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

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2001 

To amend the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection 

Act to require regulated entities to provide information necessary for 

the Offices of Women and Minority Inclusion to carry out their duties, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 18, 2021 

Mrs. BEATTY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To amend the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act to require regulated entities to 

provide information necessary for the Offices of Women 

and Minority Inclusion to carry out their duties, and 

for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Diversity Data Ac5 countability Act’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2001 IH

1 SEC. 2. DISCLOSURES BY REGULATED ENTITIES. 

2 Section 342(b) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Re3 form and Consumer Protection Act (12 U.S.C. 5452(b)) 

4 is amended by adding at the end the following: 

5 ‘‘(5) DISCLOSURES BY REGULATED ENTI6 TIES.—The Director of each Office shall require en7 tities regulated by the applicable agency to provide 

8 such information as may be required to carry out 

9 the duties of the Director.’’. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
#### HOBBIE v. MAINOR.

No. 38402.

Supreme Court of Florida.

April 1969.

Appeals dismissed without opinion. 218 So.2d 203.
#### Dale STRAUB, Petitioner, v. Harry F. JONES, M.D., Broward Medical Center, et al., Respondents.

No. 77-497.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Aug. 23, 1977.

Edward A. Perse of Horton, Perse & Ginsberg, and Brumer, Moss, Cohen & Rodgers, Miami, for petitioner.

Mark Hicks of Blackwell, Walker, Gray, Powers, Flick & Hoehl, Miami, for respondent Harry F. Jones, M.D.

PER CURIAM.

The Petition for Writ of Certiorari is granted and the order of February 19, 1977 and the corrected order of March 15, 1977 are quashed upon authority of *Perkins v.*Pare, -So.2d- (Fla. 4th DCA Opinion filed August 12, 1977).

ALDERMAN, C. J., and CROSS and DOWNEY, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
primary EPS represents basic EPS under new FAS 128.
</LEGEND>

<MULTIPLIER>                1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                OCT-01-1999
<CASH>                                           40,983
<SECURITIES>                                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    93,622
<ALLOWANCES>                                      2,068
<INVENTORY>                                      81,667
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                226,126
<PP&E>                                          163,897
<DEPRECIATION>                                   79,203
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  350,050
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           101,368
<BONDS>                                          46,215
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<COMMON>                                         94,060
<OTHER-SE>                                       98,797
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    350,050
<SALES>                                         438,336
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                438,336
<CGS>                                           325,754
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   325,754
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 66,829
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                2,338
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  44,510
<INCOME-TAX>                                     14,320
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              30,190
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                     30,190
<EPS-BASIC>                                      0.81
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      0.77



</TABLE>
Exhibit (h)(8)

**AMENDED AND RESTATED**

**ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES AGREEMENT**

 

AGREEMENT, dated as of October 1, 2008, among DWS Communications Fund, Inc., a Maryland corporation (the “Corporation”), on its own behalf, and Deutsche Investment Management Americas Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Administrator”).

WHEREAS, the Corporation is engaged in business as an open-end investment company registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “Investment Company Act”);

WHEREAS, the Corporation desires to retain the Administrator and its permitted designees to provide certain administrative and fund accounting (the “Services”) to the Corporation on the terms set out in this Agreement, and the Administrator and its designees are willing to provide the Services to the Corporation on the terms set out in this Agreement; and 

WHEREAS, the Corporation and the Administrator desire to amend and restate the Administrative Services Agreement dated July 1, 2006 and revised on October 1, 2007.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the covenants contained in this Agreement, the Corporation and the Administrator agree as follows:

|   | 1. | *Appointment and Services*. |
|--------|----|-----------------------------|

(a)       The Corporation appoints the Administrator to provide the administrative services set out in Appendix A to this Agreement (the “Administrative Services”) for the benefit of the Corporation.  The Administrator accepts its appointment and agrees to provide the Administrative Services for the compensation set out in this Agreement.

(b)       The Corporation appoints the Administrator to provide the fund accounting services set out in Appendix B to this Agreement (the “Fund Accounting Services”) for the benefit of the Corporation.  The Administrator accepts its appointment and agrees to provide the Fund Accounting Services for the compensation set out in this Agreement.

 

|   | 2. | *Fees*. |
|--------|----|---------|

(a)       For all Administrative Services and Fund Accounting Services provided under this Agreement, the Administrator will be compensated as set out on Appendix C.  

 

----
32.1

Bricklayers & Allied Craftsmen Local No. 7 Pension Plan

Checklist Item #32

Does the application include the required plan identification information? See section 7.02.

Document 32.1 provides the Pension Plan’s identification information.
32.2

7.02 Plan Identification Information

Document 32.1

Plan Identification Information 

Name of Plan: Bricklayers & Allied Craftsmen Local No. 7 Pension Plan

Plan Number: 001

EIN: 34-6666798 (same as the plan sponsor’s EIN)
24.1

Bricklayers & Allied Craftsmen Local No. 7 Pension Plan

Checklist Item #24

Does the application indicate whether the plan sponsor is requesting approval from the PBGC of 

a proposed partition under § 4233 of ERISA? See section 6.02.

