alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Drew Christensen State Representative District 56A Dakota and Scott Counties

May 14,2015 The Honorable Anthony R. Foxx Secretary ofTransportation The HonorableJohn F. Kerry Secretary ofState The Honorable Penny Priztker Secretary ofCommerce COMMITTEES: AGING AND LONG-TERM CARE POLICY EDUCATION FINANCE EDUCATION INNOVATION POLICY HIGHER EDUCATION POLICY AND FINANCE

Dear Secretary Foxx, Secretary Kerry and Secretary Pritzker, 

# Minnesota House of Representatives

Delta Air Lines employs 12,000 people in my home state of Minnesota and operates over 456 daily flights out of Minneapolis, serving 145 non-stop destinations. Our state depends on their service and investmentfor economic prosperity, ourfamilies depend on Delta forwork and travel, and our business community relies on Delta to offer convenientflights in orderto attract investors and new business. Unfortunately, Qatar and the UAE have distorted the airline market in theirfavor by providing over $40 billion in subsidies and unfair benefits over the lastten years to their state-owned carriers: Qatar Airways, Etihad Airways and Emirates Airline. Their rapid expansion and blatant disregard for the Open Skies agreement each country signed withthe United States is having a negative spillover effect on U.S carriers. For example, Gulfcarriers are offering incredibly lowair fares that are significantly below market value because they have thefinancial cushion they need to do so. Not only is this bad business, but it's a clear violation ofrules laid out in Open Skies agreements that Qatar and UAE signed ten years ago with the United States. Fair, market-based competition is the premise behind Open Skies agreements, and up untilthis pointthey have served us well. Because oftheir practices and market-distortion I am respectfully asking thatyou open consultations with the Gulf nations and call for afreeze on new capacity while the consultations are ongoing. Open Skies will onlywork ifeveryone honors their side ofthe bargain. Delta is playing butthe rules, whywon't Qatar and the UAE? Sincerely,

# ~seJn~Ml't};~-:;;~~::=:> State Representative

State Office Building, 100 Rev. Dr.**Ma~in** Luther King Jr. Blvd. St.**Pa~l,** Minnesota 55155-129,8,_

_____ _ Email: rep.drew.christensen@house.mn (651)**296~4212**
<PAGE>

                                EXHIBIT (10)(b)


                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
<PAGE>

                        Consent of Independent Auditors



We consent to the reference to our firm under the captions "Financial
Information" and "Accountants and Financial Statements" in the prospectus and to
the use of our reports (1) dated March 14, 2001 with respect to the statutory-
basis financial statements and schedules of Transamerica Life Insurance Company
of New York and (2) dated February 2, 2001 with respect to the subaccounts of
Separate Account VA-2LNY which are available for investment by contract owners
of the Dreyfus/Transamerica Triple Advantage Variable Annuity, included in Post-
Effective Amendment No. 14 to the Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 33-55152)
and related Prospectus of Dreyfus/Transamerica Triple Advantage Variable
Annuity.


                                               Ernst & Young, LLP


Des Moines, Iowa
April 24, 2001
The Honorable Mark W. Bennett, United States District Judge for the Northern 1 District of Iowa, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable John A. Jarvey, United States Magistrate Judge for the Northern District of Iowa. United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________ No. 96-2464

_____________ Michael Mark Lomax, * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Susan Van Amerongen, sued as * Northern District of Iowa. Nurse Sue Van Amorrongen; David D. * DeMoss, sued as C-O David De Moss; * [UNPUBLISHED] George R. Laningham, sued as C-O * George Lanagham, * * Appellees. *

_____________ Submitted: April 29, 1997 Filed: May 9, 1997

_____________ Before BOWMAN, WOLLMAN, and BEAM, Circuit Judges.

_____________ PER CURIAM. Michael M ark Lomax appeals from the District Court's dismissal, following a 1 hearin g, of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (West 1994) action, which was based upon a priso n nurse's alleged failure to provide Lomax with an ice pack for his knee while Lomax was-2-

housed at the Iowa Men's Reformatory. Upon review of the record and the parties ' submissions, we conclude that the dis missal of this suit was correct. The facts show, at most, a negligent delay in providing Lomax with an ice pack and not deliberate indifference to a serious medical need. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of th e District Court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
No. 59104.

protests 188142-K, etc. (New York).

