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

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 269 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 269

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That, in the enrollment of the bill H.R. 1585, the Clerk of the House 
of Representatives shall make the following corrections:
            (1) In the table in section 2201(a)--
                    (A) strike ``Alaska'' in the State column and 
                insert ``Alabama''; and
                    (B) in the item relating to Naval Station, 
                Bremerton, Washington, strike ``$119,760,000'' in the 
                amount column and insert ``$190,960,000''.
            (2) In section 2204(b)--
                    (A) in paragraph (2), strike ``Hawaii'' and insert 
                ``Hawaii)'';
                    (B) in paragraph (3), strike ``Guam'' and insert 
                ``Guam)''; and
                    (C) add at the end the following new paragraph:
            ``(4) $71,200,000 (the balance of the amount authorized 
        under section 2201(a) for a nuclear aircraft carrier 
        maintenance pier at Naval Station Bremerton, Washington).''.
            (3) In section 2703--
                    (A) insert ``(a) Authorization of Appropriations.--
                '' before ``Funds'';
                    (B) in paragraph (4), strike ``$2,107,148,000'' and 
                insert ``$2,241,062,000''; and
                    (C) add at the end the following new subsection:
    ``(b) General Reduction.--The amount otherwise authorized to be 
appropriated by subsection (a) is reduced by $133,914,000.''.

            Passed the House of Representatives December 12, 2007.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
110th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                            H. CON. RES. 269

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

  Directing the Clerk of the House of Representatives to correct the 
                   enrollment of the bill H.R. 1585.
```
IV 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 242 

Recognizing the two year anniversary of the earthquake that occurred in 

northern Pakistan in 2005 and urging the United States to continue 

to support rebuilding efforts in Pakistan in response to the conditions 

caused by that earthquake. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 25, 2007 

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas (for himself, Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas, Mr. 

PAYNE, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. PASCRELL, Mr. MCGOVERN, and 

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Recognizing the two year anniversary of the earthquake that 

occurred in northern Pakistan in 2005 and urging the 

United States to continue to support rebuilding efforts 

in Pakistan in response to the conditions caused by that 

earthquake. 

Whereas on October 8, 2005, a magnitude 7.6 earthquake 

struck northern Pakistan; 

Whereas more than 73,000 people were killed as a result of 

the earthquake; 

Whereas immediately following the earthquake, nearly 

3,000,000 people were left homeless and forced to live in 

tents or in the open air amid freezing temperatures; 


bajohnson on PRODPC61 with BILLS
2 

•HCON 242 IH 

Whereas the earthquake damaged sanitation systems in the 

region, destroyed hospitals, and left many people with no 

access to clean drinking water, making them more vulnerable to disease; 

Whereas the response of the United States to the earthquake 

was immediate and massive: within 72 hours after the 

earthquake, the Disaster Assistance Response Team 

(DART) of the United States Agency for International 

Development had established a headquarters in 

Islamabad and forward operating bases in Muzaffarabad 

and Mansehra in the North-West Frontier Province of 

Pakistan to help coordinate disaster relief operations; 

Whereas since the earthquake, the United States Government 

has provided emergency shelter, relief supplies, and medical assistance in close coordination with the Government 

of Pakistan, local authorities, and international organizations; 

Whereas 2 years after the earthquake, more than 6,000 people are still without permanent shelter; and 

Whereas within 48 hours after the earthquake, the first 

United States Army helicopters arrived from Afghanistan 

to assist in disaster relief operations: Now, therefore, be 

it 

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 

2 concurring), That Congress urges the United States Gov3 ernment to continue to support rebuilding efforts in Paki4 stan in response to the conditions caused by the earth5 quake that occurred in northern Pakistan on October 8, 

6 2005. 

Æ 


bajohnson on PRODPC61 with BILLS
# Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed August 12, 2015

. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D14-2 326

Lower Tribunal No. 85- 3768

________________



### Leonardo T. Morales,

Petitioner,

vs.



### The State of Florida, et al.,

Repondents.

On the Court’s Order to Show Cause.

Leonardo T. Morales, in proper person.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Keri T. Joseph, Assistant Attorney

General, for respondents.

