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

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4259 Reported in Senate (RS)]

<DOC>

                                                       Calendar No. 622
118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4259

 To require the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study to assess 
  the suitability and feasibility of designating certain land as the 
        Lahaina National Heritage Area, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 2, 2024

  Ms. Hirono introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

                           November 21, 2024

                Reported by Mr. Manchin, with amendments
                  [Insert the parts printed in italic]

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To require the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study to assess 
  the suitability and feasibility of designating certain land as the 
        Lahaina National Heritage Area, 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. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Lahaina National Heritage Area Study 
Act''.

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

    In this Act:
            (1) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
        of the Interior.
            (2) State.--The term ``State'' means the State of Hawaii.
            (3) Study area.--The term ``study area'' means the census-
        designated place of Lahaina in Maui County in the State.

SEC. 3. LAHAINA NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA STUDY.

    The Secretary, in coordination with the County of Maui and in 
consultation with State and local historic preservation officers, State 
and local historical societies, State and local tourism offices, and 
other appropriate organizations and governmental agencies, shall carry 
out, in accordance with section 120103(a) of title 54, United States 
Code, a study to assess the suitability and feasibility of designating 
the study area as a National Heritage Area, to be known as the 
``Lahaina National Heritage Area''.
                                                       Calendar No. 622

118th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                                S. 4259

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 To require the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study to assess 
  the suitability and feasibility of designating certain land as the 
        Lahaina National Heritage Area, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                           November 21, 2024

