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

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 8569 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 8569

To prohibit the use of Federal funds for a passenger motor vehicle or a 
  personal driver for the chief executive officer of the Metropolitan 
                       Transportation Authority.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 24, 2024

    Mr. Gottheimer (for himself and Mr. D'Esposito) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation 
                           and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To prohibit the use of Federal funds for a passenger motor vehicle or a 
  personal driver for the chief executive officer of the Metropolitan 
                       Transportation Authority.

    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 ``No Private Rides Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON CERTAIN USES OF FEDERAL FUNDS FOR CHIEF 
              EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION 
              AUTHORITY.

    No Federal funds may be used to provide the chief executive officer 
of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority a passenger motor vehicle 
or a personal driver.
                                 <all>
```
Before the Second Division,

October 16, 1950

No. 54752.

#### Henry Lauterbach *v.*United States,

protest 146171-K (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

The protest was dismissed.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

KEYVAN PARSA, 

 Appellant,

 

vs.

ALBERT FLORES, MONTOYA PARK 

PLACE, INC., AND WESTSTAR TITLE, 

LLC, FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE 

INSURANCE COMPANY,

 Appellees. 

§

§

§

§

§

 

No. 08-22-00239-CV

Appeal from the

327th Judicial District Court 

of El Paso County, Texas 

(TC# 2020DCV2997) 

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes the appeal should be 

dismissed for want of jurisdiction without prejudice. We therefore dismiss the appeal without 

prejudice. This decision shall be certified below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 28TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2022.

GINA M. PALAFOX, Justice

Before Rodriguez, C.J., Palafox, and Alley, JJ.
Document Headings

                    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 Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration 

          - [TA-W-60,566] 

Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c) an application for administrative reconsideration was filed with the Director of the Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance for workers at E*Trade Mortgage Corporation, including leased workers from Manpower and Radian, Coraopolis, Pennsylvania. The application did not contain new information supporting a conclusion that the determination was erroneous, and also did not provide a justification for reconsideration of the determination that was based on either mistaken facts or a misinterpretation of facts or of the law. Therefore, dismissal of the application was issued.

*TA-W-60,566; E *Trade Mortgage Corporation Including Leased Workers From Manpower and Radian, Coraopolis, Pennsylvania (March 15, 2007).*

Signed at Washington, DC, this 21st day of March 2007. 

Linda G. Poole, 

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. 

 [FR Doc. E7-5846 Filed 3-29-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-7451

RICKEY J. SHEPARD,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

DOCTOR PATE; DOCTOR HARD; WILLIAM R. WARDEN;

MICHAEL MOORE, Commissioner; DOCTOR RENTZ,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Dennis W. Shedd, District Judge.

(CA-95-2696-19-BD)

Submitted: January 23, 1997 Decided: February 5, 1997

Before RUSSELL, WILKINS, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Rickey J. Shepard, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Carson Thomas, BARNES,

ALFORD, STORK & JOHNSON, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on

his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint. We have reviewed the record

and the district court's opinion accepting the magistrate judge's

recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm

on the reasoning of the district court. Shepard v. Pate, No. CA-95-

2696-19-BD (D.S.C. Aug. 28, 1996). We dispense with oral argument

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in

the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-6117
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DWIGHT SHAFFER, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Charles H. Haden II, Chief District Judge. (CR-92-299-2, CA-96-599-2) Submitted: October 7, 1997 Decided: November 7, 1997 Before WILKINS and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dwight Shaffer, Ap pellant Pro Se. Michael Lee Keller, Victoria Boros Major, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find noreversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Shaffer , Nos. CR-92-299-2; CA-96-599-2 (S.D.W. Va. Oct. 30, 1996).We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
EXHIBIT 32 - CEO AND CFO CERTIFICATION


Exhibit 32.1

                     Statement Furnished Pursuant to
              Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

         The undersigned are the Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer of OBN Holdings, Inc. (the "Company").  This Certificate
is made pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
This Certification accompanies the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of
the Company for the quarter ended December 31, 2006 (the "10-QSB Report").

The undersigned certifies that the 10-QSB Report fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the 10-QSB Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company on the dates and for the periods
presented therein.


Date: May 30, 2007                        /s/ ROGER N. SMITH
                                       --------------------------------
                                           Roger N. Smith
                                           Chief Executive Officer

Date: May 30, 2007                       /s/ LARRY TAYLOR
                                      ---------------------------------
                                           Larry Taylor
                                           Chief Financial Officer
```

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 61 (Friday, March 30, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 15171]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-5887]

[[Page 15171]]

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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Advisory Committee for Engineering; Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub L. 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meeting:

    Name: Advisory Committee for Engineering (1170).
    Date/Time: April 19-20, 2007, 8:30 a.m.-5 p.m.
    Place: National Science Foundation, Room 375.
    Type of Meeting: Open.
    Contact Person: Deborah Young, Program and Management Analyst, 
Office of the Assistant Director for Engineering, 703-292-8301.
    Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice, recommendations and 
counsel on major goals and policies pertaining to engineering 
programs and activities.
    Agenda: The principal focus of the meeting will be a discussion 
of emerging issues and opportunities for the Directorate for 
Engineering and its divisions.