Before SHEPHERD, EMAS and SCALES, JJ.

PER CURIAM.On June 3, 2015, this Court issued an opinion denying Leonardo T.

Morales’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Our opinion contained an order to

show cause why Morales should not be prohibited from filing with this Court any

further pro se appeals, petitions, motions or other proceedings related to his

criminal sentence in circuit court case number 85-3768.

Morales responded by filing with this Court a motion for

rehearing/reconsideration, a response to the order to show cause, and a request for

a written opinion. In this omnibus submission, Morales again raises his contention

that his criminal sentence was illegal because his sentencing guidelines scoresheet

misidentified the primary offense (of the two crimes for which he was convicted).

Morales’s response raises no new information or argument for our

consideration. This matter is well settled on the merits. 1 Accordingly, we conclude

that Morales has not shown good cause to justify further pro se filings of appeals,

petitions, motions, or other proceedings with this Court.

We must balance Morales’s pro se right of access to courts with this Court’s

need to devote finite resources to legitimate appeals, recognizing the seriousness of

the sanction when the litigant is a criminal defendant. State v. Spencer

, 751 So. 2d

1 See, e.g., Morales v. State

, 73 So. 3d 775 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011) (Table) (affirming

the trial court’s findings on the merits upon Morales’s 3.800 motion to correct

illegal sentence).

247, 48 (Fla. 1999). After an order to show cause and an opportunity to respond, a

court may prevent such further filings. Id.

It is hereby ordered that the Clerk of the Court of the Third District Court of

Appeal shall refuse further filings related to case number 85-3768; provided,

however, that filings related to case number 85-3768 may be accepted by the Clerk

if such filings have been reviewed and signed by an attorney who is a licensed

member of the Florida Bar in good standing.

Any further and unauthorized pro se filings by Morales will subject him to

sanctions, including the issuance of written findings forwarded to the Florida

Department of Corrections for consideration by it for disciplinary action, pursuant

to section 944.279(1) of the Florida Statutes.

The motion for rehearing is denied.

Order issued.

3
Case No. 8,066.

#### LANGLEY v. BRENT.

[3 Cranch, C. C. 365.] 3

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

Dec. Term, 1828.

Set-Off — Identity op Parties.

A debt due by two joint debtors to two joint creditors cannot be set off as against a debt due by one of the joint creditors to one of the joint debtors.

Assumpsit on the defendant’s promissory note to the plaintiff. Langley and King rented a wharf from Brent and Pierson in 1822; Langley and King dissolved their partnership in 1824, indebted to Brent and Pier-son in the sum of $53. .

Mr. Morfit, for plaintiff.

Mr. Worthington, for defendant.

3

 [Reported by Hon. William Cranch, Chief Judge.]

THE COURT

decided that it could not be set-off in this action.
### Surface water supply of the United States, 1961-65, Part 3. Ohio River basin, Volume 3. Ohio River basin from Louisville, Kentucky to Wabash River

By: Water Resources Division, U.S. Geological Survey

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/wsp1909

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plate:  **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
- NGMDB Index Page:  **National Geologic Map Database Index Page**
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

No abstract available.

#### Study Area

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
### IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10
- 12
- 00084
- CV IN THE MATTER OF J.D ., A JUVENILE ,

From the 272nd District Court Brazos County, Texas Trial Court No. 280
- J
- 11

MEMORANDUM OPINION
J.D. was adjudicated for the offe nse of possession of marijuana. On January 31, 2012, the trial court entered a disposition order placing J.D on probation for twelve months. J.D. filed a notice of appeal seeking to appeal a pretrial ruling on his motion to suppress evidence. On May 11, 2012, this Court rec eived a letter from J.D.’s attorney notifying the Court that that the record was deficient because the testimony was insufficiently recorded. The parties informed this Court that they were working on a stipulation of evidence. On August 9, 2012, the Stat e notified the Court that the parties were unable to reach an agreement as to proposed findings of fact and that another
sup pression hearing would be held.In the Matter of J.D ., a Juvenile Page 2

On November 8, 2012, the parties filed a joint motion to dismiss the appeal. See
T EX
. R. A PP
. P . 4 2.1(a). Dismissal of this appeal would not prevent a party from seeking relief to which it would otherwise be entitled. The motion is granted , and the appeal is
dismissed.

