alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Corporation for National and Community Service Board of Directors

Resolution Recognizing Wendy Spencer

WHEREAS, Wendy Spencer has served with great dedication and distinction as Chief 

Executive Officer of the Corporation for National and Community Service from April 9, 2012 

through January 20, 2017; and 

 

WHEREAS, Wendy Spencer has been a consistent, constant, positive, and spirited 

champion of national service, volunteering, and social innovation; and 

WHEREAS, Wendy Spencer has energized and strengthened CNCS leadership and 

overseen a renewed emphasis on oversight and accountability; and 

WHEREAS, Under Wendy Spencer’s leadership and as co-chair of the President’s Task 

Force on Expanding National Service, CNCS has launched new partnerships creating more than 

10,000 opportunities for individuals serve in AmeriCorps programs including FEMA Corps, 

School Turnaround AmeriCorps, STEM AmeriCorps, and Financial Opportunity Corps; and

WHEREAS, Wendy Spencer has increased the agency’s focus on veterans and military 

families; expanded support for Native American communities, and overseen the national service 

response for many severe disasters; and 

WHEREAS, Wendy Spencer has strengthened connections to state and local elected 

officials, including implementing the annual Mayor and County Recognition Day for National 

Service, which last year engaged 3,539 bipartisan local leaders representing 178 million 

Americans in recognizing the value of Senior Corps and AmeriCorps; and

WHEREAS, Under Wendy Spencer’s leadership, the local matching support and outside 

resources exceeded the agencies annual federal appropriation, increasing the impact of agencies 

in communities and demonstrating strong support at the local level for national service; and 

WHEREAS, Wendy Spencer has been an eloquent and passionate champion for service 

and volunteering among our nation’s leaders; therefore, 

 

BE IT RESOLVED, this 15th day of February, 2017, that the Board of Directors for the 

Corporation for National and Community Service, with great respect and affection, gratefully 

recognizes the outstanding contributions of Wendy Spencer and wishes her well in her future 

endeavors. 

Shamina Singh

Chairwoman

Approved on February 15, 2017

Resolution 2017-01
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 687 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 687

  To abolish the Special Reserve of the Savings Association Insurance 
   Fund and to repeal the provision which would have established the 
 Special Reserve of the Deposit Insurance Fund had section 2704 of the 
           Deposit Insurance Funds Act of 1996 taken effect.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 10, 1999

Mrs. Roukema (for herself and Mr. Vento) introduced the following bill; 
 which was referred to the Committee on Banking and Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To abolish the Special Reserve of the Savings Association Insurance 
   Fund and to repeal the provision which would have established the 
 Special Reserve of the Deposit Insurance Fund had section 2704 of the 
           Deposit Insurance Funds Act of 1996 taken effect.

    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 ``Deposit Insurance Funds Amendments 
Act of 1999''.

SEC. 2. ABOLITION OF SPECIAL RESERVE FUNDS.

    (a) Special Reserve of the SAIF.--Section 11(a)(6) of the Federal 
Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1821(a)(6)) is amended by striking 
subparagraph (L).
    (b) Special Reserve of the Deposit Insurance Fund.--Section 2704 of 
the Deposit Insurance Funds Act of 1996 is amended--
            (1) by striking subsection (b);
            (2) by striking paragraph (4) of subsection (d);
            (3) in subsection (d)(6)(C)(i), by striking ``(6) and (7)'' 
        and inserting ``(5), (6), and (7)''; and
            (4) by striking clause (ii) of subsection (d)(6)(C) and 
        inserting the following new clause:
                            ``(ii) by redesignating paragraph (8) as 
                        paragraph (5).''.
    (c) Effective Date.--This section and the amendments made by this 
section shall be deemed to have taken effect on December 31, 1998.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>   5
       