    Dated: March 27, 2007.
Susanne Bolton,
Committee Management Officer.
 [FR Doc. E7-5887 Filed 3-29-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
```
#### Fox *v.*Abbott.

— Motion for reargument and for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied.

Hardin, J., taking no part.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RECEIVED 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

MAR 2 6 20!4 --------------~~--~~--~~~--~-------------

In the Matter of Mountain Air Cargo, Inc. HEARING DOCKET 

2013EA680043 

Judge Not Assigned 

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE 

Complainant, Federal Aviation Administration, hereby notifies the United States 

Department of Transportation, Office of Hearings, and the Respondent, pursuant to 

14 C.F.R. §13.204(b), that it shall be represented in the above-stated action by the 

attorney listed below. All communications, notices, pleadings, or documents are 

respectfully requested to be forwarded as follows:: 

Zachary M. Berman 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Office of Regional Counsel 

1 Aviation Plaza 

Jamaica, NY 11434 

Telephone: 718 553-3258 

Facsimile: 718 995-5699 

Respectfully submitted, 

Alfred R. Johnson, Jr. 

Regional Counsel 

By: Dated: ""f{(l/{{ -----f, --'---1-, '---!-. --

Zachary 

Attorney 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certifY that on this day copies of the foregoing Notice of Appearance were 

placed in the United States mail, postage prepaid, Certified Mail - Return Receipt 

Requested addressed as follows: 

Mark A. Dombroff, Esq. 

McKenna Long & Aldridge 

1676 International Drive 

Penthouse 

McLean, VA 22102 

Federal Aviation Administration (Original and one copy) 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building- Room 2014 

~IF FILING BY FEDERAL EXPRESS 

Federal Aviation Administration (Original and one copy) 

600 Independence Avenue, SW 

Wilbur Wright Building- Room 2014 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Date:~------

LisiH' oks 

J 

Paralegal Specialist 

Office of Regional Counsel 

I Aviation Plaza 

Jamaica, NY 11434
Before the First Division,

May 26, 1960

No. 64237.

protests 59/23851 and 59/23612 (New York).

#### Frazar & Co., Inc., and J. C. Penney Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

*486Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that *the*. merchandise consists of valances similar in all material respects to those the subject of *D. N. & E. Walter & Co. et al.*v. *United States*(43 Cust. Ct. 26, C.D. 2098), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 8550 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 8550

 To provide for the prohibition on the use of United States passports 
      for travel to, in, or through the Turks and Caicos Islands.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 23, 2024

Mr. Ogles (for himself and Mr. Donalds) introduced the following bill; 
         which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To provide for the prohibition on the use of United States passports 
      for travel to, in, or through the Turks and Caicos Islands.

    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 ``Protecting Americans Against Lawless 
Foreign Territories Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION.

    Beginning 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and 
for a period of time not to exceed 90 days, all United States passports 
shall be invalid for travel to, in, or through the Turks and Caicos 
Islands, unless specially validated for such travel under the authority 
of the Secretary of State.

SEC. 3. RENEWAL OF PROHIBITION.

    The Secretary of State shall have the authority to extend the 
prohibition described in section 2 for periods of 90 days, renewable 
indefinitely.
                                 <all>
```
Third District Court of Appeal 

State of Florida 

Opinion filed December 26, 2018. 

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. 

________________ 

No. 3D17-1540 

Lower Tribunal No. 17-1559 

________________ 

Quentisa Wright, 

Appellant, 

vs. 

Tyson Tribble, 

Appellee. 

 An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Reemberto Diaz, 

Judge. 

 Law Office of Sean P. O'Connor, P.A., and Sean P. O'Connor, for appellant. 

 Bland Law, P.A., and Gerald R. Bland, for appellee. 

Before SALTER, EMAS, and LOGUE, JJ. 

 PER CURIAM. 

 Finding the Appellant failed to present specific facts to support a finding that 

the father “abused, abandoned, or neglected the child as defined in chapter 39,” § 
 2 

751.03(9), Fla. Stat. (2011), we affirm the trial court’s dismissal of the case. See In 

re A.M.M., 63 So. 3d 910, 913 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011) (order granting temporary 

custody to extended family member facially erroneous where court did not find by 

clear and convincing evidence that parent abused, abandoned, or neglected child as 

defined in chapter 39); In re T.H. v. Dep’t Children and Family Servs., 979 So. 2d 

1075, 1081 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (concluding evidence of involuntary abandonment 

by parent insufficient to terminate parental rights); Landinguin v. Carneal, 837 So. 

2d 525, 527 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (quoting § 751.05(3), Fla. Stat. (2001)) (“where 

one parent objects to the granting of custody, ‘the court shall grant the petition only 

upon a finding, by clear and convincing evidence, that the child’s parent or parents 

are unfit to provide the care and control of the child. In determining that a parent is 

unfit, the court must find that the parent has abused, abandoned, or neglected the 

child, as defined in chapter 39.’”). 