#### Baeff & Vesely, Inc., and W. J. Byrnes & Co. of N. Y., Inc., et al.,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of lambskin plates the same in all material respects as those the subject of *A. S. Gold & Bro., Inc.,*v. *United States*(33 Cust. Ct. 120, C. D. 1643), the claim for free entry under paragraph 1681 was sustained.

Ford, J., concurred.

Mollison, J.,

dissented for the reasons set forth in his dissenting opinion in C. D. 1643, *supra.*
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 8592 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 8592

   To amend title 38, United States Code, to increase the amount of 
educational assistance paid by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to an 
  eligible individual during the first year of a full-time program of 
                apprenticeship or other on-job training.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              June 3, 2024

 Mr. Van Orden (for himself and Mrs. Dingell) introduced the following 
     bill; which was referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend title 38, United States Code, to increase the amount of 
educational assistance paid by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to an 
  eligible individual during the first year of a full-time program of 
                apprenticeship or other on-job training.

    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 ``Warriors to Workforce Act''.

SEC. 2. INCREASE OF AMOUNT OF EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE PAID BY THE 
              SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS FOR FIRST YEAR OF A FULL-
              TIME PROGRAM OF APPRENTICESHIP OR OTHER ON-JOB TRAINING.

    Section 3313(g)(3)(B) of title 38, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) in the matter preceding clause (i), by inserting 
        ``using educational assistance under this chapter''; and
            (2) in clause (i)(II), by striking ``80 percent'' and 
        inserting ``90 percent''.
                                 <all>
```
#### L. Bamberger & Co. *v.*United States

No. 6312.

Entry No. N-588, etc.

Invoices dated London, England, April 29, 1942, etc.

Certified April 29, 1942, etc.

Entered at Newark, N. J., May 23, 1942, etc.

(Decided July 29, 1946)

*Strauss & Hedges*for the plaintiff.

*Paul P. Rao,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Keefe, Judge:

These appeals for reappraisement have been submitted for decision upon tbe following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> ‘ It is hereby stipulated and agreed, subject to the approval of the court, that the merchandise consisting of earthenware and chinaware and the issues in the appeals for reappraisement listed in the attached schedule are the same in all material respects as the merchandise and issues decided in *United States*v. *Wm. S. Pitcairn Corp.,*Suit No. 4513, C. A. D. 334, and that the record in said case may be incorporated herein.

> It is further stipulated and agreed that the appraised value of the merchandise consisting of earthenware and chinaware involved in each of the cases enumerated in the attached schedule, less the additions made by the importer on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases, is equal to the price, at the time of exportation of such' merchandise to the United States, at which such or similar merchandise is freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, and that the foreign value of such or similar merchandise is no higher.

> It is further stipulated and agreed that these cases may be submitted on the foregoing stipulation.

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the earthenware and chinaware here involved, and that such values are the appraised values, less the additions made by the importer on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases. Insofar as the appeals relate to all other merchandise they are hereby dismissed.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
7032

#### LITTLE v. BARKSDALE.

Injunction — Election.'—This Court will not enjoin a special election when parties complaining have a plain and adequate remedy at law by contest before board of canvassers and no property rights are involved.

Petition in the original jurisdiction of this Court by J. W. Little *et al.*against C. D. Barkesdale *et al.,*election commissioners of Laurens county, to enjoin them from holding a special election on question of maintaining county dispensaries in Laurens county in connection with the general election of 1908.

The allegation upon which the petitioners rested their case was that the supervisor of Laurens county was in error when he held that the petitions asking him to order such special election were signed by one-fourth of the qualified electors of the county. This allegation in the petition was denied in the return, and the petition was also demurred to, on the ground that the petitioners had a plain and adequate remedy by contest before board of canvassers.

*Messrs. Cannon & Blackwell,*for petitioners.

*Messrs. Simpson, Cooper & Rabb, Ferguson & Feather-stone*and *W. R. Richey,*contra.

*393October 17, 1908.

Per Curiam.

After hearing the petition for injunction, and affidavits in support thereof, the Court is of opinion that the petitioners have a plain and adequate remedy at law and that no property rights are involved justifying the interference of this Court with the election by injunction.

