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

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4 Engrossed Amendment Senate (EAS)]

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

                  In the Senate of the United States,

                                May 18 (legislative day, May 14), 1999.
      Resolved, That the bill from the House of Representatives (H.R. 
4) entitled ``An Act to declare it to be the policy of the United 
States to deploy a national missile defense.'', do pass with the 
following

                               AMENDMENT:

            Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``National Missile Defense Act of 
1999''.

SEC. 2. NATIONAL MISSILE DEFENSE POLICY.

    It is the policy of the United States to deploy as soon as is 
technologically possible an effective National Missile Defense system 
capable of defending the territory of the United States against limited 
ballistic missile attack (whether accidental, unauthorized, or 
deliberate) with funding subject to the annual authorization of 
appropriations and the annual appropriation of funds for National 
Missile Defense.

SEC. 3. POLICY ON REDUCTION OF RUSSIAN NUCLEAR FORCES.

    It is the policy of the United States to seek continued negotiated 
reductions in Russian nuclear forces.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
106th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                H. R. 4

_______________________________________________________________________

                               AMENDMENT
```
#### SARAH M. COOK, Respondent, *v.*THE UNITED STATES EXPRESS COMPANY, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Tompkins county, in favor of the plaintiff, entered on the verdict of a jury, and from an order of this court, denying a new trial, upon a motion certified into this court.

This action was brought to recover the value of certain articles *273claimed to have been taken from a trunk of the plaintiff while in the possession of the defendant. The judgment was reversed on the ground that the plaintiff, was allowed to testify to statements made to her by a man at a depot, to the effect that he was an agent of the company, which in fact he was not, and also on the ground that the verdict was against the weight of evidence.

*Marcus Lyon,*for the appellant.

*John A. Williams,*for the respondent.

Opinion by

James J.

Present — Learned, P. J., Boardman and James, JJ.

Judgment reversed and new trial granted, costs to abide the event.
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

 Southern District of Florida

Antionette Smith, individually and on behalf of all 

others similarly situated,

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

 

 Plaintiff(s)

 v. Civil Action No.

The Coca-Cola Company,

 Defendant(s)

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

 To: (Defendant’s name and address) The Coca-Cola Company

c/o The Corporation Trust Company

1209 N Orange St

Wilmington DE 19801-1120

A lawsuit has been filed against you.

 

 Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you_

are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ._ 

P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of 

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney, 

whose name and address are: The Wright Law Office, P.A., 515 N Flagler Dr Ste P-300 West Palm Beach FL 

33401, (561) 514-0904

 If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint._

You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

CLERK OF COURT

 

 Date:

 Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

Case 0:22-cv-61643-RS Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/02/2022 Page 1 of 2
 AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No.

 PROOF OF SERVICE

(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))

This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)

was received by me on (date) .

 I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

on (date) ; or

 I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name)

, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,

on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or

 I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is

designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)

on (date) ; or

 I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

 Other (specify):

 My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ .

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.

Date:

Server’s signature

Printed name and title

Server’s address

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

Case 0:22-cv-61643-RS Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/02/2022 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 22-CR-20521-RNS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

vs.

THEODORE FARNSWORTH, and 

J. MITCHELL LOWE, 

Defendants.

 /

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE

The undersigned Assistant United States Attorney, Emily R. Stone, hereby appears as cocounsel for the United States of America regarding any forfeiture issues in the above-styled case.

Respectfully submitted,

MARKENZY LAPOINTE

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

By: /s/ Emily R. Stone 

Emily R. Stone

Assistant United States Attorney

Florida Bar No. 092077

99 N.E. 4th Street, 7th Floor

Miami FL, 33132-2111

Telephone: (305) 961-9407

E-mail: Emily.Stone@usdoj.gov

Case 1:22-cr-20521-DSL Document 140 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2024 Page 1 of 1
Editorial Note on Part 101-8
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 101-8 appear at 68 FR 51374, Aug. 26, 2003.