                        Reported with amendments
```
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

**____________**
No. 23

- 60554 Summary Calendar

**____________ Jie Xu,** 

Petitioner **,**

versus
**Merrick Garland,** U.S. Attorney General **,** Respondent

**.**

**______________________________** Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A216 760 262

**______________________________** Before **Jolly, Willett**  **,** and **Engelhardt ,**  Circuit Judges

**. Per Curiam**  **:** *****
Jie Xu, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) upholding the immigration judge’s order of remova l and denying sua sponte reopening. He argues that he was not allowed a fair opportunity to file his I

- 589 application

**_____________________**

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See **5th Cir**

**. R** 

**.** 47.5. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED July 15, 2024 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 23-60554 Document: 59-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/15/2024No. 23

- 60554

2 for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture.

We review the BIA’s decision and consider the i mmigration judge ’s decision only to the extent it influenced the BIA

. Masih v. Mukasey , 536 F.3d 370, 373 (5th Cir. 2008). The BIA reasoned that even if the immigration judge erred by not specifically warning Xu about abandonment of his I

- 589 application and by finding that good cause for a continuance had not been shown, Xu failed to establish prejudice from any such errors because he had not shown that the outcome of his proceedings was materially affected.

Xu has not shown that the BIA erred in conclud ing that he failed to

meet his burden of demonstrating prejudice. See Matter of Sibrun , 18 I.&N. Dec. 354, 356

- 57 (BIA 1983)

. He has not explained the basis of his claims for relief from removal and ultimately has failed to show why the outcome of his

ca se would have been different had his proceedings continued. To the extent he argues that his right to due process was violated, the contention similarly is unavailing. See Santos

- Alvarado v. Barr , 967 F.3d 428, 439 (5th Cir. 2020 ) (recognizing that an initial showing of substantial prejudice is required to prevail on a due process claim). Lastly, we lack jurisdiction to review Xu’s challenge to the BIA’s denial of sua sponte regulatory reopening. The petition for review is **DISMISSE D**  in part for lack of jurisdiction and **DENIED** in all other respects. Case: 23-60554 Document: 59-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/15/2024
Welcome
 Training Module Topics Below are the training topics you need to prepare, submit and approve deposits in OTCnet. Click **Expand All** to view all resources for your role, or click the arrow next to a module to view the lesson(s) and resources. You can choose to view Web Based Training (WBT) modules, certificates are assigned for critical tasks and are noted by the certificate icon Certificate icon. You can also review Printable Job Aids (PJAs) and Videos that support your OTCnet user training.  Expand All
  GETTING STARTED MODULE 1: OTCNET OVERVIEW 1.1 OTCnet Overview
            PJA
            VideoOTCnet Overview
 MODULE 2: ACCESSING OTCnet Certificate icon2.1 Start and Stop the OTCnet Local Bridge (OLB) Application
            PJA
            VideoStart and Stop the OTCnet Local Bridge (OLB) ApplicationCertificate icon2.2 Request Your OTCnet AccessSelf-Register/Create an Account in SailPoint IIQRequest Your OTCnet Access in SailPoint IIQCertificate icon2.3 Log In to OTCnet OnlineLog In to OTCnet Online
 DEPOSIT PROCESSING MODULE 10: SEARCHING DEPOSITS Certificate icon10.1 Search for a Deposit
            PJA
            VideoSearch for a DepositDownload Search Results for a Deposit
 MODULE 11: VIEWING DEPOSITS Certificate icon11.1 View a Deposit
            PJA
            VideoView a Deposit
 MODULE 12: SEARCHING ADJUSTMENTS Certificate icon12.1 Search for and View an Adjustment
            PJA
            VideoSearch for and View an AdjustmentDownload Search Adjustment Results for a Deposit
 MODULE 13: PREPARING DEPOSITS Certificate icon13.1 Create and Modify a Deposit
            PJA
            VideoCreate a Deposit for US CurrencyCreate a Deposit for Foreign Currency CashCreate a Deposit for a Foreign Check ItemModify a Deposit
 MODULE 14: APPROVING DEPOSITS Certificate icon14.1 Approve or Return a Deposit to Draft
            PJA
            VideoApprove or Return a Deposit to Draft
 MODULE 17: VIEWING DEPOSIT PROCESSING AND HISTORICAL REPORTS 17.1 View a Business Report
            PJA
            VideoView Business Reports: Adjustment Activity (FI)View Business Reports: Adjustments by OTC EndpointView Business Reports: Daily Voucher ReportView Business Reports: Deposit Activity (FI)View Business Reports: Deposits by Accounting CodeView Business Reports: Deposits by OTC EndpointView Business Reports: Deposit History by StatusView Business Reports: Non-Reporting OTC EndpointsView Business Reports: Processing Options by OTC Endpoints17.3 View an Administration ReportView Administrative Reports: CIR File StatusView Administration Reports: View Vouchers CompletedView Administrative Reports: Vouchers in Progress17.4 View Historical ReportsDeposit Historical ReportAdjustment Historical ReportView Previously Generated Historical Reports
 Welcome
Exhibit 10.35

Date:    November 13, 2000

From:    Steven G. Singer

To:      G. Gerald Goldsmith

Re:      Patrick Gentile Bonus

Dear Gerry,

Subject to your approval, I have reached an agreement with Patrick Gentile
regarding bonuses covering 1999, 2000, the bankruptcy process, and future
incentive compensation. We have agreed that in 1999 and 2000, no personal
objectives were established, and that it is therefore impossible to assert that
they have been met. We have agreed that Pat's contributions to the restructuring
process have been significant, and deserving of bonus compensation. And we have
agreed that it is desirable to create a revised bonus structure for the future.

Therefore, we agree as follows:

     o    A one-time lump sum stay bonus of $75,000 will be paid presently.

     o    Starting January 1, 2001, Pat's employee loan will be forgiven over 3
          years, both as a bonus and as an offset of all claims asserted by him
          in the bankruptcy for earned but unpaid bonus in prior years.

     o    Pat will be included in the Restructuring Bonus Pool in an amount
          equal to $100,000, payable in the same manner and at the same time as
          all other pay-outs under the pool.

     o    Pat agrees that all future bonuses (including any contractual or
          Challenge 2000 bonus) will be replaced by any Compensation Committee
          approved "incentive bonus" program, at a target bonus level
          commensurate with other senior managers of the company.

