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

Calendar No. 923 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 622 

Designating the week beginning September 7, 2008, as ‘‘National Historically 

Black Colleges and Universities Week’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 24 (legislative day, JULY 23), 2008 

Mr. GRAHAM (for himself, Mr. ALEXANDER, Mr. BAYH, Mr. BIDEN, Mr. 

BOND, Mrs. BOXER, Mr. BROWN, Mr. BROWNBACK, Mr. BUNNING, Mr. 

BURR, Mr. BYRD, Mr. CARDIN, Mr. CASEY, Mr. CHAMBLISS, Mr. 

COBURN, Mr. COCHRAN, Mr. CORNYN, Mr. DEMINT, Mr. DODD, Mrs. 

DOLE, Mr. DURBIN, Mrs. HUTCHISON, Mr. ISAKSON, Ms. LANDRIEU, 

Mr. LEVIN, Mrs. LINCOLN, Mr. MARTINEZ, Mr. MCCAIN, Mrs. 

MCCASKILL, Mr. MENENDEZ, Ms. MIKULSKI, Mr. NELSON of Florida, 

Mr. OBAMA, Mr. ROCKEFELLER, Mr. SALAZAR, Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. SPECTER, Mr. VITTER, Mr. WARNER, and Mr. WICKER) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

JULY 31, 2008 

Reported by Mr. LEAHY, without amendment 

RESOLUTION 

Designating the week beginning September 7, 2008, as ‘‘National Historically Black Colleges and Universities 

Week’’. 

Whereas there are 103 historically Black colleges and universities in the United States; 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
2 

SRES 622 RS 

Whereas historically Black colleges and universities provide 

the quality education essential to full participation in a 

complex, highly technological society; 

Whereas historically Black colleges and universities have a 

rich heritage and have played a prominent role in the history of the United States; 

Whereas historically Black colleges and universities have allowed many underprivileged students to attain their full 

potential through higher education; and 

Whereas the achievements and goals of historically Black colleges and universities are deserving of national recognition: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) designates the week beginning September 7, 

3 2008, as ‘‘National Historically Black Colleges and 

4 Universities Week’’; and 

5 (2) calls on the people of the United States and 

6 interested groups to observe the week with appro7 priate ceremonies, activities, and programs to dem8 onstrate support for historically Black colleges and 

9 universities in the United States. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS

wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
Calendar No. 923 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 622 

RESOLUTION 

Designating the week beginning September 7, 

and Universities Week’’. 2008, as ‘‘National Historically Black Colleges 

JULY 31, 2008 

Reported without amendment 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
----

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO      SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

| This                15th day of November, 2005 |                                     |
|------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------|
|                                           |                                     |
|                                           |                                     |
|                                           |                                     |
|                                           | /s/                Charles M. Jones, III |
|                                           | Charles                M. Jones, III     |
|                                           | Chief                Executive Officer   |
|                                           |                                     |
|                                           |                                     |
|                                           | /s/                David J. Baranko      |
|                                           | David                J. Baranko          |
|                                           | Chief                Financial Officer   |

----
###### Editorial Note on Part 117

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 117 appear by USCG-1998-3799, 63 FR 35529, June 30, 1998.

#### § 117.199 Steamboat Slough.

The draw of the California Department of Transportation highway bridge, mile 11.2 at the head of Grand Island, shall open on signal from May 1 through October 31 from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. At all other times, the draw shall open on signal if at least four hours notice is given to the drawtender at the Rio Vista bridge across the Sacramento River, mile 12.8.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-7814

MITCHELL LEE SUMPTER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

STUCKEY, Major; A. MCCORMICK, Captain; L. T.

