alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
PRIVATE LAW 106–11—NOV. 9, 2000

Private Law 106–11

106th Congress

An Act

For the relief of Zohreh Farhang Ghahfarokhi.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR ZOHREH FARHANG

GHAHFAROKHI.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b) of

section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Zohreh Farhang

Ghahfarokhi shall be eligible for issuance of an immigrant visa

or for adjustment of status to that of an alien lawfully admitted

for permanent residence upon filing an application for issuance

of an immigrant visa under section 204 of such Act or for adjustment

of status to lawful permanent resident.

(b) ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS.—If Zohreh Farhang Ghahfarokhi

enters the United States before the filing deadline specified in

subsection (c), she shall be considered to have entered and remained

lawfully and shall, if otherwise eligible, be eligible for adjustment

of status under section 245 of the Immigration and Nationality

Act as of the date of the enactment of this Act.

(c) DEADLINE FOR APPLICATION AND PAYMENT OF FEES.—Subsections (a) and (b) shall apply only if the application for issuance

of an immigrant visa or the application for adjustment of status

is filed with appropriate fees within 2 years after the date of

the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 2. REDUCTION OF IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBER.

Upon the granting of an immigrant visa or permanent residence

to Zohreh Farhang Ghahfarokhi, the Secretary of State shall

instruct the proper officer to reduce by one, during the current

or next following fiscal year, the total number of immigrant visas

that are made available to natives of the country of the alien’s

birth under section 203(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act

or, if applicable, the total number of immigrant visas that are

made available to natives of the country of the alien’s birth under

section 202(e) of such Act.

Approved November 9, 2000.

Nov. 9, 2000

[H.R. 3184]
No. 9683.

#### Cudell *v.*The City of Cleveland et al.

(Decided April 10, 1906.)

Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

*Mr. George A. Groot,*for plaintiff in error.

' *Mr. Newton D. Baker,*city solicitor, for defendants in .error.

Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1424 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1424

  To remove the restrictions on commercial air service at Love Field, 
                                 Texas.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 19, 2005

Mr. Ensign (for himself, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. McCain, and Mr. Brownback) 
introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 
           Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To remove the restrictions on commercial air service at Love Field, 
                                 Texas.

    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 ``American Right to Fly Act''.

SEC. 2. REMOVAL OF CERTAIN RESTRICTIONS.

    (a) In General.--The first sentence of section 29(c) of the 
International Air Transportation Competition Act of 1979 (Public Law 
96-192; 94 Stat. 48) is amended--
            (1) by striking ``, if (1)'' and all that follows to the 
        end period; and
            (2) by inserting ``Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, 
        Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, 
        Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, 
        Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, 
        Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North 
        Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Puerto 
        Rico, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, 
        Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, 
        Wyoming,'' before ``and Texas''.
    (b) Effect on Master Plan.--Nothing in this section or the 
amendments made by this section shall be construed as altering or 
preempting any otherwise valid exercise of proprietary powers contained 
in a lawfully adopted Airport Master Plan for Dallas Love Field.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          12,421
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           1,982
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 5,750
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     26,438
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          39,062
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            39,218
<LOANS>                                        179,956
<ALLOWANCE>                                      2,240
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 278,572
<DEPOSITS>                                     236,722
<SHORT-TERM>                                    16,270
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                951
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,500
<OTHER-SE>                                      22,129
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 278,572
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 16,837
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                3,814
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   418
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                21,069
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               9,053
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               9,481
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           11,588
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      644
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   1
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  8,664
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,287
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       2,830
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,830
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.42
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.42
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.60
<LOANS-NON>                                      1,398
<LOANS-PAST>                                     1,427
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 2,145
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      572
<RECOVERIES>                                        23
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                2,240
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               911
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          1,329
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1607 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1607

  To amend section 10501 of title 49, United States Code, to exclude 
       solid waste disposal from the jurisdiction of the Surface 
                         Transportation Board.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 29, 2005

 Mr. Lautenberg (for himself and Mr. Corzine) introduced the following 
 bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, 
                      Science, and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend section 10501 of title 49, United States Code, to exclude 
       solid waste disposal from the jurisdiction of the Surface 
                         Transportation Board.

    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 ``Solid Waste Environmental Regulation 
Clarification Affecting Railroads Act of 2005''.

SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO EXCLUDE SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FROM THE 
              JURISDICTION OF THE BOARD.

