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

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1101 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1101

To abolish the Board of Review of the Metropolitan Washington Airports 
                   Authority, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 1, 1995

  Mr. Moran (for himself, Mr. Davis, and Mrs. Morella) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation 
                           and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To abolish the Board of Review of the Metropolitan Washington Airports 
                   Authority, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. ABOLITION OF BOARD OF REVIEW AND RELATED AUTHORITY.

    (a) Abolition of Board of Review.--Section 6007 of the Metropolitan 
Washington Airports Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 1783-379) is amended--
            (1) by striking subsections (f) and (h);
            (2) by redesignating subsection (g) as subsection (f); and
            (3) by redesignating subsection (i) as subsection (g).
    (b) Conforming Amendments.--
            (1) Relationship to and effect of other laws.--Section 
        6009(b) of the Metropolitan Washington Airports Act of 1986 
        (100 Stat. 1783-384) is amended by striking ``or by reason of 
        the authority'' and all that follows through the end of the 
        subsection and inserting a period.
            (2) Separability.--Section 6011 of the Metropolitan 
        Washington Airports Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 1783-385) is amended 
        by striking ``Except as provided in section 6007(h), if'' and 
        inserting ``If''.
    (c) Protection of Certain Actions.--Actions taken by the Airports 
Authority and submitted to the Board of Review pursuant to section 
6007(f)(4) of the Metropolitan Washington Airports Act of 1986 before 
April 1, 1995, shall remain in effect and shall not be set aside solely 
by reason of a judicial order invalidating certain functions of the 
Board of Review.
    (d) Amendment of Lease.--The Secretary of Transportation shall 
amend the lease entered into with the Airports Authority under section 
6005(a) of the Metropolitan Washington Airports Act of 1986 to secure 
the Airports Authority's consent to the amendments made by this Act.

SEC. 2. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS IN OTHER LAW.

    Any reference in any Federal law, Executive order, rule, 
regulation, or delegation of authority to the Board of Review of the 
Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority or the provisions of law 
repealed under this Act is hereby repealed.
                                 <all>
```
IA

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 111

Providing for the appointment of Anne D’Harnoncourt as a citizen regent

of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 29, 1995

Mr. LIVINGSTON (for himself, Mr. MINETA, and Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas)

introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on House Oversight

JOINT RESOLUTION

Providing for the appointment of Anne D’Harnoncourt as

a citizen regent of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That, in accordance with section 5581 of the Revised Stat4 utes of the United States (20 U.S.C. 43), the vacancy on

5 the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution, in

6 the class other than Members of Congress, occurring by

7 reason of the expiration of the term of Samuel Curtis

8 Johnson of Wisconsin on December 4, 1995, is filled by

9 the appointment of Anne D’Harnoncourt of Pennsylvania.
2

•HJ 111 IH

1 The appointment is for a term of six years and shall take

2 effect on December 5, 1995.

Æ
#### Transit Management, LLC, Plaintiff, v Watson Industries, Inc., et al., Appellants, and Charles K. Sauberan et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants.

(Appeal No. 2.)

[803 NYS2d 451]

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Thomas A. Stander, J.), entered November 4, 2004. The order, insofar as appealed from, granted in part the motion of defendants Charles K. Sauberan, Frederick R. Kulikowski, Professional Management, LLC, Sauberan & Co., Ltd. and Watson Industries Management, LLC for summary judgment dismissing the counterclaims of defendants Watson Industries, Inc. and Benjamin Okwumabua.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Same memorandum as in *Transit Mgt., LLC v Watson Indus., Inc.*(23 AD3d — [2005]). Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Green, Hurlbutt, Kehoe and Pine, JJ.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Victor Mojica, Appellant.

[803 NYS2d 921]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (DeRosa, J.), rendered July 14, 2004, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see Anders v California,*386 US 738 [1967]; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631 [1976]; *cf. People v Gonzalez, 47*NY2d 606 [1979]). Adams, J.P., Ritter, Goldstein, Skelos and Dillon, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 155 (Thursday, August 13, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 40831]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-19385]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

U.S. Customs and Border Protection


Accreditation and Approval of Intertek USA, Inc., as a Commercial 
Gauger and Laboratory

AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland 
Security.

ACTION: Notice of accreditation and approval of Intertek USA, Inc., as 
a commercial gauger and laboratory.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 
CFR 151.13, Intertek USA, Inc., 4951A East Adamo Drive, Suite 130, 
Tampa, FL 33605, has been approved to gauge and accredited to test 
petroleum and petroleum products, organic chemicals and vegetable oils 
for customs purposes, in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 
151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13. Anyone wishing to employ this entity to 
conduct laboratory analyses and gauger services should request and 
receive written assurances from the entity that it is accredited or 
approved by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the 
specific test or gauger service requested. Alternatively, inquires 
regarding the specific test or gauger service this entity is accredited 
or approved to perform may be directed to the U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The inquiry may also be sent to 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3a59584a14565b58524b7a5e5249145d554c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="593a3b297735383b3128193d312a773e362f">[email protected]</span></a>. Please reference the Web site listed below for a 
complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and accredited laboratories. 
http://cbp.gov/xp/cgov/import/operations_support/labs_scientific_svcs/commercial_gaugers/.

DATES: The accreditation and approval of Intertek USA, Inc., as 
commercial gauger and laboratory became effective on June 03, 2009. The 
next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for June 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony Malana, Laboratories and 
Scientific Services, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, 202-344-
1060.

    Dated: August 4, 2009.
Ira S. Reese,
Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services.
[FR Doc. E9-19385 Filed 8-12-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-14-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 71 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 71

    Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States 
     repealing the 22nd article of amendment, thereby removing the 
    restrictions on the number of terms an individual may serve as 
                               President.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 1, 1995

Mr. McNulty (for himself and Mr. Shays) 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 
     repealing the 22nd article of amendment, thereby removing the 
    restrictions on the number of terms an individual may serve as 
                               President.

    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 
within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:

                              ``Article--

    ``The twenty-second article of amendment to the Constitution of the 
United States is hereby repealed.''.
                                 <all>
```
#### § 1025.530 [Reserved]
§ 48.6416(b)(1)-4 Supporting evidence required in case of price readjustments. No credit or refund of an overpayment arising by reason of a price readjustment described in § 48.6416(b)(1)-2 or § 48.6416(b)(1)-3 shall be allowed unless the manufacturer who paid the tax submits a statement, supported by sufficient available evidence— ( a ) Describing the circumstances which gave rise to the price readjustment,
( b ) Identifying the article in respect of which the price readjustment was allowed,
( c ) Showing the price at which the article was sold, the amount of tax paid in respect of the article, and the date on which the tax was paid,
( d ) Giving the name and address of the purchaser to whom the article was sold, and
( e ) Showing the amount repaid to the purchaser or credited to the purchaser's account.
[T.D. 8043, 50 FR 32026, Aug. 8, 1985]
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