§ 101-8.724 Exhaustion of administrative remedies. ( a ) A complainant may file a civil action following the exhaustion of administrative remedies under the Act. Administrative remedies are exhausted if: ( 1 ) 180 calendar days elapse after the complainant files the complaint and GSA makes no finding with regard to the complaint; or
( 2 ) GSA Issues a finding in favor of the recipient.
( b ) If GSA fails to make a finding within 180 days or issues a finding in favor of the recipient, GSA must: ( 1 ) Promptly advise the complainant of this fact;
( 2 ) Advise the complainant of his or her right to bring civil action for injunctive relief; and
( 3 ) Inform the complainant: ( i ) That the complainant may bring civil action only in a United States district court for the district in which the recipient is located or transacts business;
( ii ) That a complainant prevailing in a civil action has the right to be awarded the costs of the action, including reasonable attorney's fees, but that the complainant must demand these costs in the complaint;
( iii ) That before commencing the action the complainant must give 30 calendar days notice by registered mail to the Secretary, HHS, The Administrator, the Attorney General of the United States, and the recipient;
( iv ) That the notice must state the alleged violation of the Act, the relief requested, the court in which the complainant is bringing the action, and whether or not attorney's fees are demanded in the event the complainant prevails; and
( v ) That the complainant may not bring an action if the same alleged violation of the Act by the same recipient is the subject of a pending action in any court of the United States.
§ 762.31 Disbursement postal money orders issued to deceased payees. ( a ) If the Disbursement Postal Money Order is endorsed by an Executor or Administrator and presented for payment by a bank it will be paid by the Postal Service without submission to the Postal Service of documentary proof of the authority of the Executor or Administrator.
( b ) If an Executor or Administrator has not been appointed or if there is doubt as to whether the proceeds of the Disbursement Postal Money Order pass to the estate of the deceased payee, the instrument should be returned to the Money Order Division, Postal Data Center, P.O. Box 14963, St. Louis, MO 63182, for determination whether, under applicable laws, payment is due, and for reissuance to the appropriate payee.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-6732

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

ARTHUR SEAN WARNER,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at 

Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, Senior District Judge. (1:14-cr-00081-IMK-JES-1; 1:15-cv00164-IMK-JES)

Submitted: October 26, 2017 Decided: November 15, 2017

Before AGEE and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Arthur Sean Warner, Appellant Pro Se. Zelda Elizabeth Wesley, Assistant United States 

Attorney, Clarksburg, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Arthur Sean Warner seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the 

recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on Warner’s 28 U.S.C. § 2255 

(2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a 

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of 

appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional 

right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, 

a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that 

the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. 

McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 

(2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must 

demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion 

states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Warner has not made 

the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the

appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

DISMISSED
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5366 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5366

            To abolish the Council on Environmental Quality.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 3, 2000

 Mr. Dingell introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                         Committee on Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
            To abolish the Council on Environmental Quality.

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

SECTION 1. COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ABOLISHED.

    (a) In General.--The Council on Environmental Quality is abolished.
    (b) Conforming Amendment.--The National Environmental Quality Act 
of 1969 is amended by striking sections 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 
and 208 (42 U.S.C. 4342-4346b).
                                 <all>
```
i"i'ilE. .J t.. ........ C'" E'·· "iV· 1 r' E···· .U ~ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION JON 23lml, 

I,fEARING DOCKET 

In the matter of 

. GOJET AIRLINES, LLC 

(VD GEAR PINS) 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

FAA Docket No. CP10CE0003 

DMS No. FAA-2010-0025 

WITHDRAWAL OF NOTICE OF APPEAL 

Complainant hereby withdraws its Notice of Appeal previously filed on May 21, 

2011, and corrected on June I, 2011. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Dated: June21,2011 

Peter Lynch 

Assistant Chief Counsel 

for Enforcement 

By: ----=:~======:=-:====..c_ Charles Raley, Attorney 

Enforcement Division, AGC-300 

Office of the Chief Counsel 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Phone: (202) 267-3357 