    Section 10501 of title 49, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) in subsection (b)(2), by inserting ``except solid waste 
        management facilities (as defined in section 1004 of the Solid 
        Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6903)),'' after ``facilities,''; 
        and
            (2) in subsection (c)(2)--
                    (A) by striking ``over mass'' and inserting the 
                following: ``over--
                    ``(A) mass''; and
                    (B) by striking the period at the end and inserting 
                the following: ``; or
                    ``(B) the processing or sorting of solid waste.''.
                                 <all>
```
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Wilbert PARKER.

No. 60581.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 19, 1978.

Order On Motion For Withdrawal of Appeal July 7, 1978.

*227Anthony R. Frey, III, New Orleans, for defendant-appellant.

William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., Harry F. Con-nick, ' Dist. Atty., William L. Brockman, Asst. Dist. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.

SUMMERS, Justice.

Defendant Wilbert Parker was charged with the second-degree murder of Jeffery Ellis. After trial by jury on December 4, 1974 the jury returned a nine-to-three verdict of guilty as charged. He was sentenced to life imprisonment. A previous trial on this same charge resulted in a mistrial because the jury was unable to reach a verdict.

On appeal from the verdict and sentence, the defense assigns four errors. Assignment 2 asserts that a denial of due process and a fair trial resulted when the prosecutor withheld evidence favorable to defendant’s plea of self-defense.

To support this contention defendant refers to his motion for a new trial based upon an alleged violation of the principles set forth in *Brady v. Maryland,*373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963). The motion set forth that the State withheld information that the victim had previously been arrested two times, once on a charge of aggravated battery. Evidence that the victim had been charged with aggravated battery would have supported the self-defense plea of defendant, he claims, by tending to prove that the victim was the aggressor in the encounter which resulted in his death.

Therefore, the defense asserts that when the prosecutor implied or stated in his closing and rebuttal argument to the jury that the victim had never been arrested for violent activities, undue prejudice resulted to the defendant.

Because the record did not contain a transcription of the closing argument of the prosecutor, this Court ordered the record supplemented with a transcript of all closing arguments. The trial court was unable to furnish the transcriptions ordered because the notes of the court reporter were destroyed. The court reporter was also incapable of preparing a transcript from the recorder because the tape was barely audible.

When there is no record of the facts relied upon to support a defense assignment of error, this Court cannot afford a meaningful appeal. It is necessary under these circumstances to retry the case and preserve a record which will permit a meaningful appeal.

For the reasons assigned, the conviction and sentence are set aside and the case is remanded to the trial court for a new trial.

SANDERS, C. J., dissents.

ORDER ON MOTION FOR WITHDRAWAL OF APPEAL

MOTION

Now into Court through undersigned counsel comes defendant, Wilbert Parker. The defendant prays that his appeal taken in the matter of the State of Louisiana v. Wilbert Parker be withdrawn for the following reason.

I.

Defendant has determined that it would be contrary to his best interest to proceed with the appeal.

ORDER

Considering the foregoing motion, it is ordered that the appeal of defendant Wilbert Parker be and the same is withdrawn and dismissed.
# Marine acquisition leaders explore expanding DLA support during visit

/ Published April 10, 2017
PHILADELPHIA, 
Two leaders from Marine Corps Systems Command, the service’s acquisition authority, visited Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support April 5 to learn how the agency could expand support in equipping Marines.

Marine Lt. Col. Christopher Madeline, product manager for Reconnaissance and Amphibious Raids, said that it was a worthwhile visit, emphasizing the potential to draw on the collaborative efforts Clothing and Textiles and the Army have done in managing uniforms and clothing items.

“There’s a lot of hard working folks here,” Madeline said. “We’ll see if we can leverage some of that work for us and save some money in the process.”