AL SCOGGINS Justice Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Justice Scoggins Motion granted; appeal dismissed Opinion delivered and filed November 29, 2012 [CV06]
IN THE MISSOURI COURT OF APPEALS

HANDDOWN LIST OF OCTOBER 20, 2015

WESTERN DISTRICT

THE FOLLOWING CASES WERE AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 84.16(b)

AND ISSUED PER CURIAM

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

None

THE FOLLOWING CASES WERE AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 30.25(b)

AND ISSUED PER CURIAM

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

WD77505 State of Missouri vs. Vincent D Gulley
No. 62072.

#### Bonniers, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 238083-K (New York).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of furniture similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Davies Turner & Co.*v. *United States*(45 C. C. P. A. 39, C. A. D. 669), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Before the Third Division,

November 30, 1950

No. 54905.

#### Leacock & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 130715-K (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

It was stipulated that the Federal Reserve bank certified dual rates of exchange for the currency involved in the liquidation of the entry for the date of exportation of the merchandise covered by the entry and that the circumstances relating to the liquidation of the said entry are similar in all material respects to those in Abstract 54732. In view of this stipulation and following the cited decision it was held that the currency of the invoice should have been converted in the manner directed by the judgment of this court in said Abstract 54732, in accordance with Bureau of Customs Circular Letter No. 2675, dated October 19, 1949.
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-17-00348-CR

No. 02-17-00349-CR

KEVIN BRIAN MORRIS APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE

----------

FROM THE 371ST DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

TRIAL COURT NOS. 1512506D, 1516801W

----------

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

----------

Appellant Kevin Brian Morris attempts to appeal from two judgments

convicting him of theft under $2,500 with two or more previous convictions. Each 

trial court certification states that this “is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant 

has NO right of appeal.” See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). On November 17, 

2017, we notified Morris that the appeals may be dismissed pursuant to the trial 

 

1See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2

court’s certifications unless he or any party desiring to continue the appeals filed 

a response showing grounds for continuing the appeals. See Tex. R. App. P. 

25.2(d), 44.3. Morris filed a response, but it does not show grounds for 

continuing the appeals. Therefore, in accordance with the trial court’s 

certifications, we dismiss these appeals. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f).

PER CURIAM

PANEL: MEIER, GABRIEL, and KERR, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED: December 28, 2017
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsA manned-machine space station construction conceptA design concept for the construction of a permanent manned space station is developed and discussed. The main considerations examined in developing the design concept are: (1) the support structure of the station be stiff enough to preclude the need for an elaborate on-orbit system to control structural response, (2) the station support structure and solar power system be compatible with existing technology, and (3) the station be capable of growing in a systematic modular fashion. The concept is developed around the assembly of truss platforms by pressure-suited astronauts operating in extravehicular activity (EVA), assisted by a machine (Assembly and Transport Vehicle, ATV) to position the astronauts at joint locations where they latch truss members in place. The ATV is a mobile platform that is attached to and moves on the station support structure using pegs attached to each truss joint. The operation of the ATV is described and a number of conceptual configurations for potential space stations are developed.Document ID19840011327Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsMikulas, M. M., Jr.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA, United States)*Bush, H. G.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA, United States)*Wallsom, R. E.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA, United States)*Dorsey, J. T.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA, United States)*Rhodes, M. D.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 4, 2013Publication DateFebruary 1, 1984Subject CategorySpacecraft Design, Testing And PerformanceReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.15:85762NASA-TM-85762Accession Number84N19395Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 506-53-43-01Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19840011327.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
2.4389729999999910
0.0
0.0
-2.4389729999999910
667058.23303529085
4083681.1171557843
EXHIBIT 21

                           SUBSIDIARIES OF REGISTRANT

US LEC of North Carolina Inc. (North Carolina Corporation)

US LEC of Georgia Inc. (Delaware Corporation)

US LEC of Tennessee Inc. (Delaware Corporation)

US LEC of Florida Inc. (North Carolina Corporation)

US LEC of South Carolina Inc. (Delaware Corporation)

US LEC of Alabama Inc. (North Carolina Corporation)

US LEC of Maryland Inc. (North Carolina Corporation)

US LEC of Pennsylvania Inc. (North Carolina Corporation)

US LEC Communications Inc. (North Carolina Corporation)

US LEC of Virginia L.L.C. (Delaware Limited Liability Company)
No. 53799.