Facsimile: (202) 267-5106 
Certificate of Service 

I hereby certify that on this date I have placed in the U.S. mail and by facsimile, a 

copy of Complainant's Withdrawal of Notice of Appeal In the Matter a/GaJet Airlines, 

LLC, Docket No. CPlOCE0003, addressed to: 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin 

Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

East Bldg. Ground Floor, Room E12-320 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, DC 20590 

Facsimile: 202-366-7536 

In addition, I hereby certify that on this date I have sent by the U.S. mail one copy 

of the foregoing document to: 

David J. A. Hayes, II, Esq. 

Vice President & General Counsel 

Trans State Airlines Inc. 

11495 Natural Bridge Rd., Suite 303 

Bridgeton, MO 63044 

In addition, I hereby certify that on this date I have sent by the U.S. mail the 

original and one copy of the foregoing document to: 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building - Suite 2Wl 000 

Dated: June 21, 2011
Editorial Note on Part 3005
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 3005, formerly part 3003, appear at 70 FR 48277, Aug. 17, 2005.

§ 3005.102 Definitions. For purposes of this part: ( a ) *Commission* means the Postal Regulatory Commission.
( b ) *Individual, record,* and *system of records* have the meanings specified in 5 U.S.C. 552a(a).
( c ) *Day* means a calendar day and does not include Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays.
[64 FR 57982, Oct. 28, 1999, as amended at 72 FR 33165, June 15, 2007. Redesignated at 85 FR 9615, Feb. 19, 2020]
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, 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.

August 26, 2014 

# Order

August 2 6 , 2014

148674 ( 76 )

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN

, Plaintiff

- Appell ee

,

v

SHAWQUANDA BOROM

, Defendant

- Appell ant

. SC: 148674

COA: 313750

Wayne CC: 12

- 004559

- FC

________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of the plaintiff

- appell ee to extend the

time to file its supplemental brief on the leave application is GRANTED. The

supplemental brief submitted on August 7 , 2014 , is accepted for filing.
### ^MmMHelAAml Uel of Thh tmd±. Fi&r J\ismtr/touroh'AoPEfib 30/ F*ritJnd 3-/~£££/ Ikuibh*; fy Wfidci- M6> JtjAir/LcQa/S'
BLED INJLSX,C0Ua£0&APf>EAfcSHOUSTON, TEXAS -m 15 ZUIb —6HfBST8PHERTt-PRINfc CLERK, 

## /fe' LudtMlikik doULjs^MiltM, TmiAml^s^A shMlt LubLhOFAfiPtdi fllo-1 01-IS'M2lidL Tii^/AujHm^aL /^g£g 57V/&J/ JoUiJ I^^^LH/mai (A. TL ^mzdFrtZAs

bite. 

### Aem Ml il FdILuHiMQ SLEA&fl- of'/aus Crffde {n£s£gMmjLdjJ^JmM^L /2g/7^ m&m 

### Jutiz QL M5~~ *JaJ iJtrtMMiE i& %4 aLml mmJML d&i.. s^*. 

### P/sQ5£ Mfiku Akk.'Mra MdUiliM wz tbjzSjisEs.* hfo uhdMmiil V IL^\i^>c iiir^fi-. u\iujg=. j'/rn jic i v, edLSL&Ut •"" '< Cfaw&fafeO£fc '-"-"^»1_<:/_'.J—' *' ' *-<-« *-~^' t Alas ; 

### ^g /£!/ AnjuLhjfl8A»J 3uMdJAIJ))sT{lJcT&nd- of/f/IM/s AunT/Jti A$e//aaTs



## 76 Paj/ JmLMdt£>*>hA hml£ i^AuMJdMexhd. fi&a&Ajo L£jm&s^A JjtaiAAad. 

## fkuls fawnpj rt> ^JW^y/r/^/Wc {mm. J-^^J/a-^/j t <(^7t(b^s AJd^Loa/Jaj/j£/v1A^*J fiJgBWxL a f/&?5,£AhWiJ MSJMmeJ/AfeA/ t/Zuc/f Zv%0*£y 

