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

[106th Congress Private Law 20]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

<DOC>
[DOCID: f:pvtl020.106]

[[Page 114 STAT. 3118]]

Private Law 106-20
106th Congress

                                 An Act

 
For the relief of Jacqueline Salinas and her children Gabriela Salinas, 
   Alejandro Salinas, and Omar Salinas. <<NOTE: Nov. 22, 2000 -  [S. 
                                1513]>> 

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENCE.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for purposes of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.), Jacqueline 
Salinas and her children Gabriela Salinas, Alejandro Salinas, and Omar 
Salinas, shall be held and considered to have been lawfully admitted to 
the United States for permanent residence as of the date of enactment of 
this Act upon payment of the required visa fees.

SEC. 2. REDUCTION OF NUMBER OF VISAS.

    Upon the granting of permanent residence to Jacqueline Salinas and 
her children Gabriela Salinas, Alejandro Salinas, and Omar Salinas, as 
provided in this Act, the Secretary of State shall instruct the proper 
officer to reduce by the appropriate number during the current fiscal 
year the total number of immigrant visas available to natives of the 
country of the aliens' birth under section 203(a) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(a)).

    Approved November 22, 2000.
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          41,758
<SECURITIES>                                   123,449
<RECEIVABLES>                                   60,512
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               140,832
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 225,719
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           62,233
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,351
<OTHER-SE>                                     160,135
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   225,719
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                57,505
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (57,505)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (57,505)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (57,505)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.03)


</TABLE>
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

CHEKAYLA DAMPIER, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D18-33

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

)

Opinion filed October 12, 2018.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pasco 

County; Mary M. Handsel, Judge.

Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and 

Richard J. Sanders, Assistant Public Defender, 

Bartow, for Appellant. 

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, for Appellee. 

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

LaROSE, C.J., and KHOUZAM and SLEET, JJ., Concur.
# Distribution Warner Robins aids cot storage and distribution mission in support of Hurricane Irma 

/ Published Sept. 27, 2017
WARNER ROBINS, Ga., 

When DLA Distribution Warner Robins, Georgia, received the call that the Georgia Army National Guard’s 277th Maintenance Company needed assistance receiving and storing cots slated for Hurricane Irma evacuees, the answer was a resounding yes.

The unit had been tasked to support to support two missions in support of Irma recovery– receive and stage cots while awaiting mission requirements and also serve as a recovery team, recovering “down” vehicles that became inoperable while supporting Hurricane Irma efforts.  

On Sunday, September 10, the unit arrived with 31 personnel to Warner Robins from Kennesaw, Georgia, where the distribution center began receiving and offloading 14 trucks loaded with 426 pallets containing nearly 10,000 cots.  

According to Nate Friend, DLA Distribution Warner Robins branch chief, the team continued to download the cots through Monday and then began distributing about two truckloads per day to a FEMA-designated location.  

It is noteworthy that the 277th Maintenance Company was fully supported by select DLA Distribution Warner Robins Transportation division members.  Specifically, Sam Mather, George Maddox and Charlie Blunt, who unloaded approximately 316 pallets loaded with over 8,000 cots on the eve of Hurricane Irma.  Friend and Jason Lamb supported the Army National Guard unit the day Hurricane Irma swept through Georgia.

“Everyone is just happy to help.  I love the mentality that we all have.  Anything that we can do, we will, regardless of what day of the week it is or the hour,” said Friend.
| Maryland                          | 000-52947                  | 74-3242562               |
|-----------------------------------|----------------------------|--------------------------|
| (State      or Other Jurisdiction | (Commission      File No.) | (I.R.S.      Employer    |
| of      Incorporation)            |                       | Identification      No.) |

| 95 Elm Street, West      Springfield, Massachusetts | 01089           |
|-----------------------------------------------------|-----------------|
| (Address      of Principal Executive Offices)       | (Zip      Code) |

| [  ] | Written      communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR      230.425) |
|----------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| [  ] | Soliciting      material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR      240.14a-12) |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| [  ] | Pre-commencement      communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR      240.14d-2(b)) |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| [  ] | Pre-commencement      communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR      240.13e-4(c)) |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----

| (a)   | Not      Applicable. |
|-----------------|----------------------|

| (b)   | Not      Applicable. |
|-----------------|----------------------|

| (c)   | Not      Applicable. |
|-----------------|----------------------|

| (d)   | Exhibits. |
|-----------------|-----------|

|   | Exhibit      No. | Description                                |
|--------|------------------|--------------------------------------------|
|   | 99.1             | Press      release dated November 12, 2008 |

|                                    | UNITED      FINANCIAL BANCORP, INC.        |
|-----------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------|
|                                    |                                       |   |
|                                    |                                       |   |
| DATE:  November      14, 2008 | By:                                        | /s/      Richard B. Collins |
|                                    | Richard      B. Collins                    |
|                                    | President      and Chief Executive Officer |
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 162 (Thursday, August 21, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 44479]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-22162]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism; Notice of 
Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting:

    Purpose/Agenda: To review and evaluate a request for application 
(RFA).
    Name of Committee: National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and 
Alcoholism Special Emphasis Panel.
    Date of Meeting: August 26, 1997.
    Time: 8:00 A.M. to adjournment.
    Place of Meeting: Radison Barcelo Hotel 2121 P Street, NW, 
Washington, DC 20037.
    Contact Person: Mark Green, 6000 Executive Boulevard, Suite 409, 
Rockville, Md 20892-7003, 301-443-2860.