<S>                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             DEC-29-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                  SEP-29-1996
<CASH>                                             24,638
<SECURITIES>                                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     194,559
<ALLOWANCES>                                            0
<INVENTORY>                                       330,213
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  586,012
<PP&E>                                            504,313
<DEPRECIATION>                                    156,143
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  1,196,333
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             153,331
<BONDS>                                           226,372
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                             0
<COMMON>                                              886
<OTHER-SE>                                        620,843
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    1,196,333
<SALES>                                           930,675
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  930,675
<CGS>                                             766,793
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     766,793
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  9,901
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    10,279
<INCOME-TAX>                                        3,801
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 6,478
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                        6,478
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         .08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         .08
        

</TABLE>
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________ 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff(s)

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant(s)

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendant’s name and address)

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:

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 9:22-cv-81868-XXXX Document 1-4 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/01/2022 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 9:22-cv-81868-XXXX Document 1-4 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/01/2022 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 21.1





Subsidiaries of the Company



PainCare, Inc.

PainCare Management Services, Inc.

PainCare Surgery Centers, Inc.

PainCare Real Estate Advisors, Inc.

Advanced Orthopaedics of South Florida II, Inc.

Rothbart Pain Management Clinic, Inc.

Pain and Rehabilitation Network, Inc.

Medical Rehabilitation Specialists II, Inc.

PainCare Acquisition Company V, Inc.

PainCare Acquisition Company VI, Inc.

Health Care Center of Tampa, Inc.

PainCare Acquisition Company VIII, Inc.

PainCare Acquisition Company IX, Inc.

PainCare Acquisition Company X, Inc.

PainCare Acquisition Company XI, Inc.

Georgia Surgery Centers, Inc.

PainCare Acquisition Company XII, Inc.

PainCare Acquisition Company XIII, Inc.

PainCare Acquisition Company XIV, Inc.

PainCare Acquisition Company XV, Inc.

PainCare Acquisition Company XVI, Inc.

PainCare Acquisition Company XVII, Inc.

PainCare Acquisition Company XVIII, Inc.

PainCare Acquisition Company XIX, Inc.
EXHIBIT 21



Subsidiaries of the Registrant



|                                      |  |                                            |  |                     |  
|------------------------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------ |  | ------------------- | -
|                                      |  | State or OtherJurisdiction ofIncorporation |  | PercentageOwnership |  
|Parent                                |  |                                            |  |                     |  
|Patapsco Bancorp, Inc.                |  | Maryland                                   |  |                    |  
|                                      |  |                                           
|Subsidiary (1)                        |  |                                            |  |                     |  
|The Patapsco Bank                     |  | Maryland                                   |  | 100                 | %
|                                      |  |                                           
|Subsidiaries of The Patapsco Bank (1) |  |                                            |  |                     |  
|PFSL Holding Corp.                    |  | Maryland                                   |  | 100                 | %
|Prime Business Leasing                |  | Maryland                                   |  | 100                 | %
|Patapsco Financial Services, Inc.     |  | Maryland                                   |  | 100                 | %

---

|(1) | The assets, liabilities and operations of the subsidiaries are included in the consolidated financial statements contained in the Annual Report to Stockholders attached hereto as
Exhibit 13.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5288 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5288

 To amend part C of title XVIII of the Social Security Act to increase 
 the minimum payment amount to Medicare+Choice organizations offering 
 Medicare+Choice plans to correct inequities in amounts paid in rural 
                            and urban areas.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 25, 2000

Mr. Sherwood (for himself, Mr. Peterson of Pennsylvania, and Mr. Minge) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
  Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Commerce, 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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend part C of title XVIII of the Social Security Act to increase 
 the minimum payment amount to Medicare+Choice organizations offering 
 Medicare+Choice plans to correct inequities in amounts paid in rural 
                            and urban areas.

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

SECTION 1. INCREASING FLOOR TO 75 PERCENT OF MAXIMUM RATE.

