chief Judge 

Charles N. Belssner 

Hutchison & Steffen, LLC/Las Vegas 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

1The Honorable Mark Gibbons, Senior Justice, participated in this 

matter under a general order of assignment. 

2
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


L\_2021065DE.01009301.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 25.2.2021 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 65/93 |

---

Berichtigung der Verordnung (EU) 2019/2019 der Kommission vom 1. Oktober 2019 zur Festlegung von Ökodesign-Anforderungen an Kühlgeräte gemäß der Richtlinie 2009/125/EG des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates und zur Aufhebung der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 643/2009 der Kommission

(
[Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 315 vom 5. Dezember 2019](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOL_2019_315_R_TOC)
)

Seite 192, Artikel 4 Absatz 3 Unterabsatz 1 letzter Teil des Satzes:

Anstatt:

„so sind in der technischen Dokumentation die Einzelheiten dieser Berechnung, die vom Hersteller vorgenommene Bewertung der Genauigkeit der Berechnung und gegebenenfalls die Identitätserklärung für die Modelle verschiedener Hersteller anzugeben.“

muss es heißen:

„so werden in der technischen Dokumentation die Einzelheiten dieser Berechnung, die vom Hersteller vorgenommene Bewertung der Genauigkeit der Berechnung und gegebenenfalls die Erklärung zur Gleichwertigkeit der Modelle verschiedener Hersteller aufgeführt.“

Seite 194, Anhang I Nummer 3:

Anstatt:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| „3. | ‚Winterschaltung‘ bezeichnet eine Steuerfunktion, die bei einem Kombigerät mit einem Kompressor und einem Thermostat gemäß den Anleitungen des Herstellers, Importeurs oder Bevollmächtigten bei Umgebungstemperaturen von unter 16 °C zum Einsatz kommen kann und die aus einem Schaltgerät oder einer Schaltfunktion besteht, das/die dafür sorgt, dass der Kompressor selbst dann weiterarbeitet, um die Lagertemperaturen in den Fächern aufrechtzuerhalten, wenn dies für das Fach, in dem sich der Thermostat befindet, nicht erforderlich ist;“ |

muss es heißen:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| „3. | ‚Winterschaltung‘ bezeichnet eine Steuerfunktion, die bei einem Kombigerät mit einem Kompressor und einem Thermostat gemäß den Anleitungen des Herstellers, Importeurs oder Bevollmächtigten bei Umgebungstemperaturen von unter 16 °C zum Einsatz kommen kann und die aus einem Schaltgerät oder einer Schaltfunktion besteht, das/die dafür sorgt, dass der Kompressor selbst dann weiterarbeitet, um die richtigen Lagertemperaturen in den anderen Fächern aufrechtzuerhalten, wenn dies für das Fach, in dem sich der Thermostat befindet, nicht erforderlich ist;“ |

Seite 199, Anhang II Nummer 3 Buchstabe b Nummer 3 Satz 2:

Anstatt:

„Eine Gebühr ist angemessen, wenn sie keine abschreckende Wirkung hat und berücksichtigt, in welchem Umfang der fachlich kompetente Reparateur die bereitgestellten Informationen nutzt.“

muss es heißen:

„Eine Gebühr ist angemessen, wenn sie keine abschreckende Wirkung hat, da berücksichtigt wird, in welchem Umfang der fachlich kompetente Reparateur die bereitgestellten Informationen nutzt.“

---
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1055 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1055

To amend title 5, United States Code, to clarify that the Government in 
     the Sunshine Act applies to the Federal Open Market Committee.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 24, 1995

Mr. Traficant introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
              Committee on Government Reform and Oversight

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title 5, United States Code, to clarify that the Government in 
     the Sunshine Act applies to the Federal Open Market Committee.

    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 ``Sunshine on the Federal Open Market 
Committee Act''.

SEC. 2. APPLICABILITY OF GOVERNMENT IN THE SUNSHINE ACT TO THE FEDERAL 
              OPEN MARKET COMMITTEE.

    Section 552b(a)(1) of title 5, United States Code, is amended by 
inserting ``and, notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, 
includes the Federal Open Market Committee'' before the semicolon at 
the end.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 34 Introduced in House (IH)]

                                     

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 34

  Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to 
           limit the terms of office for Members of Congress.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 1995

   Mr. McCrery 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 to 
           limit the terms of office for Members of Congress.

    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, to be valid only if 
ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States 
within seven years after the date of its submission by the Congress:

                              ``Article--

    ``Section 1. No person may serve any portion of a term as 
Representative if at the completion of that term the person would have 
served as a Representative for more than six and one-half terms.
    ``Section 2. No person may serve any portion of a term as Senator 
if at the completion of that term the person would have served as a 
Senator for more than two and one half terms.
    ``Section 3. No person holding office on the date of the adoption 
of this article of amendment shall be prevented by reason of this 
article of amendment from completing that person's term of office.''.
                                 <all>
```
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

October 1, 2009 

jm 

Order 

 

October 1, 2009 

139674 (55) 

STEVEN BOYT, 

 Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v SC: 139674 

 CoA: 282653 

STEVEN DRAKOS, 

 Defendant-Appellee. 

___________________________________ 

On order of the Court, the motion to waive fees is considered and it is DENIED 

because MCL 600.2963 requires that a prisoner pursuing a civil action be liable for filing 

fees. Appellant is not required to pay an initial partial fee. However, for an appeal to be 

filed, appellant must resubmit a copy of this order, and shall refile the copy of the 

pleadings which is being returned with this order within 21 days. By doing this, 

appellant becomes responsible for paying the $375.00 filing fee. Failure to comply with 

this order shall result in the appeal not being filed in this Court. 

If appellant timely refiles the pleadings, monthly payments shall be made to the 

Department of Corrections in an amount of 50 percent of the deposits made to appellant’s 

account until the payments equal the total amount of the filing fee stated above. That 

amount shall then be remitted to this Court. 

Pursuant to MCL 600.2963(8) plaintiff shall not file further appeals in this Court 

until the entry fee in this case is paid in full. 

The Clerk of the Court shall furnish two copies of this order to appellant and 

return appellant’s pleadings with this order.
First Amendment to Commercial Paper Dealer Agreement



 Exhibit 10.04 
 FIRST AMENDMENT TO COMMERCIAL PAPER DEALER AGREEMENT 
 THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO COMMERCIAL PAPER DEALER AGREEMENT (the “First Amendment”) is entered into on this 28th day of February, 2007 by and between Cardinal Health, Inc. (“Issuer”) and Wachovia Capital Markets, LLC (“Dealer”). 
 Background Information 
 A. Issuer and Dealer are parties to that certain
Commercial Paper Dealer Agreement dated August 9, 2006 (the “Agreement”) concerning notes issued pursuant to that certain Issuing and Paying Agency Agreement also dated August 9, 2006 by and between Issuer and The Bank of New
York (the “Issuing and Paying Agency Agreement”). 
 B. The Issuer desires to increase to $1,500,000,000 the limit as to the
aggregate principal amount of commercial paper notes which may be outstanding at any given time under the 4(2) Commercial Paper Program established by the Issuing and Paying Agency Agreement, the Agreement, and other related agreements. 

Agreement 
 The parties hereby acknowledge
the accuracy of the foregoing Background Information and agree as follows: 
 1. Defined Terms. Unless the context as used
herein requires otherwise, capitalized terms used but not defined in this First Amendment shall have the meaning given to them in the Agreement. 
 2. Amendment. The centered paragraph underneath the line on page one (the cover page) of the Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and restated as follows: 
 Between: Cardinal Health, Inc., as Issuer and Wachovia Capital Markets, LLC, as Dealer Concerning Notes to be issued pursuant to an Issuing and Paying
Agency Agreement dated as of August 9, 2006, as amended February 28, 2007, between the Issuer and the Bank of New York, as Issuing and Paying Agent, dated as of August 9, 2006, as amended February 28, 2007. 
 3. No Other Modifications. Except as expressly provided in this First Amendment, all of the terms and conditions of the Agreement shall
remain unchanged and in full force and effect. 
 4. Binding Effect. This First Amendment shall be binding upon and inure to
the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. 
 5. Governing Law. This First Amendment shall
be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of New York. 







 6. Conflict. In the event of any inconsistency or conflict between this First Amendment and
the Agreement, the terms, provisions and conditions of this First Amendment shall govern and control. 
 7. Counterparts. This
First Amendment may be executed in separate counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original but all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. 
 (Signatures on following page.) 







 The parties hereto have executed this First Amendment as of the day and year first written above.

  

							
	CARDINAL HEALTH, INC.	 	WACHOVIA CAPITAL MARKETS, LLC
				
	By:	 	 /s/ Linda S. Harty
	 	By:	 	 /s/ Steven P. Shorkey

	Name:	 	Linda S. Harty, as Executive	 	Name:	 	Steven Shorkey
		 	Vice President and Treasurer	 		 	
				
	Date:	 	2-28-2007	 	Date:	 	February 28, 2007
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 176 (Wednesday, September 11, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 55774]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-22102]

[[Page 55774]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Twenty Fourth Meeting: RTCA Special Committee 213, Enhanced 
Flight Vision Systems/Synthetic Vision Systems (EFVS/SVS)

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), U.S. Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Meeting notice of RTCA Special Committee 213, Enhanced Flight 
Vision Systems/Synthetic Vision Systems (EFVS/SVS).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of the 
twenty fourth meeting of the RTCA Special Committee 213, Enhanced 
Flight Vision Systems/Synthetic Vision Systems (EFVS/SVS).

DATES: The meeting will be held October 8-9, 2013 from 9:00 a.m.-5:00 
p.m. and October 10, 2013 from 9:00 a.m.-3:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at SAIC, 1515 Wilson Blvd., 
Arlington, Virginia 22209.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street 
NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036, or by telephone at (202) 330-
0652/(202) 833-9339, fax at (202) 833-9434, or Web site at http://www.rtca.org. Additional contact information: please contact Patrick 
Krohn, pkrohn@uasc.com, telephone (425) 602-1375 or mobile at (425) 
829-1996. RTCA contact is Jennifer Iverson, jiverson@rtca.org, (202) 
330- 0662.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a) (2) of the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is 
hereby given for a meeting of Special Committee 213. The agenda will 
include the following:

Tuesday, October 8, 2013

Plenary Discussion (sign in at 9:00 a.m.)

 Introductions and administrative items
 Review and approve minutes from last full plenary meeting
 Review of terms of reference
 Status of DO-342A and DO-315C Drafts
 Industry updates
 DO-315C and DO-342A draft review

Wednesday, October 9, 2013

Plenary Discussion

 WG-1 DO-315C draft review
 WG-2 DO-342A draft review

Thursday, October 10, 2013

Plenary Discussion

 WG-1 DO-315C draft review
 WG-1 DO-342A draft review
 Administrative items
 Adjourn

    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space 
availability. With the approval of the chairman, members of the public 
may present oral statements at the meeting.
    Persons wishing to present statements or obtain information should 
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section. Members of the public may present a written statement to the 
committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 5, 2013.
Paige Williams,
Management Analyst, NextGen, Business Operations Group, Federal 
Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2013-22102 Filed 9-10-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```