It is, therefore, ordered that the demurrer be sustained and the petition dismissed.

Mr. Justice Gary *did not sit in this case.*
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7086

WILLIAM E. ALTON, III, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus POLLY A. SOCKS, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (CA-98-2761-AW) Submitted: November 8, 2001 Decided: November 16, 2001 Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William E. Alton, III, Appellant Pro Se. Randolph Stuart Sergent, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* Alton, who was represented by counsel in the district court, failed to file objections to the magistrate judge’s report in the time afforded him by the district court, waiving review of the magistrate judge’s report by both the district court and this court. See Wells v. Shriners Hosp. , 109 F.3d 198, 200-01 (4th Cir. 1997). Notwithstanding this failure, the district court conducted a de novo review and denied relief on the merits. 2 PER CURIAM:William E. Alton, III, appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2001) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation, made after an evidentiary hearing, and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. * See Alton v. Socks, No. CA-98-2761-AW (D. Md. filed May 30, 2001; entered May 31, 2001). 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
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

STEPHEN AND ELAINE BALDWIN, :

:

Plaintiffs, : Case No. 2:10-cv-01144

: 

v. : JUDGE ALGENON L. MARBLEY

: 

: 

ZIMMER, INC., ET AL, :

:

Defendant. :

ORDER

Pursuant to this Court’s August 19, 2011, Order granting Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss,

Plaintiffs were given thirty (30) days to file an amended complaint. Thirty days have now

expired, and Plaintiffs have not filed an amended complaint with the Court. Therefore, the case

is hereby dismissed with prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED

 s/Algenon L. Marbley 

ALGENON L. MARBLEY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Dated: September 27, 2011

1

Case: 2:10-cv-01144-ALM-EPD Doc #: 16 Filed: 09/27/11 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: <pageID>
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 4.6.1


SCHEDULE IDENTIFYING SUBSTANTIALLY IDENTICAL AGREEMENT(S)  TO EXHIBIT 4.6
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Indenture of Trust, Mortgage and Security Agreement (T2), dated as of August 17,
2000, between Joliet Trust II and the United States Trust Company of New York,
as Lease Indenture Trustee.

This Indenture of Trust, Mortgage and Security Agreement differs from Exhibit
4.6 in the following respects:

                  In the Lessor Notes section (2.2), the initial aggregate
         principal amounts of the Series A and Series B Lessor Notes are
         $57,270,000 and $125,410,000, respectively.

                  In the Miscellaneous section (7.16), the maximum principal
         amount of the Lessor Notes secured by this indenture is $211,738,800.



                                        1
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.16


                           GTECH HOLDINGS CORPORATION
              SUPPLEMENTAL RETIREMENT PLAN FISCAL 2001 PARTICIPANTS
                              (A FISCAL YEAR PLAN)


David Calabro
Howard Cohen *
Marc A. Crisafulli *
Stephen Davidson
Jean-Pierre Desbiens
James Hosker
Kathleen McKeough
William Middlebrook
Jaymin Patel
William Pieri
Robert Plourde
Antonio Carlos Rocha *
Donald Stanford
Donald Sweitzer
W. Bruce Turner

* Eligible for participation after close of fiscal 2001.
|                                                                                                                                                                            |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                                                                                                                                                 |
| OutlineCreditsAcknowledgmentsIntroductionPDFOrder FormHome**1. Erythematosus2. Advances3. Tests4. Care5. Medications6. Psychosocial Aspects7. Patient Info.8. Resources**       |
| National Institute of Arthritis and         Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (NIAMS)National Institutes of Health (NIH)        Bethesda, Maryland 20892-2350

January 26, 1999 |
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-7232 

In re: DERWIN COLES,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. 

(2:04-cv-01151)

Submitted: December 21, 2006 Decided: January 3, 2007

Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Derwin Coles, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Derwin Coles petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging

the district court has unduly delayed acting on his 28 U.S.C.

§ 2255 (2000) motion. He seeks an order from this court directing

the district court to act. Our review of the district court’s

docket sheet reveals that the district court denied Coles’ § 2255

motion on July 20, 2006. Accordingly, because the district court

has recently decided Coles’ case, we deny the mandamus petition as

moot. We grant Coles’ motion to proceed in forma pauperis. 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. 

PETITION DENIED
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                                   AS ADDED BY
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Coast Financial Holdings,