petition 6743-R (Tampa).

#### Delia Failde *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

The record disclosed that prior to entry the purchaser requested the petitioner herein, who is a customhouse broker, to make entry of the merchandise. In an endeavor to ascertain the correct value of the merchandise, the broker questioned the purchaser and was informed that the entered value was the correct price paid for the goods. It further appeared that prior to entry the broker informed the purchaser that she had made entry of certain other machinery, which she believed to be similar to that imported, at a price higher than that given for the involved merchandise. The purchaser explained the difference in price by stating that possibly the machine covered by *225the other entry was built differently and that his machine did not have a hydraulic pump, which was to be purchased in this country. On the record presented it was held that the petitioner acted without intent to conceal or misrepresent the facts or to defraud the revenue of the United States or to deceive the appraiser as to the value of the merchandise. The petition was therefore granted.

Cole, J., concurring.
No. 48747.

#### Protests 15098-K, etc., of C. J. Tower & Sons (Buffalo).

Opinion by

Walker, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of *Seaboard Lumber Sales Co.*v. *United States*(5 Cust. Ct. 161, C. D. 391), the protests claiming that no addition should have been made for planing, tonguing, and/or grooving were sustained.
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > Wages and Related Benefits in the Machinery Industries: Postwar Wage Trends ; Survey of 20 Labor Markets, 1953-54

              																	United States. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 						*Wages and Related Benefits in the Machinery Industries: Postwar Wage Trends ; Survey of 20 Labor Markets, 1953-54 : Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 1160*,												Washington: 								U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 										1954,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/4472,			accessed on September 25, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 239 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Whereas in 2002, there were 22,291 domestic infant adoptions in the United States; 

Whereas birthparents who decide to carry out an adoption 

plan come from all walks of life, with various backgrounds and socioeconomic status; 
2 

•HCON 239 EH 

Whereas birthparents who carry out an adoption plan should 

be recognized and commended for doing what they believe 

is in the best interest of their child; 

Whereas loving, nurturing adoptive families make it possible 

for birthparents to carry out an adoption plan; 

Whereas adoptive families make an important difference in 

the life of a child through adoption and show the compassionate spirit of our Nation; 

Whereas adoptive families should be recognized and commended for providing a permanent, safe, and loving home 

for a child; 

Whereas studies have shown that adopted children form deep 

emotional bonds with their adoptive parents indistinguishable from those biological children form with their 

parents; 

Whereas adopted children grow up to make valuable contributions to our Nation and lead fulfilling lives; 

Whereas adopted children should be recognized and commended for understanding that the choice of the 

birthparents to carry out an adoption plan may be a difficult and carefully considered decision made out of love 

for a child; and 

Whereas Congress should do more to support adoption, including birthparents who carry out an adoption plan, 

adoptive families, and adopted children: Now, therefore, 

be it 

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 

2 concurring), That Congress recognizes and acknowledges 

3 the important role of adoption, and commends all parties 
3 

•HCON 239 EH 

1 involved, including birthparents who carry out an adoption 

2 plan, adoptive families, and adopted children. 

3

Passed the House of Representatives September 26, 

2008. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 
110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 239 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Recognizing and acknowledging the important role 

plan, adoptive families, and adopted children. including birthparents who carry out an adoption of adoption, and commending all parties involved,
No. 43122.

#### Protest 932636-G of M. Pressner & Co. (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of Abstract 40493 squawker balloons were held dutiable at 45 percent under paragraph 409. Opera glasses stipulated to be similar to those involved in *Woolworth*v. *United States*(2 Cust. Ct. 1, C. D. 74) were held dutiable at 35 percent under paragraph 228 (b) as claimed.