JACKSON; S. NOLAN, Lieutenant; MCCLAIN,

Sergeant; W. B. PRATT, Captain; MCLEOD, C/O,

Officer; DAVID, C/O, Officer; COVINGTON, C/O,

Officer; SUGGS, C/O, Officer; OCEAN, C/O,

Officer,

Defendants - Appellees,

and

ROBERT E. WARD, Warden; PHILLIP E. MCLEOD,

Associate Warden,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Charleston. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District

Judge. (CA-96-1838-2-17)

Submitted: July 2, 1998 Decided: July 21, 1998

Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior

Circuit Judge.
2

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Mitchell Lee Sumpter, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Thomas King, WILLCOX, MCLEOD, BUYCK & WILLIAMS, P.A., Florence, South Carolina, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
3

PER CURIAM:

Mitchell Sumpter, a South Carolina inmate, filed an action

under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994), alleging that various South Carolina

prison officials violated his rights under the Eight Amendment.

Following a non-jury trial the district court entered judgment in

favor of the Defendants. This appeal followed.

We reject Sumpter’s claim that he was denied a fair trial because safety precautions mandated that he wear restraints throughout his trial. Although Sumpter may have suffered some discomfort

from wearing the restraints, the absence of a jury minimized any

potential prejudice. See Lemons v. Skidmore, 985 F.2d 354, 357 (7th

Cir. 1993). We find that the district court properly dismissed

Sumpter’s claims for which he failed to present evidence that he

suffered more than de minimis injuries. See Norman v. Taylor, 25

F.3d 1259, 1263 (4th Cir. 1994).

Sumpter next challenges the district court’s finding that he

failed to demonstrate that the Defendants used excessive force

against him. We review a district court’s findings of fact for

clear error. Fed. R. Civ. P. 52(a). Having reviewed the record, we

find no error in the district court’s determination that the Defendants did not use excessive force against Sumpter in violation of

the Eighth Amendment. The record also supports the district court’s

finding that the Defendants did not act improperly in erasing a

videotape of the incidents giving rise to this case.
4

Finding no merit to Sumpter’s claims, we affirm the district

court’s final order entered in favor of the Defendants. We dispense

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

AFFIRMED
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03

- 18

- 00227

- CV

Sattar Investments, Inc. and Adnan Sattar, Appellant s

v.

Ingrid Radkey, Appellee

FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF TRAVIS COUNTY
NO. C

- 1

- CV

- 16

- 011799 , THE HONORABLE ERIC SHEPPER D, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant s Sattar Investments, Inc. and Adnan Sattar have filed an unopposed

moti on to dismiss this appeal. We g rant appellant s ’ motion and dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R.

App. P. 42.1(a)

.

__________________________________________ Scott K. Field, Justice

Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Pemberton and Field

Dismissed on Appellant s ’ Motion

Filed: July 18, 2018
#### § 110.6a Fore River, Portland Harbor, Portland, Maine.

The water area beginning at a point on the shoreline near the Coast Guard Base in Position 43-38 43′′ N and 070-14 49′′ W; thence 319 to position 43-38 55′′ N, 070-15 03′′ W; thence 50 to position 43-39 06′′ N: 070-14 43′′ W: thence 161 to mainland; and thence southwesterly along the shore to the point of beginning.

[CGD 01-87-02, 52 FR 9829, Mar. 27, 1987]
Exhibit 32.2






CERTIFICATION OF


PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER








I, Robert C. Jacobucci, Principal Financial Officer and Controller of TC PipeLines GP, Inc., the general partner of TC PipeLines, LP (the Partnership), in compliance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge,in connection with the Partnership’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) on the date hereof, that:




●
the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




●
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Partnership.






Dated: April 30, 2010                                                  /s/ Robert C. Jacobucci


Robert C. Jacobucci


Principal Financial Officer and Controller


TC PipeLines GP, Inc., as general partner of


TC PipeLines, LP
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 460 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 460

To authorize representation by the Senate Legal Counsel in the case of 
        National Association of Manufacturers v. Taylor, et al.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 25, 2008

   Mr. Reid (for himself and Mr. McConnell) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
To authorize representation by the Senate Legal Counsel in the case of 
        National Association of Manufacturers v. Taylor, et al.