    Section 1853(c)(1)(B) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-
23(c)(1)(B)) is amended--
            (1) in clause (ii), by striking ``For a succeeding year,'' 
        and inserting ``For 1999 and 2000,''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following new clause:
                            ``(iii) For 2001 and each succeeding year, 
                        75 percent of the largest annual 
                        Medicare+Choice capitation rate under this 
                        paragraph for any Medicare+Choice payment area 
                        for the year involved (but not to exceed, in 
                        the case of an area outside the 50 States and 
                        the District of Columbia, 150 percent of the 
                        annual per capita rate of payment for 1997 
                        determined under section 1876(a)(1)(C) for the 
                        area).''.
                                 <all>
```
steam_record - Re: ICR Deadline Extension Request - Big Rivers Electric Corporation 

 

Greetings, 

This e-mail is a confirmation that your extension request for the steam electric effluent 

guidelines questionnaire was received. Extension requests will be evaluated on a case-by-case 

basis. Please be aware that submittal of an extension request to EPA does not alter the due date

of your questionnaire unless and until EPA agrees to the extension and establishes a new date.

Sincerely, 

-----Mark Bertram <Mark.Bertram@bigrivers.com> wrote: ----- 

To: Jezebele Alicea/DC/USEPA/US@EPA 

From: Mark Bertram <Mark.Bertram@bigrivers.com> 

Date: 06/30/2010 03:13PM 

Subject: ICR Deadline Extension Request - Big Rivers Electric Corporation 

Alicea,

From: <Alicea.Jezebele@epamail.epa.gov>

To: Mark Bertram <Mark.Bertram@bigrivers.com>

Date: 7/2/2010 7:32 PM

Subject: Re: ICR Deadline Extension Request - Big Rivers Electric Corporation

Page 1 of 2

file://C:\Documents and Settings\TMedley\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4C2E3EC7D... 4/14/2011
Attached is a letter requesting a 60-day extension to the current ICR Questionnaire deadline for all Big Rivers 

facilities. It should be noted that HMP&L Station Two is owned by the City of Henderson, but operated by Big 

Rivers Electric Corporation.

Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions or concerns.

Sincerely,

Mark W. Bertram

Environmental Supervisor

Big Rivers Electric Corporation

201 Third Street

Henderson, Kentucky 42420

(270) 844-6176

(270) 869-7815 cell

The information contained in this transmission is intended only for the person or entity to which it is directly addressed or copied. It may contain 

material of confidential and/or private nature. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this 

information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is not allowed. If you receive this message and the information contained therein 

by error, please contact the sender and delete the material from your/any storage medium. 

[attachment "ICR Extension Request.pdf" removed by Jezebele Alicea/DC/USEPA/US] 

Page 2 of 2

file://C:\Documents and Settings\TMedley\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4C2E3EC7D... 4/14/2011
#### § 101-29.212 Tailoring.

*Tailoring* is a process by which the individual requirements (sections, paragraphs or sentences) or product descriptions are evaluated to determine the extent to which each requirement is most suitable for a specific acquisition and the modification of these requirements, where necessary, to ensure that each document invoked achieves and optimal balance between operational needs and costs.
DOT 36-13

Monday, April 22, 2013

Contact: Bill Mosley

Tel.: (202) 366-4570

DOT Reviewing Request for Moratorium of Tarmac Delay Rule

The U.S. Department of Transportation is currently reviewing a motion filed by two airline 

industry associations, Airlines for America (A4A) and the Regional Airline Association (RAA), 

requesting a moratorium of the tarmac delay rule in light of sequestration-related furloughs by

the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The request was received on Friday, April 19. 

The Department will consider the views of all interested parties. Any party that would like its 

views on the issue considered may submit correspondence regarding the request to the 

docket. Correspondence should be submitted by April 26, at 5:00 p.m. The request is available 

on www.regulations.gov, docket DOT-OST-2013-0084.

####
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 22-cv-24118-BLOOM/Otazo-Reyes

WINDY LUCIUS,

Plaintiff,

v.

SUSHI BY BOU GLOBAL, LLC.,

doing business as Sushi by Bou,

Defendant.

______________________________/

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon the Notice of Voluntary Dismissal, ECF No. [8] 

(“Notice”), filed on February 24, 2023. The Court has carefully reviewed the Notice, the record in 

this case, and is otherwise fully advised. Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as 