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

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

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ATM MAGFOOR RAHMAN SARKAR;

et al.,

 Petitioners,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 09-74106

Agency Nos. A070-952-103

 A070-952-104

 A070-952-105

 A070-952-106

 A070-952-107

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted July 12, 2011** 

Before: SCHROEDER, ALARCÓN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. 

Atm Magfoor Rahman Sarkar and his family, natives and citizens of

Bangladesh, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”)

order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction

under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law and for abuse of

FILED

JUL 21 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 09-74106

discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785,

791–92 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying petitioners’ motion to

reopen because they presented insufficient evidence to establish prejudice from the

alleged ineffective assistance of their former counsel. See Rojas-Garcia v.

Ashcroft, 339 F.3d 814, 826 (9th Cir. 2003) (presumption of prejudice rebutted

where petitioner has not demonstrated plausible grounds of relief).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

JIRIES AYOUB,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 121 MAL 2022

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 10th day of August, 2022, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________ No. 95-31110 Summary Calendar

__________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus ALFRED D. LEWIS, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 95-CR-30018
- - - - - - - - - - May 16, 1996 Before KING, GARWOOD, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Alfred D. Lewis appeals his sentence, arguing that the district court abused its discretion by denying his motion for a downward departure pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 5K2.0 and that the court erred by denying his motion for a concurrent sentence and/or for downward departure pursuant to §§ 5G1.3(b) and (c). Because the sentencing court's refusal to depart downward pursuant to § 5K2.0 was not the result of a violation of the law or a misapplication of the guidelines, this court lacks2

jurisdiction to review the court's refusal to depart. See United States v. DiMarco , 46 F.3d 476, 477 (5th Cir. 1995). Section 5G1.3 is not applicable to Lewis's case because Lewis was not subject to an undischarged term of imprisonment at the time of sentencing. See § 5G1.3. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. AFFIRMED.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

O. L.

,

Appellant,

v.

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY

AND PROTECTIVE SERVICES,

Appellee

. §

§

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 1 4

- 00 1 84

- C V

Appeal from the

65 th District Court

of El Paso C ounty, Texas

(TC# 201 2 DCM 09529 )

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS D ’ Anne Asleson ’ s first r equest for an extension of time within

which to file the Reporter ’ s Record until Ju ly 11 , 2014

. NO FURTHER REQUESTS FOR

EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE THE REPORTER ’ S RECORD WILL BE CONSIDERED

BY THIS COURT.