    The meeting will be closed in accordance with the provisions set 
forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C. The 
proposal and discussions could reveal confidential trade secrets or 
commercial property such as patentable material, and personal 
information concerning individuals associated with the proposal, the 
disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of 
personal privacy.
    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the urgent need to meet timing limitations imposed by 
the review and funding cycle.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance, Program Nos. 93.271, 
Alcohol Research Career Development Awards for Scientists and 
Clinicians; 93.272, Alcohol National Research Service Awards for 
Research Training; 93.273, Alcohol Research Programs; 93.891, 
Alcohol Research Center Grants; National Institutes of Health)

    Dated: August 13, 1997.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Committee Management Officer, NIH.
[FR Doc. 97-22162 Filed 8-20-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER
Appellate case name: In the Interest of T

. C ., a Child In the Interest of T.L.C., a Child

Appellate case number: 01

- 1 7

- 00 4 97

- CV 01

- 17

- 00498

- CV

Trial court case number: 201 4

- 71 0 7 2 2011

- 08360

Trial court: 3 09 th District Court of Harris County

These appeals involve termination and child

- protection cases. On January 22

, 201 8

, appellee, Department of Family & Protective Service (“DFPS”), filed an unopposed motion for an extensio n of time to February 12, 2018 to file its appellee’s brief

. We grant the motion. DFPS ’s brief is due to be file d in these appeals no later than Monday , February 12 , 201 8

. No further extensions will be granted. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 28.4( a ), 3 8

. 6(b), (c)

. Further, in Cause No. 01

- 17

- 00498

- CV, the brief of appellee T.L.C. aka T.L.C. is due to be filed no later than Monday, February 12, 2018. No further extensions will be granted. Because these appeals involve termination and child

- protection cases, this Court is required to bring the appeals to final disposition within 180 days of June 30, 2017, the date the notices of appeal were filed, so far as reasonably possible. See Tex. R. Jud. Admin. 6.2, reprinted in T EX

. G OV ’ T

. C ODE A NN

. , tit. 2, subtit. F app. (Vernon Supp. 2017 ).

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Terry Jennings

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: January 2 5 , 2018
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1466 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1466

            To suspend temporarily the duty on Desmodur R-E.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 21, 2005

 Mr. Santorum introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
            To suspend temporarily the duty on Desmodur R-E.

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

SECTION 1. DESMODUR R-E.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.09.04      Polyisocyante       Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         cross linking                                                      31/2008
                         agent products
                         containing
                         triphenylmethane
                         triisocyante (CAS
                         No. 2422-91-5) in
                         solvents
                         (provided for in
                         subheading
                         3824.90.28)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 12-1684

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

Blas Acusta Marquez

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant

____________

 Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock

____________

 Submitted: September 27, 2012

Filed: October 30, 2012

[Unpublished]

____________

Before WOLLMAN, MELLOY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Blas Acusta Marquez appeals the district court’s judgment entered after a jury 1

found him guilty of possessing cocaine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21

The Honorable Brian S. Miller, Chief Judge, United States District Court for

1

the Eastern District of Arkansas.
U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). The district court sentenced him to 120 months in prison and 5

years of supervised release. Marquez’s counsel has filed a brief under Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that the evidence wasinsufficient to support

the conviction.

We hold that the evidence was sufficient. See United States v. Birdine, 515

F.3d 842, 844 (8th Cir. 2008) (this court reviews sufficiency of evidence in light most

favorable to government, resolving evidentiary conflicts in government’s favor and

accepting all reasonable inferences that support jury’s verdict). A state trooper

testified that when he stopped the truck Marquez was driving for a traffic violation,

Marquez was nervous and gave inconsistent answers to questions about his records. 

After Marquez consented to a search, the trooper discovered 17.5 kilograms of

cocaine behind a panel in the truck cab, above the bed in the sleeper berth. A DEA

special agent testified that in his experience a drug dealer would not leave such a

quantity with someone who does not know he has it, and that Marquez gave

inconsistent explanations about the $4,400 found in his pocket and additional deposit

receipts. See United States v. Parker, 587 F.3d 871, 881 (8th Cir. 2009) (for

possession with intent to distribute drugs, government must prove defendant

knowingly possessed and intended to distribute drugs; possession may be

constructive if defendant has knowledge of object and intent and ability to control it;

knowledge can be established by defendant’s control and dominion over vehicle or

by large quantity of drugs); United States v. Serrano-Lopez, 366 F.3d 628, 635 (8th

Cir. 2004) (even if defendant did not own drugs, it is unlikely owner would place a

large quantity of drugs with person who does not know it is there; large quantity can

indicate both intent to distribute and ability to control drugs for constructive

possession). 