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Gerald L.
Anthony, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as added by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

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

2.       To my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly
         presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
         of operations of the Company as of and for the period covered by the
         Report.

Date: December 31, 2003               By: /s/ Gerald L. Anthony
                                          --------------------------------------
                                              Gerald L. Anthony, President and
                                              Chief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 33.1







REPORT ON ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE WITH SERVICING CRITERIA


FOR ASSET-BACKED SECURITIES






Dated March 29, 2012




Entergy Arkansas, Inc. (the “Servicer”), as a party participating in the servicing function under Item 1122 of Regulation AB, hereby reports on its assessment of compliance with the servicing criteria specified in paragraph (d) of Item 1122 of Regulation AB, as follows:




(1) The Servicer is responsible for assessing compliance with the servicing criteria applicable to it. The servicing criteria specified in the following paragraphs of paragraph (d) of Item 1122 of Regulation AB are not applicable to the Servicer based on the activities it performs with respect to asset-backed securities transactions taken as a whole involving the Servicer and that are backed by the same asset type backing the Senior Secured Storm Recovery Bonds: (1)(ii) (outsourcing), (1)(iii) (back-up servicing), (1)(iv) (fidelity bond), 2(iii) (advances or guarantees), (2)(vi) (unissued checks), (4)(iii) (additions, removals or substitutions), 4(v) (records regarding pool assets), (4)(ix) (adjustments to interest rates), (4)(x) (funds held in trust for an obligor), (4)(xi) (payments on behalf of obligors), (4)(xii) (late payment penalties), (4)(xiii) (obligor disbursements), (4)(xv) (external credit enhancement);




(2) The Servicer used the criteria in paragraph (d) of Item 1122 of Regulation AB to assess compliance with the applicable servicing criteria;




(3) The Servicer has determined that it is in compliance with the applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ending December 31, 2011, which is the period covered by this report on Form 10-K; and




(4) Deloitte & Touche LLP, a registered public accounting firm, has issued an attestation report on the Servicer's assessment of compliance with the applicable servicing criteria as of December 31, 2011, which is the period covered by this report on Form 10-K.








Entergy Arkansas, Inc., as servicer




By:  /s/ Theodore H. Bunting, Jr.


Name:   Theodore H. Bunting, Jr.


Title:     Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer
#### Economy Cabs, Inc., v. Georgia Kirkland, *et vir.*

176 So. 151.

Division A.

Opinion Filed September 22, 1937.

*Austin Miller,*for Plaintiff in Error;

*Ralph K. Roberts*and *Bedell & Bedell,*for Defendant in Error.

Per Curiam.

On rehearing in this cause, a reargument

was granted and the case has been carefully re-examined but we find no reason to recede from or modify our former opinion filed'February 1, 1937. It is accordingly reaffirmed on rehearing.

Affirmed.

Ellis, C. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.

Whitfield, P. J., and Brown and Chapman, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
No. 38942.

#### Protest 441892-G of Abraham & Straus, Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

From the record it was found that certain items consist ,of articles in chief value of cellulose filaments similar to those involved in Abstract .37230. The claim at 60 percent under paragraph 31 was therefore sustained.
Exhibit 32.1

Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

The undersigned hereby certifies that,
to his or her knowledge, (i) the Form 10-Q filed by New Century Bancorp, Inc. (the Issuer) for the quarter ended March 31, 2008, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii) the information contained in that report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer on the dates and for the periods presented therein.



|                   |  |     |  |                                      
|------------------ |  | --- |  | -------------------------------------
|Date: May 15, 2008 |  | By: |  | /s/ William L. Hedgepeth II          
|                   |  |     |  | William L. Hedgepeth II              
|                   |  |     |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 8841 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.8841

                     One Hundred Eighteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
         the third day of January, two thousand and twenty-four

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
  114 Center Street East in Roseau, Minnesota, as the ``Floyd B. Olson 
                             Post Office''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. FLOYD B. OLSON POST OFFICE.
    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 114 Center Street East in Roseau, Minnesota, shall be known 
and designated as the ``Floyd B. Olson Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Floyd B. 
Olson Post Office''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```