# J^^^^^ZS^lMl&mm

tfruyhn 71 -lidoSi 

## ~WNeHARRIS COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE JAIL Name: </£>/&/ /:J&dlU
.SkMetAJ

SPN: 62n4733<J Cell: £T&S Street: /Qpd QtiEzg. STJU&T HOUSTON, TEXAS 77002

r "received" IFIRST COURT OFAPPFA/c; I HOUSTON, TEXASI ' JUN 1 5 2015 LCLERKST°PHER A- PR,NE f'JORlTJ 'HOUSTON i:x:?.



### ILtlmJoPilEl A.AihJe, f/sAJC

LLtnk &F Ths f'outr FiksttilSTfttlfbdiZTOt~APfeAf&

!*'OC'22C>&&33 j,hI,,'IiIi,Ii,'IiIi,iIii'i",iI»,,p,iIiII,»»,hMI,,i»I,m.i,«
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 118 (Monday, June 19, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37980-37981]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-15334]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request Child Care Subsidy 
Application--Provider

AGENCY: Office of Child Care, GSA.

ACTION: Notice of request for approval of a new information collection 
entitled Child Care Subsidy Application--Provider.

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

SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 
(44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), GSA has submitted to the Office of Management 
and Budget (OMB) a request to review and approve a new information 
collection concerning Child Care Subsidy Application--Provider. An 
emergency review was requested by OMB and notice was published in the 
Federal Register at 65 FR 24698, April 27, 2000. OMB approved the 
emergency collection and assigned OMB Control No. 3090-0275.
    The proposed information collection activity is for approval of the 
form for implementation of a GSA child care subsidy for lower income 
GSA employees in accordance with provisions of the Office of Personnel 
Management Rules and Regulations 5 CFR Part 792, Agency Use of 
Appropriated Funds for Lower Income Employees. The rule was published 
March 14, 2000. The form would verify the child care fees paid by 
federal employees to licensed child care providers so that providers 
could be paid a portion of those fees by GSA. The rule requires funds 
to subsidize lower income employees' child care rates be

[[Page 37981]]

given to child care providers rather than employees. The form will also 
request banking information so those child care providers can be paid 
via electronic funds transfer.

DATES: Submit comments on or before August 18, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect 
of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing 
this burden, should be submitted to: Marjorie Ashby, General Services 
Administration (MVP), 1800 F Street NW, Washington, DC 20405.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bonnie Storm, Office of Childcare, 
General Services Administration, 202-208-5119.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Purpose

    The purpose of this Notice is to consult with and solicit comments 
from the public concerning the proposed collection of information 
regarding GSA child care subsidy for lower income GSA employees.

B. Annual Reporting Burden

    Respondents: 50; annual responses: 50; average hours per response: 
.15; burden hours: 12.5.
    Copy of Proposal: A copy of this proposal may be obtained from the 
Office of Child Care. Room 6116, GSA Building, 1800 F Street NW, 
Washington, DC 20405, or by telephoning (202) 208-5119.

    Dated: June 12, 2000.
David A. Drabkin,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Acquisition Policy.
[FR Doc. 00-15334 Filed 6-16-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-61-M
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5417 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  2d Session

                               H. R. 5417

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

   To rename the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act as the 
              ``McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act''.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5417

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
   To rename the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act as the 
              ``McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    Section 1 of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act (42 
U.S.C. 11301 note; Public Law 100-77) is amended by striking subsection 
(a) and inserting the following new subsection:
    ``(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the `McKinney-Vento 
Homeless Assistance Act'.''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in any law, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless 
Assistance Act shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``McKinney-
Vento Homeless Assistance Act''.

            Passed the House of Representatives October 11, 2000.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```