After reviewing the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75

(1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issuesfor appeal. Accordingly, the judgment

is affirmed. We also grant counsel leave to withdraw, conditioned on counsel

-2-
advising the appellant as to the procedure for filing a petition for writ of certiorari,

and deny Marquez’s motion for new appellate counsel. 

_________________________

-3-
Independent Auditors Consent The Board of Directors

Bio-Technology General Corp.: We consent to the incorporation by reference in the

registration statement Nos. 33-83902, 33-46628, 333-33077, 333-02685, and

333-65626 on Form S-3 and Nos. 33-51202, 33-83904, 33-69870, 33-41591,

33-41592, 33-41593, 333-36121, 333-33073, 333-33075, 333-64541, and 333-87344

on Form S-8 of Bio-Technology General Corp. (the Company) of our report dated

September 20, 2002, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Bio-Technology

General Corp. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2000 and 2001, and the

related consolidated statements of operations, changes in stockholders equity,

and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December

31, 2001, which report appears in the December 31, 2001, annual report on Form

10-K/A of Bio-Technology General Corp. Our report refers to a change in the method of

revenue recognition for certain up-front nonrefundable fees in 2000. Also, our report refers to the Companys restatement

of the consolidated financial statements for the years ended December 31, 1999,

2000 and 2001, which consolidated financial statements were previously audited

by other independent auditors. /s/ KPMG LLP Princeton, New Jersey

September 23, 2002
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN RE: ASSIGNMENT OF JUDGES OF

THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF 

THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF 

PENNSYLVANIA 

:

:

:

:

:

No. 333 Common Pleas Judicial 

Classification Docket 

 O R D E R

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 2nd day of February, 2016, upon consideration of the 

Petitions of Sheila Woods-Skipper, President Judge of the Court of Common Pleas of 

the First Judicial District of Pennsylvania, for the assignment of Judges to division(s) of 

the court, it is hereby ORDERED that the Petitions are granted and the following 

assignments are approved:

Family Division

The Honorable Daine A. Grey, Jr. 

The Honorable Christopher Mallios

The Honorable Ourania Papademetriou

The Honorable Lyris F. Younge

The Honorable Michael Fanning

Trial Division

The Honorable Tracy Brandeis-Roman

The Honorable Scott DiClaudio

The Honorable Mia R. Perez

The Honorable Kai N. Scott

The Honorable Stephanie M. Sawyer

The Honorable Abbe F. Fletman

The Honorable Kenneth J. Powell, Jr.

Mr. Justice Eakin did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.
Exhibit 99.1

                                     [LOGO]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Espey Announces 4th Quarter Dividend ...

Saratoga  Springs,  NY;  May 18,  2007- The Board of  Directors  of Espey Mfg. &
Electronics Corp., (AMEX:ESP) has declared a cash dividend of $.15 per share for
the fourth quarter of the fiscal year ending June 30, 2007. The dividend will be
payable on June 22, 2007, to all shareholders of record as of June 1, 2007.

The Board of Directors  also  increased to $2 million an existing  authorization
allowing management to repurchase Company stock periodically.

Espey's  primary  business  is  the  development,   design,  and  production  of
specialized  military and industrial power  supplies/electronic  equipment.  The
Company's web site can be found on the Internet at www.espey.com.
                                                   -------------

For further information, contact Mr. Howard Pinsley or Mr. David O'Neil at (518)
245-4400.

Certain  statements in this press release are  "forward-looking  statements" and
are made  pursuant  to the safe  harbor  provisions  of the  Private  Securities
Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These  forward-looking  statements  represent the
Company's current  expectations or beliefs concerning future events. The matters
covered by these statements are subject to certain risks and uncertainties  that
could  cause  actual  results to differ  materially  from those set forth in the
forward-looking  statements.  The Company wishes to caution readers not to place
undue reliance on any such  forward-looking  statements,  which speak only as of
the date made.

                        #################################


                                       3
#### LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. James I. WILLIAMS and Harry F. Jones, M.D., et al., Appellees.

No. 76-2623.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

March 14, 1978.

Gerald R. Wells, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Michael F. Kempner, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee James I. Williams.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by the employer’s Workmen’s Compensation carrier from an order denying it any award in a proceeding for equitable distribution, pursuant to Section 440.39, Florida Statutes (1975).

We have considered appellant’s contention in the light of the record1 and the authorities and find that no abuse of discretion has been demonstrated. In equitable distribution cases a trial judge, when supported by the record, may in the exercise of his discretion find the insurance carrier not entitled to recover any amount by way of equitable distribution. *United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company v. Harb,*170 So.2d 54 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1964).

Accordingly, the judgment appealed from is affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

DOWNEY, ANSTEAD and LETTS, JJ., concur.

1

. The record does not contain the evidence adduced at the hearing on appellant’s application for equitable distribution. However, the trial judge made specific findings of fact in the judgment.