Whereas, in the case of National Association of Manufacturers v. Taylor, et al., 
        Case No. 08-CV-208-CKK (D.D.C.), pending in the United States District 
        Court for the District of Columbia, the plaintiff is asserting that the 
        reporting requirements of section 4(b)(3) of the Lobbying Disclosure Act 
        of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 1603(b)(3), as amended by section 207 of the Honest 
        Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007, Pub. L. No. 110-81, 121 
        Stat. 735, 747, are unconstitutional;
Whereas, the plaintiff has named the Secretary of the Senate, Nancy Erickson, as 
        a defendant in her capacity as the officer of the Senate responsible for 
        the receipt of lobbying disclosure registrations and reports;
Whereas, pursuant to sections 703(a) and 704(a)(1) of the Ethics in Government 
        Act of 1978, 2 U.S.C. 288b(a) and 288c(a)(1), the Senate may direct its 
        counsel to defend officers of the Senate in civil actions relating to 
        their official responsibilities: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate Legal Counsel is authorized to represent 
the Secretary of the Senate in the case of National Association of 
Manufacturers v. Taylor, et al.
                                 <all>
```
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 Justice Drug Enforcement Administration
 By Notice dated April 13, 2011, and published in the 
                    **Federal Register**
                     on April 20, 2011, 76 FR 22146, Stepan Company, Natural Products Dept., 100 W. Hunter Avenue, Maywood, New Jersey 07607, made application by renewal to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to be registered as a bulk manufacturer of the following basic classes of controlled substances: Drug
ScheduleCocaine (9041)
IIEcgonine (9180)
II
 The company plans to manufacture the listed controlled substances in bulk for distribution to its customers. No comments or objections have been received. DEA has considered the factors in 21 U.S.C. 823(a), and determined that the registration of Stepan Company to manufacture the listed basic classes of controlled substances is consistent with the public interest at this time. DEA has investigated Stepan Company to ensure that the company's registration is consistent with the public interest. The investigation has included inspection and testing of the company's physical security systems, verification of the company's compliance with state and local laws, and a review of the company's background and history. Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823(a), and in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33, the above named company is granted registration as a bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled substances listed. Dated: August 10, 2011. Joseph T. Rannazzisi, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration.


[FR Doc. 2011-21081 Filed 8-17-11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
Exhibit 4.01
 
 SEE REVERSE FOR CERTAIN DEFINITIONS INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF
THE STATE OF DELAWARE THIS CERTIFICATE IS TRANSFERABLE IN JERSEY CITY, NJ, NEW YORK, NY AND PITTSBURGH, PA This Certifies that is the record holder of FULLY PAID AND NONASSESSABLE SHARES OF COMMON STOCK, $.001 PAR VALUE OF MercadoLibre, Inc. transferable on the books of the Corporation by the holder hereof, in person or by duly authorized attorney, upon surrender of this Certificate properly endorsed. This Certificate is not valid until countersigned and registered by the Transfer Agent and Registrar. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Corporation has caused this Certificate to be signed in facsimile by its duly authorized officers. Dated: PRESIDENT, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND SECRETARY COUNTERSIGNED AND REGISTERED:
MELLON INVESTOR SERVICES LLC
TRANSFER AGENT AND REGISTRAR BY AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE AMERICAN BANK NOTE COMPANY
711 ARMSTRONG LANE
COLUMBIA, TENNESSEE 38401
(931) 388-3003
SALES: HOLLY GRONER 615-261-0610
/ ETHER 7 / LIVE JOBS / M / MERCADO 30042 FACE PRODUCTION COORDINATOR: CORBIN MATLOCK 931-490-7660
PROOF OF May 16, 2008
MERCADOLIBRE, INC.
TSB 30042 FC
Operator: AP/TERESA/AP/TERESA