          As previously discussed, I anticipate proposing a largely objective
          incentive-based bonus plan, which sets a target bonus for all senior
          employees, and determines the percentage of that target met based on
          objective criteria, plus a small discretionary component. For example,
          the plan might assign Employee X a 40% target bonus, based 1/4 on the
          company meeting budgeted EBITDA, 1/4 on meeting budgeted top line, 1/4
          on meeting budgeted cash flow, and 1/4 on discretionary factors.

          The plan might also include "super-achievement" objectives, for
          example awarding 150% of the EBITDA portion of the bonus if EBITDA
          exceeds budget by 25%.

Pat expressly waives any other claim for bonus compensation through December 31,
2000.

Except as set forth above, Pat's current Employment Agreement, which was
ratified by the Bankruptcy Court, will remain in full force and effect.

If you find this resolution acceptable, kindly indicate that below and authorize
the payment to Pat of $75,000 as soon as possible.

All the best,

S/S.Singer

AGREED:                                              AGREED:

                                                     S/Patrick Gentile

G. Gerald Goldsmith                                  Patrick Gentile
EXHIBIT 12.1



EARLE M. JORGENSEN COMPANY, INC.



STATEMENT OF COMPUTATION OF RATIO

OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES

(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS)



|                                                                    |  |                      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |        
|------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | -------------------- | ------- | - | ---- | - | ------- | ---- |  | - | -------
|                                                                    |  | Year Ended March 31,
|                                                                    |  | 2003                 |         |   | 2004 |   |         | 2005
|Income before income taxes                                          |  | $                    | (31,371 | ) |      | $ | (20,435 | )    |  | $ | 58,941 
|Fixed charges to be added back to earnings:                         |  |                      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |        
|Interest and debt expense, including capitalized interest           |  |                      | 83,345  |   |      |   | 90,147  |      |  |   | 75,800 
|Rentals (one-third of all rent and related costs charged to income) |  |                      | 7,219   |   |      |   | 7,434   |      |  |   | 7,103  
|                                                                    |  |                      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |        
|Total fixed charges                                                 |  |                      | 90,564  |   |      |   | 97,581  |      |  |   | 82,903 
|                                                                    |  |                      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |        
|Amortization of capitalized interest                                |  |                      | 13      |   |      |   | 39      |      |  |   | 47     
|Less capitalized interest                                           |  |                      | (464    | ) |      |   | (61     | )    |  |   |       
|                                                                    |  |                      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |        
|Earnings before income taxes and fixed charges                      |  | $                    | 58,742  |   |      | $ | 77,124  |      |  | $ | 141,891
|                                                                    |  |                      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |        
|Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                                  |  |                      | 0.65    |   |      |   | 0.79    |      |  |   | 1.71   
|Amount by which earnings are inadequate to cover fixed charges      |  | $                    | (31,822 | ) |      | $ | (20,457 | )    |  | $ |       
|                                                                    |  |                      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

OPTHALMIC IMAGING SYSTEMS,

a California corporation,

NO. CIV. S-04-482 LKK/DAD

Plaintiff,

v. O R D E R

MARK FUKUHARA, an individual;

DOUGLAS BURLAND, an individual;

MICHAEL GERKOVICH, an individual;

STEVEN LEACH, an individual;

EDMUND PETERSON, an individual;

DAN SALOMON, an individual; JOE

SILVA, an individual; DALE BRODSKY,

an individual; EYEPICTURES, INC., a

Missouri corporation; JUSTICE

OPTHALMICS, INC., a Tennessee

corporation; ZETA DEVELOPMENT LABS,

INC., a Tennessee corporation; and

JOHNNY JUSTICE, JR., an individual,

Defendants.

 /

On October 25, 2005, the court ordered defendant Joe Silva 

to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed for his

failure to appear at a Status Conference held in chambers on

Case 2:04-cv-00482-LKK -DAD Document 189 Filed 11/17/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

October 24, 2005. The court is in receipt of defendant Silva’s

response. Good cause being shown, the order to show cause is

discharged. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: November 16, 2005.

/s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

LAWRENCE K. KARLTON

SENIOR JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case 2:04-cv-00482-LKK -DAD Document 189 Filed 11/17/05 Page 2 of 2
# sec5_snc_2020

&L&"Arial"&10&BBulletin No. 2020-21	&"Arial,Bold"&10V SNC - &P	&R&"Arial"&10&BAugust 2020
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-28-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-28-1996
<CASH>                                          94,164
<SECURITIES>                                   169,476
<RECEIVABLES>                                  510,654
<ALLOWANCES>                                     9,873
<INVENTORY>                                    299,700
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,110,585
<PP&E>                                       1,513,716
<DEPRECIATION>                                 697,510
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,174,195
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          569,682
<BONDS>                                        260,008
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         4,750
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,198,905
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,174,195
<SALES>                                     12,538,753
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            12,538,753
<CGS>                                       12,095,171