Madeline will become the program manager for individual clothing and combat equipment when a reorganization within MCSC takes effect this summer.

Marine Sgt. Maj. Gary Smith, MCSC senior enlisted Marine, said that each of the five supply chains’ briefings opened his eyes to what DLA Troop Support can provide.

“This will absolutely be beneficial to the Marine Corps,” Smith said. “We can reach out to DLA for what they bring to the table and we’ll never go it alone again.”

Smith said that he’ll inform his workforce about the depth and breadth of support that DLA Troop Support can bring to Marines.

“If my workforce becomes more aware of what DLA Troop Support has to offer here, they can maximize their work,” Smith said. “We all have to come together and maximize the opportunities DLA brings.”

Smith said he’s already planning another trip here to strengthen future endeavors between DLA and the Marine Corps.

“It’s all about relationships and partnerships,” Smith said. “We’re going to build bridges to set us up for success down the road.”
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 165 (Tuesday, August 26, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 45223]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-22618]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Export Administration


Materials Technical Advisory Committee; Notice of Open Meeting

    A meeting of the Materials Technical Advisory Committee will be 
held September 26, 1997, 10:30 a.m., in the Herbert C. Hoover Building, 
Room 1617M(2), 14th Street between Constitution & Pennsylvania Avenues, 
N.W., Washington, D.C. The Committee advises the Office of the 
Assistant Secretary for Export Administration with respect to technical 
questions that affect the level of export controls applicable to 
advanced materials and related technology.

Agenda

    1. Opening remarks by the Chairman.
    2. Presentation of papers or comments by the public.
    3. Discussion of the Chemical Weapons Convention implementing 
regulations.
    The meeting will be open to the public and a limited number of 
seats will be available. To the extent that time permits, members of 
the public may present oral statements to the Committee. Written 
statements may be submitted at any time before or after the meeting. 
However, to facilitate distribution of public presentation materials to 
the Committee members, the Committee suggests that presenters forward 
the public presentation materials two weeks prior to the meeting date 
to the following address: Ms. Lee Ann Carpenter, OAS/EA MS: 3886C, 
Bureau of Export Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 
Washington, D.C. 20230.
    For further information or copies of the minutes, contact Lee Ann 
Carpenter on (202) 482-2583.

    Dated: August 21, 1997.
Lee Ann Carpenter,
Director, Technical Advisory Committee Unit.
[FR Doc. 97-22618 Filed 8-25-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DT-M
DISMISS: Opinion filed September 6, 2012.

In The 

## (Court 

# a Appeals Eifti Distrirt of Jexas at Dallas

No. 05-12-00956-CV LEGACY VILLAGE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, LEGACY VILLAGE ONE, L.C., LEGACY VILLAGE ASSOCIATES, LTD., SC LEGACY INDEPENDENCE, LTD.,

SC LEGACY INDEPENDENCE ONE, LLC, L&B REALTY ACQUISITIONS, LLC, AND SPY, INC., Appellants V. PROGRESSIVE CHILD CARE SYSTEMS, INC., Appellee On Appeal from the 401st Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 401-01220-2012 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices FitzGerald, Murphy, and Fillmore

Opinion By Justice Fillmore Before the Court is appellants' motion to dismiss the appeal. Appellants inform the Court that they no longer desire to pursue the appeal. Accordingly, we grant appellants' motion 

### and dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1).

ROBERT M. FILLMORE JUSTICE 120956F.P05

## (Court of Appeats Jiftlf District of ihxa, at Dallas

JUDGMENT LEGACY VILLAGE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, LEGACY VILLAGE ONE, L.C., LEGACY VILLAGE ASSOCIATES, LTD., SC LEGACY INDEPENDENCE, LTD., SC LEGACY INDEPENDENCE ONE, LLC, L&B REALTY ACQUISITIONS, LLC, AND SPY, INC., Appellants No. 05-12-00956-CV V. PROGRESSIVE CHILD CARE SYSTEMS, INC., Appellee Appeal from the 401st Judicial District Court of Collin County, Texas. (Tr.Ct.No. 401- 01220-2012). Opinion delivered by Justice Fillmore, Justices FitzGerald and Murphy, participating.

Based on the Court's opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED. It is ORDERED that appellee, Progressive Child Care Systems, Inc., recover its costs of the appeal from appellants, Legacy Village Limited Partnership, Legacy Village One, L.C., Legacy Village Associates, Ltd., SC Legacy Independence, Ltd., SC Legacy Independence One, LLC, L&B Realty Acquisitions, LLC, and Spy, Inc. Judgment entered September 6, 2012.