It is further ORDERED that D ’ Anne Asleson

, Official Court Reporter for the 65 th Child

Protection C ourt for El Paso County, Texas, prepare the Reporter ’ s Record and forward the same

to this Court on or before Ju ly 11 , 2014

.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 2 nd day of Ju ly , 20 1 4

.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure , C.J., Rivera and Rodriguez , JJ.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 55 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 55

 Requesting the President to return the enrolled bill (H.R. 831), and 
    providing for its reenrollment without the targeted tax benefit 
                           contained therein.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 4, 1995

 Mr. Deutsch submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
  referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the 
     Committee on House Oversight, for a period to be subsequently 
   determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such 
 provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
 Requesting the President to return the enrolled bill (H.R. 831), and 
    providing for its reenrollment without the targeted tax benefit 
                           contained therein.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That the President of the United States is requested to return to the 
House of Representatives the enrolled bill (H.R. 831) to amend the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permanently extend the deduction for 
the health insurance costs of self-employed individuals, to repeal the 
provision permitting nonrecognition of gain on sales and exchanges 
effectuating policies of the Federal Communications Commission, and for 
other purposes. The Clerk of the House is authorized to receive such 
bill if it is returned when the House is not in session. Upon the 
return of such bill, the action of the Speaker of the House of 
Representatives and the Acting President pro tempore of the Senate in 
signing it shall be deemed rescinded and the Clerk of the House shall 
reenroll the bill with the following corrections: In subparagraph (B) 
of section 2(d)(2) of the bill (relating to sales contingent on 
issuance of certificate)--
            (1) strike clause (ii), and
            (2) strike
                    ``(B) Sales contingent on issuance of 
                certificate.--
                            ``(i) In general.--A contract''
        and insert
                    ``(B) Sales contingent on issuance of 
                certificate.--A contract''.
                                 <all>
```
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D18-1556

_____________________________

TREVOR ALAN HARVEY,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Russell Healey, Judge.

August 13, 2019

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

B.L. THOMAS, KELSEY, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Joel Arnold, Assistant Public 

Defender Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
§ 49.4261-9 Mileage awards. ( a ) *Tax imposed.* Any amount paid (and the value of any other benefit provided) to an air carrier (or any related person) for the right to provide mileage awards for or other reductions in the cost of any transportation of persons by air is an amount paid for taxable transportation and is therefore subject to the tax imposed by section 4261(a) of the Internal Revenue Code. *See* section 4261(e)(3)(A).
( b ) *[Reserved]*
( c ) *Applicability date.* This section applies to amounts paid on and after January 19, 2021.
[T.D. 9948, 86 FR 5003, Jan. 19, 2021]
(logo)Newmark Knight Frank

 

 

225Franklin Street 

18thFloor

Boston,MA 02110

T877.526.3562

ngkf.com

 

 

**Officer'sCertificate**

 

 

Pursuantto the requirements of the applicable Servicing Agreement for the transactionslisted on Schedule I hereto, for which Midland Loan Services, a Division of PNCBank, National Association, as Master Servicer, and Berkeley Point Capital LLCd/b/a Newmark Knight Frank, as Primary Servicer, the undersigned, RonaldSteffenino, a Senior Managing Director of Berkeley Point Capital LLC d/b/aNewmark Knight Frank, hereby certifies subject to any limitations listed onSchedule I hereto, as of the date hereof, solely in his capacity as an officerand not in his individual capacity, as follows:

 

1.A review of the activities of the Primary Servicer during the precedingcalendar year (the "Reporting Period") and of its performance underthe Agreement has been made under my supervision; and

 

2.To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Primary Servicer hasfulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respectsthroughout the Reporting Period.

 

INWITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 31stday of January, 2019.

 

BerkeleyPoint Capital LLC d/b/a

NewmarkKnight Frank

/s/Ronald Steffenino

RonaldSteffenino

SeniorManaging Director,

Servicingand Asset Management

 

 

**Schedule I**

 

CommercialMortgage Pass-Through Certificates; Berkeley Point Capital LLC d/b/a NewmarkKnight Frank as ***Primary Servicer***:

 

COMM 2014-CCRE 17                   COMM2014-CCRE19 

GSMS2014-GC24                           COMM 2014-UBS4

COMM 2015-CCRE23                    COMM 2015 CCRE27

GSMS2015-GC30                           GSCCRE2015-HULA

COMM 2015-LC19                         COMM2015-LC21

CFCMT 2016-C3                             CGCMT2016-C3                                                  

CFCRE2016-C7                              CCRESG 2016 HEAT

CCUBS2017-C1                              CGCMT 2017-C4

UBS 2017-C5                                  BMARK2018 B3

MSCI 2018L1                                  UBS2018 C12

UBS 2018C14                                  UBS2018 C8

     UBS 2018 C9                                    MSCI 2018 H4