Affirmed.
ORDER

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

Nos. DA 21 - 0170 IN THE MATTER OF R.J.H. and K.H., Youths in Need of Care **ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant Father, L.H.’s, motion to consolidate, and good cause appearing therefore, Appellant’s motion is GRANTED and Cause Nos. 21 - 0170 and 21 - 0171 are hereby consolidated under Cause No. DA 21 - 0170 and henceforth captioned In the Matter of R.J.H. and K.H, Youths in Need of Care .

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 28 2021

06/28/2021
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v James Jones, Appellant.

[634 NYS2d 214]

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Eng, J.), rendered February 9, 1994, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree and unlawful imprisonment in the first degrée, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We reject the defendant’s contention that he was denied a fair trial by the admission of evidence indicating that the victim had been working for him as a prostitute at the time of her death. While evidence of uncharged crimes is generally inadmissible if proffered solely to establish criminal propensity *(see, People v Alvino,*71 NY2d 233), it may be introduced to demonstrate, as it was in the instant case, the defendant’s motive and intent to commit the crime charged *(see, People v Molineux,*168 NY 264; *see also, People v Ingram,*71 NY2d 474; *People v Allweiss,*48 NY2d 40), or to complete a witness’ narrative to assist the jury in its comprehension of the crime *(see, People v Hudy,*73 NY2d 40; *People v Mendez,*165 AD2d 751). Here, the court properly determined that the probative value of the challenged evidence outweighed its potential for prejudice *(see, People v Alvino, supra).*Bracken, J. P., Rosenblatt, Miller and Krausman, JJ., concur.
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-15-00512- CV
Edgar Rodriguez, Appellan t

v. Lynn O. Rodriguez, Appellee

F ROM TH E DISTRI CT COURT O F H AY S CO UNTY, 428 TH JUDICI AL DISTRICT NO. 14- 1600 , H ONO RAB LE B RENDA K. SMI TH, JUDGE P RESIDING

O R D E R
P ER CURIAM

The Clerk of this Court filed appellant’ s notice of appea l on Aug
. 12, 2015, and the cler k and repor

ter’s rec ords wer e due on September 8, 2015. On September 14, 2015, the Clerk of this Court sent notice to appellant that the rec ords wer e overdue and reque sted that appellant make
arr ang ement for pay

ment and submit a status repor t on o r b ef

ore September 24, 2015. Appellant filed a status repor

t with the Court, reque sting that the appea l be continued beca use a hearing befor e the district court was schedule d on October 22, 2015. We abate d the appea l, advised the parties that the appea l w ould be automatically reinstated on November 2, 2015, and direc ted the parties to f ile a status re port or motion to dism iss by that date. This appea l was reinstated on November 2, 2015. On that date, appellee filed a supplemental motion to dismiss on the g round that appellant had failed to pay for the rec ord or makearr ang ements to pay for it. Appellant filed a supplemental response to the motion to dismiss , asking

for twenty -one more day s to obta in the rec ords and seven day s to pr ovide docketing statement and fee s reque sted by this Court. Appellee has now filed a reply to the response , disputing appellant’ s portrayal of the fac ts a

nd repr esenting that appellant has not c ontacted the court repor ter reg arding the transc ript from the fina l hear ing in June 2015.

This Court order s that appellant’ s deadline to pa y for or make arr ang ements for the
rec ords is Dec ember 9, 2015. No further extensions will be g rante d. Appellant is direc ted to submit
a status repor

t with this Court by that date reg arding this appea l. I f appellant fails to do so, this Court will dism iss this appea l for wa nt of prosec ution. SeeTex. R. App. P . 37.3(b). I t is ordere d on November 24, 2015.
Be fore J ustices Pury ear , Goodwin, and B ourland

2
|    |                                                                                            |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Agenus Inc.; and |

|    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report. |

|        |
|--------|
|        |  |  |  |
| Date:  | June 3, 2015 |   | /s/    GARO H. ARMEN, PH.D.         |
|   |   |   | Garo H. Armen, Ph.D. |
|   |   |   | Chief Executive Officer |
#### Mary Salow, *Respondent, v.*The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, *Appellant.*

— Judgment affirmed, with costs. Opinion by Bookes, J.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of The First Marblehead Corporation (the Company) for the period ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), I, John A. Hupalo Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that, to my knowledge:

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

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

Dated: May 12, 2008



/s/ JOHN A. HUPALOJohn A. HupaloSenior Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
to The First Marblehead Corporation and will be retained by The First Marblehead Corporation and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon request.
Before the Second Division,

May 19, 1955

No. 59085.

protest 903323-G (Galveston).

#### Sinclair Refining Company v. United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of seamless steel oil-well casings similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *Winkler-Koch Engineering Co.*(41 C. C. P. A. 121, C. A. D. 540), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
## TECHNICAL SUPPORT DOCUMENT: ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM FOR COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT:

ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION TRANSFORMERS

July 2004

U.S. Department of Energy Assistant Secretary Office of Energy Efficien cy and Renewable Energy Building Technologies Program Appliances and Commercial Equipment Standards Washington, DC 20585This document was prepared fo r the Department of Energy by staff members of Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and Navigant Consulting, Inc.