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               12,095,171
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               120,674
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,373
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                319,535
<INCOME-TAX>                                   120,800
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            198,735
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   198,735
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.07
        

</TABLE>
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

IN AND FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KEVIN B. JOHNSON,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-04-0892 DFL DAD P

vs.

JIM HAMLET, Warden, et al.,

Respondents. ORDER

 /

Petitioner is a state prisoner represented by appointed counsel. On December 28,

2004, the court granted petitioner’s request for 150 days in which to file a motion for leave to

amend and a proposed amended petition. Four extensions of time have been granted. By order

filed August 30, 2005, petitioner was granted an extension to September 22, 2005, to file his

motion or, in the alternative, a statement that he will proceed on his original pro se petition. The

September 22, 2005 deadline has passed, and petitioner has not filed a motion for leave to

amend, a statement that he will proceed on his original petition, or a request for a fifth extension

of time.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. A status conference is set for December 2, 2005, at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom

#27;

Case 2:04-cv-00892-MCE -DAD Document 35 Filed 10/21/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

2. On or before November 28, 2005, petitioner shall file and serve either 

(a) a statement that petitioner will stand on his existing petition, together

with any supplemental points and authorities petitioner wishes to offer in

support of the existing petition;

or

(b) a motion for leave to amend, accompanied by a proposed amended

petition;

3. At the status conference, the parties shall be prepared to discuss the scheduling

of all further proceedings relative to petitioner’s statement or motion; and

4. Any party may appear at the status conference telephonically upon making

proper arrangements. To arrange telephonic appearance, a party shall contact Pete Buzo,

courtroom deputy to the undersigned, at (916) 930-4128, no later than 48 hours prior to the status

conference.

DATED: October 21, 2005.

DAD:13

john0892.ossc

Case 2:04-cv-00892-MCE -DAD Document 35 Filed 10/21/05 Page 2 of 2
1

No. 14-14-00825-CV

______________

IN THE 

COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE 

FOURTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

at Houston 

______________

INWOOD FOREST COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, 

Appellants 

v.

TOAN VAN NGUYEN, ET AL 

Appellees 

Appealed from the 165th Judicial District Court

Harris County, Texas 

ROBERT BURCHFIELD’S

NOTICE REGARDING APPELLEE’S BRIEF

Steven D. Poock 

State Bar Number 00794473 

P.O. Box 984 

Sugar Land, Texas 77487 

Tel. (281) 277-7678

Fax (281) 277-7679

spoock@juno.com 

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE ROBERT BURCHFIELD 

ACCEPTED

14-14-00825-CV

FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS

7/1/2015 3:28:32 PM

CHRISTOPHER PRINE

CLERK

 FILED IN 14th COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 7/1/2015 3:28:32 PM CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE Clerk
2

ROBERT BURCHFIELD’S

NOTICE REGARDING APPELLEE’S BRIEF

COMES NOW Robert Burchfield, Appellee herein, and shows the Court the 

following:

1. Robert Burchfield adopts the factual analysis and legal argument in 

Appellee’s brief previously filed with this Court, and will NOT be filing a separate brief 

apart from Appellee’s. 

Respectfully Submitted,

 /s/ Steven Poock

_______________________

Steven Poock

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing has been served on all parties on this 

the 1

st day of July, 2015.

 /s/ Steven Poock

_______________________

Steven Poock
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                                          EXHIBIT 12


                                                             MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED CAPITAL TRUST V
                                                              MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED FUNDING V, L.P.
                                                               COMPUTATION OF RATIOS OF EARNINGS TO
                                                   COMBINED FIXED CHARGES AND PREFERRED SECURITIES DISTRIBUTIONS
                                                                    (dollars in thousands)


                                             FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED               FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED
                                                  MARCH 29, 2002                           MARCH 30, 2001
                                         ----------------------------------       ----------------------------------
                                          MERRILL LYNCH      MERRILL LYNCH         MERRILL LYNCH      MERRILL LYNCH
                                            PREFERRED          PREFERRED             PREFERRED          PREFERRED
                                         CAPITAL TRUST V    FUNDING V, L.P.       CAPITAL TRUST V    FUNDING V, L.P.
                                         ---------------    ---------------       ---------------    ---------------
<S>                                        <C>                <C>                   <C>                <C>
Earnings                                    $ 15,949           $ 18,665              $ 15,949           $ 18,736
                                            ========           ========              ========           ========



Fixed charges                               $      -           $   -                 $      -           $      -

Preferred securities distribution
  requirements                                15,470             15,949                15,470             15,949
                                            --------           --------              --------           --------

Total combined fixed charges and
  preferred securities distributions        $ 15,470           $ 15,949              $ 15,470           $ 15,949
                                            ========           ========              ========           ========

Ratio of earnings to combined
  fixed charges and preferred
  securities distributions                      1.03               1.17                  1.03               1.17




</TABLE>