REV. 3 PLEASE INITIAL THE APPROPRIATE SELECTION FOR THIS PROOF: OK AS IS OK WITH CHANGES MAKE CHANGES AND SEND ANOTHER PROOF Colors Selected for Printing: Logo prints in 3 color process  cyan, magenta and yellow. Intaglio prints in SC-7 DARK BLUE. COLOR: This proof was printed from a digital file or artwork on a graphics quality, color laser printer. It is a good representation of the color as it will appear on the final product. However, it is not an exact color rendition, and the final printed product may appear slightly different from the proof due to the difference between the dyes and printing ink.
Submitted on record and petitioners’ brief December 10,

reversed and remanded for reconsideration December 30, 1992

#### In the Matter of the Compensation of Horace E. Bittle, Jr., Claimant. S & B JAMES CONSTRUCTION and Liberty Northwest Insurance Corporation, *Petitioners, v.*Horace E. BITTLE, Jr., *Respondent.*

(WCB 91-08680; CA A75218)

842 P2d 818

Alexander D. Libniann, Trial Counsel, Liberty Northwest Insurance Corporation, Portland, filed the brief for petitioners.

No appearance for respondent.

Before Richardson, Presiding Judge; and Deits and Durham, Judges.

PER CURIAM

Reversed and remanded for reconsideration. *SAIF v. Herron,*114 Or App 64, 836 P2d 131, *rev den*315 Or 271 (1992).
# Figure 1 Number of Persons 65+

Figure 1:  Number of Persons Age 65 and Over, 

1900 to 2060 (numbers in millions)

Year (as of July 1)

# Figure 2 Marital Status

Figure 2: Marital Status of Persons Age 65 and Over, 2017

# Figure 3 Living Arrangements

# Figure 4 State Map Percent 65+

https://agid.acl.gov/

# Figure 5 State Map Increase 65+

https://agid.acl.gov/

# Figure 6 Population by State

#  Figure 7F Family Income

Family Households with Householder Age 65 and Over, 2016

# Figure 7P Personal Income

Persons Age 65 and Over Reporting Income, 2016

# Figure 8 Health Insurance

Figure 8: Percentage of Persons Age 65 and Over by Type of 

Health Insurance Coverage, 2016

# Figure 9 Disability

Figure 9: Percentage of Persons Age 65 and Over

with a Disability, 2016

# image1.jpeg

# image2.jpeg
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER ON MOTION

Cause Number: 01-15-00816-CV

Trial Court Cause 

Number: 13-CV-0293

Style: The Landing Community Improvement Association

v Paul T. Young

Date motion filed*: November 13, 2017

Type of motion: Third Request for Extension to File Motion for Rehearing and En Banc Reconsideration

Party filing motion: Appellee, Paul T. Young

Document to be filed: Motion for Rehearing and En Banc Reconsideration

Is appeal accelerated? Yes No

If motion to extend time:

Original due date: September 22, 2017

Number of previous extensions granted: 1, with no further extensions absent extraordinary circumstances

Date Requested: December 1, 2017

Ordered that motion is:

 Granted

If document is to be filed, document due: December 1, 2017

The Court will not grant additional motions to extend time.

 Denied

 Dismissed (e.g., want of jurisdiction, moot)

 Other: 

Judge's signature: /s/ Terry Jennings

  Acting individually Acting for the Court

Panel consists of 

Date: November 21, 2017
#### § 779.234 Establishments whose only regular employees are the owner or members of his immediate family.

Section 3(s) provides that any “establishment which has as its only regular employees the owner thereof or the parent, spouse, child, or other member of the immediate family of such owner” shall not be considered to be an “enterprise” as described in section 3(r) or a part of any other enterprise. Further the sales of such establishment are not included for the purpose of determining the annual gross volume of sales of any enterprise for the purpose of section 3(s). The term “other member of the immediate family of such owner” is considered to include relationships such as brother, sister, grandchildren, grandparents, and in-laws but not distant relatives from separate households. The 1966 amendments extended the exception to include family operated establishments which only employ persons other than members of the immediate family infrequently, irregularly, and sporadically. (See general discussion in part 776 of this chapter.)
Electronically FiledIntermediate Court of AppealsCAAP-11-000061423-APR-201201:29 PM
<PAGE>

                       SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

                              WASHINGTON, DC 20549

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

                                  FORM 10-KSB/A

                                   (Mark One)

   /X/ ANNUAL REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
       1934.