ROBERT M. FILLMORE JUSTICE

### Record 

## Retentiou Form — Civil 

## Cases

\PPP:HATE CASE NO: 

### - - /Z S'I'Y I E 

### !lacy Offile rnek,1 itchletcd , •/1 2 1 1 77e35/vc . 1 

### ",h)/1 dtve <- 5 / - 5 lens" / OLN'FY: CASE DISPOSITION & DATE: DES(' MI/ION/SUBJECT C.ViE : .2e6d 14tokM RECONINIENDXFIONS: Ix I DESTROY I I RETAIN (see retention list below)

Appeal concerning election questions tall), •ppeal concerning landmark legal opinions, .\ppeal that contains unique information on the area's history or concernnig important ligures or events. List pertinent information above, i.e.. person's name, or event, etc.

( SIGNED: DATE: 

# 1(4 , /t SERIES NO.:
#### Burnis TACKETT, Petitioner, v. GUERDON INDUSTRIES, INC., Employers Insurance of Wausau, and the Florida Industrial Commission, Respondents.

No. 38444.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Oct. 29, 1969.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 8, 1969.

Michael C. Bergen of Hodges, Bergen, & Gafford, Lake City, for petitioner.

Charles Vocelle, of Brannon, Brown, Norris, Vocelle & Haley, Lake City, Patrick H. Mears and J. Franklin Garner, Tallahassee, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

In this Workmen’s Compensation matter, we have heard oral argument and considered the records and briefs. We find that the order of the Florida Industrial Commission entered on March 10, 1969, comports with the essential requirements of the law. The writ of certiorari is therefore denied. The petitioner’s motion for *13an attorney’s fee in this Court is also denied.

It is so ordered.

ERVIN, C. J., DREW, ADKINS and BOYD, JJ., and RAWLS, District Court Judge, concur.
ZUCKERT SCOUTT &- RASENBERGER, L.L.P 

ATTORNEY S AT LAW 

888 Seventeenth Street, NVy Washington, DC 20006-5509 

Telephone [202] 298-8660 Fax 1202] 342-0683 

wwwzsrtdwcom 

March 23,2011 ^ •.::\u^'> 

BY HAND DELIVERY _^ : §^ ^ 

George Wellington rr 

Chief, Foreign Air Carrier Licensing Division X-45 

Office of International Aviation 

Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, DC 20590 

Re: Porter Airlines Inc. (Docket DOT-OST-2QQ7-27402) 

Dear Mr. Wellington: 

On March 11, 2011, Porter Airlines Inc. ("Porter") filed a Motion for Issuance of a 

Foreign Air Carrier Permit ("Motion") in the above-referenced docket. On March 18, 20II, 

Community Air Impact Review (CAIR) apparently resubmitted to the docket a copy of 

comments previously submitted on October 20, 2009, although it did not serve these comments 

on Porter or Porter's counsel. 

Porter previously addressed CAIR's comments in its November 10, 2009, Consolidated 

Answer, and as such. Porter will not make any further response at this lime. Since no new 

comments or objections were submitted in response to Porter's Motion, Porter urges the 

Department to promptly issue its foreign air carrier permit as more fully discussed in its Motion. 

Sincerely, 

^M 

John E. Gillick 

David M. Endersbee 

Counsel for Porter Airlines Inc. 

cc: Service List 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on this 23rd day of March 2011, a copy of the foregoing was served 

by email on the parties named below: 

R. Bruce Keiner, Jr. 

Lorraine B. Halloway 

Counsel for Continental Airlines 

Crowell & Moring 

1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20004 

rbkeiner@crowell.com 

Lhalloway@crowell.com 

Hershel Kamen 

Vice President—International 

and Regulatory Affairs 

Dan Weiss 

Continental Airlines, Inc. 

Government Affairs—S'^ Floor 

1600 Smith Street 

Dept. HQSGV 

Houston, TX 77002 

hkamen@coairxom 

dan.weiss@CDair.com 

William Freeman 

Chair 

Community AIR 

P.O. Box 81057 

57B Harbour Square 

Toronto, Ontario, Canada 

M5J 2R0 

billfreeman@rogers.com 

info@communityair.org 

Paul Arvanitidis 

Counsellor (Transportation) 

Canadian Embassy 

501 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20001 

pau!.arvanitidis@intemational.gc.ca 

Krishna "Kris" Urs 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Transportation Affairs 

U.S. Department of State 

2201 C Street, N.W., Room 5830 

Washington, D.C. 20520 

urskr@state.gov 

David M. Endersbee
No. 9478.

#### Bibler *v.*Kory.

(Decided February 20, 1906.)

' Error to Circuit Court of Hancock county.

*Mr. A. G. Fuller,*for plaintiff in error.

*Messrs. Ross & Kinder*and *Mr. M. G. Foster,*for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.
M£i /-/J -AT

CHR\STOPt*t|£> CHRISTOP,

CLERK Jufc^-'-tr' CLERK

SW^ ^i<it/UcV i^^lAiiOUA of tW*^ i%»jff, 7Y

(LClfel-P