follows:

1. The Notice, ECF No. [8], is APPROVED and ADOPTED;

2. The above-styled case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;

3. Each party shall bear its own attorneys’ fees and costs;

4. To the extent not otherwise disposed of, all pending motions are denied as MOOT

and all deadlines are TERMINATED;

5. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.

Case 1:22-cv-24118-BB Document 9 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/27/2023 Page 1 of 2
Case No. 22-cv-24118-BLOOM/Otazo-Reyes

2

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, on February 24, 2023.

_________________________________

BETH BLOOM

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copies to: Counsel of Record

Case 1:22-cv-24118-BB Document 9 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/27/2023 Page 2 of 2
#### §§ 102-74.80-102-74.95 [Reserved]
#### § 102-37.195 Does a SASP have to have a donee in mind to request surplus property?

Generally yes, you should have a firm requirement or an anticipated demand for any property that you request.
§ 105-57.010 Financial hardship. ( a ) A debtor whose wages are subject to a wage withholding order under this part, may, at any time, request a review by GSA of the amount garnished, based on materially changed circumstances such as disability, divorce, or catastrophic illness which result in financial hardship.
( b ) A debtor requesting a review under paragraph (a) of this section shall submit the basis for claiming the current amount of garnishment results in a financial hardship to the debtor, along with supporting documentation.
( c ) If a financial hardship is found, GSA will downwardly adjust, by an amount and for a period of time agreeable to the Agency, the amount garnished to reflect the debtor's financial condition. GSA will notify the employer of any adjustments to the amounts to be withheld.
*

 This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines

of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. This court generally

disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment

may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

** After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this three-judge panel

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not be of material assistance

in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9.

The cause is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

F I L E D

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

JUL 2 1998

PATRICK FISHER

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

vs.

EARL GENE RAMSEY,

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 97-3330

(D.C. No. 97-CR-40016)

(D. Kan.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

Before PORFILIO , KELLY , and HENRY , Circuit Judges. **

Mr. Ramsey appeals from his conviction of possession of a firearm by a

convicted felon in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). He was sentenced to 87

months, followed by three years of supervised release. Our jurisdiction arises under

28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Mr. Ramsey’s sole issue on appeal is the sufficiency of the evidence. He
- 2 -

contends that the evidence is insufficient to establish constructive possession of the

firearm because the officers testifying at trial presented mutually exclusive accounts

of Mr. Ramsey’s relationship to the firearm that was discovered.

To prove a violation of § 922(g)(1), the government was required to show

Mr. Ramsey’s knowing possession of a firearm. See United States v. Capps , 77 F.3d

350, 352 (10th Cir.), cert. denied , 518 U.S. 1027 (1996). Although the government

may rely upon actual or constructive possession, see United States v. Taylor , 113

F.3d 1136, 1144-45 (10th Cir. 1997), the evidence in this case when viewed in the

light most favorable to the government was sufficient for a rational trier of fact to

find actual possession beyond a reasonable doubt--that Mr. Ramsey had physical

control over a firearm, and dropped it on the ground prior to being apprehended.

Merely because one of the officers from a different vantage point did not observe

Mr. Ramsey concealing or dropping a firearm did not preclude the jury from

believing the other officer who so testified.

 Contrary to Mr. Ramsey’s position, the issue is whether a reasonable jury

could have found possession beyond a reasonable doubt, not whether the evidence

in this case is consistent with both innocence and guilt. See United States v. Hooks ,

780 F.2d 1526, 1530-31 (10th Cir.), cert. denied , 475 U.S. 1128 (1986). Moreover,

conflicts in the officers’ testimony about other matters, i.e., who handcuffed Mr.

Ramsey and whether a magazine was inserted in the firearm, were for the jury to
- 3 -

consider in deciding credibility and such conflicts are presumed to have been

resolved in favor of the prosecution. See Jackson v. Virginia , 443 U.S. 307, 326

(1979).

AFFIRMED.

Entered for the Court

Paul J. Kelly, Jr.

Circuit Judge