                  For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003.


                                       OR


 /   / TRANSITION REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
     ACT OF 1934.

          For the transition period from _____________ to _____________


                        Commission file number 011-15489

                                  EPIXTAR CORP.
                 (Name of Small Business Issuer in Its Charter)


            Florida                                              65-0722193
-------------------------------                              -------------------
(State or Other Jurisdiction of                               (I.R.S. Employer
Incorporation or Organization)                               Identification No.)

            11900 Biscayne Boulevard
                    Suite 262
                 Miami, Florida                                      33181
    ----------------------------------------                --------------------
    (Address of Principal Executive Offices)                      (Zip Code)

                                 (305) 503-8600
                         ------------------------------
                (Issuer's Telephone Number, Including Area Code)

Securities registered under Section 12(b) of the Exchange Act:

Title of Each Class                    Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered
----------------                       -----------------------------------------
  Not Applicable                                    Not Applicable

Securities registered under Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act:

Common Stock, par value $0.001 per share

Check whether the issuer: (1) filed all reports required to be filed by Section
13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act during the past 12 months (or for such shorter
period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for past 90 days. Yes X    No
                                                         ---     ---
3/26/2004


                                                                               1
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16

- 30827 Summary Calendar

KEITH SMEATON , Plaintiff

- Appellant

v. ALAN NELSON; RON SANDERS; WARDEN FEDERAL DETENTION CENTER OAKDALE; WILLIAM H. FURNIA; DAVID WESTBERG; EDWARD MOSS; CHARLES A. WIEGAND, III; H.S. OTT; DAVID JOHNSTON; THOMAS HETRICK; NORMAN CARLSON; FOY; STEVEN MARTIN; JOSEPH WILLIAMS; UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT , Defendant s
- Appellee s

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 2:86

- CV

- 3333

Before KING, ELROD, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
Keith Smeaton , former federal prisoner # 75242

- 011, appeals the district court’s denial of his postjudgment motion for relief from the May 14, 1987 dismissal of his civil rights complaint. Smeaton’s Federal Rule of Civil

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED May 16, 2018 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 16-30827 Document: 00514475412 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/16/2018No. 16

- 30827

2 Procedure 59(e) motion was filed more than 28 y ears after the entry of the judgment. Consequently, the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the Rule 59(e) motion as untimely. See F ED

. R. C IV

. P. 59 (e); Quinn v. Guerrero , 863 F.3d 353, 360 (5th Cir. 2017), cert. denied , 138 S. Ct. 68 2 (2018).
To the extent the motion should have been tr eated as a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) motion , it was also untimely. See F ED

. R. C IV

. P. 60(c)(1) ; Quinn , 863 F.3d at 360 n.1; Travelers Ins. Co. v. Liljeberg Enterprises, Inc. , 38
F. 3d 1404 , 1410 (5th Cir. 1994). Finally, t o the extent the motion should have been treated as a motion for a ruling on the Rule 59(e) motion filed on May 15, 1987, Smeaton cannot show that the district court’s denial of the motion was an abuse of discretion , see Quinn , 863 F.3d at 360 , and he has abandoned any challenge to the basis of the district court’s dismissal of his complaint, see Yohey v. Collins , 985 F.2d 222, 224

- 25 (5th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. Smeaton’s

mot ions to supplement the record on appeal and for the appointment of appellate counsel, a waiver of the visa requirement, and financial assistance
with travel costs are DENIED. Case: 16-30827 Document: 00514475412 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/16/2018