Document 24.1 discusses whether the Pension Plan will request approval from the PBGC of a 

proposed partition under § 4233 of ERISA.
24.2

6.02 Partition Request

Document 24.1

Pension Plan’s Will Not Request for Partition

Not applicable. The Pension Plan will not request approval from the PBGC of a proposed 

partition under § 4233 of ERISA.
Order filed May 15 , 2014

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 13

- 00900

- CR

____________ LAKENDRICK EARL JACO BS , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 338th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1289471



### ORDER
Appellant is represented by appointed counsel, Patrick F. McCann

. Appellant’s brief was originally due January 3, 2014

. Three extensions of time have been granted. On May 5, 2014, counsel filed a further request for extension of time to file appellant’s brief. To date, counsel has submitted no brief. We deny the request and issue the following order.Accordingly, we order Patrick F. McCann to file a brief with the clerk of

this Court within thirty days of the date of this or der . If Patrick F. McCann does not timely file the brief as ordered, the Court may issue an order directing the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine the reason for the failure to file the brief. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(b).

PER CURIAM
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be

published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-20432

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

CHARLES EDWARD BATES,

 Defendant-Appellant.

__________________________________ _

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-97-CR-217-1

____________________________________

April 16, 1999

Before POLITZ, BARKSDALE and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Charles Edward Bates appeals his conviction and sentence for possession with intent to

distribute crack cocaine and aiding and abetting. He argues that the evidence at trial was insufficient

to support his conviction as well as the two-levelsentencing adjustment for his leadership role in the

offense. This court ordinarily reviews the sufficiency of the evidence to determine whether any

reasonable trier of fact could have found that the evidence established guilt beyond a reasonable

doubt. United States v. Martinez, 975 F.2d 159, 160-61 (5th Cir. 1992). Bates moved for a

judgment of acquittal at the close of the Government’s case. However, Bates did not move for a
judgment of acquittal at the close of all the evidence. Therefore, Bates’s sufficiency claim is

reviewable only for plain error. United States v. McCarty, 36 F.3d 1349, 1358 (5th Cir. 1994).

Under the plain error standard, this court willreverse only ifthere is a manifest miscarriage ofjustice.

Id. A miscarriage of justice exists only when the record is devoid of evidence pointing to guilt or

when the evidence on a key element ofthe offense isso tenuousthat a conviction would be shocking.

United States v. Pierre, 958 F.2d 1304, 1310 (5th Cir. 1992)(en banc). 

Bates hasfailed to establish that a miscarriage ofjustice occurred as a result of his conviction.

Nor has he shown that the district court clearly erred in assessing a two-level upward adjustment in

his guideline range on the basis of his leadership role in the offense. See United States v. Watson,

988 F.2d 544, 550 (5th Cir. 1993). The evidence at trial sufficiently established Bates’ guilt as well

as his leadership role in the offense. 

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 23.1 Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm The Board of Directors

Madison Square Garden, Inc.: We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No. 333-164597) on Form S-8 of Madison
Square Garden, Inc. (a combination of certain businesses and assets
of Cablevision Systems Corporation) of our report dated March 18, 2010, with respect to the combined balance sheets of Madison Square
Garden, Inc. as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, related combined
statements of operations, group equity and
comprehensive income (loss), and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2009,
and the related combined financial statement schedule, which report appears in the December 31, 2009 annual report on Form
10-K of Madison Square Garden, Inc. /s/ KPMG LLP New York, New York

March 18, 2010
#### BRADLEY HOMES, INC., a Florida Corporation, Appellant, v. George M. GONZALEZ and Carmen M. Gonzalez, his wife, Appellees.

No. 76-2018.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Nov. 29, 1977.

*802Keith, Mack, Lewis & Allison and Kim Ronald Blackman, Miami, for appellant.

Maurice Rosen, North Miami Beach, Samuel Morris, Hialeah, for appellees.

Before HENDRY, C. J., and HAVER-FIELD and NATHAN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

There was reversible error in the trial court’s entry of a summary judgment ordering defendant, Bradley Homes, Inc., to deliver a warranty deed to the plaintiffs Gonzalez.

We hold that the agreement for deed which provides in pertinent part that,

> “. . . the Purchaser hereby conven-ants and agrees to pay to the Seller the sum of $11,200.00 in the manner following: $600.00 cash in hand, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, and $76.00 on the first day of November, 1955, and thereafter the sum of $76.00 on the first day of each and every month until the entire remaining unpaid balance shall be paid in full, together with interest thereon at the rate of *6% per annum payable monthly as herein set forth on the whole sum remaining from time to time unpaid. .*” (emphasis added)

is clear and unambiguous and calls for payment of interest of 6% on the unpaid balance. Compare *Southern Inv. Co. v. Galloway,*206 Ala. 445, 90 So. 300 (1921). The balance due and owing, and whether or not Bradley Homes is estopped by its actions to recover such sums, are questions of material fact.

Reversed.
U.S. Department of 

Transportation 

Office of the Secretary of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Washington, DC 20590

 Issue date: November 10, 2014

Mr. Jason E. Maddux

Garofalo Goerlich Hainbach PC Authority expires: December 3, 2014

1200 New Hampshire Avenue, NW

Suite 590

Washington, DC 20036

 _________________________________

 Director, Office of International Aviation

NOTICE OF CONSISTENCY

Southern Air, Inc.

is a properly certificated carrier that holds authority to conduct charter operations to and from China. Based on 

a proposal submitted by the carrier, we have determined that the operations comply with the applicable 

Department regulations and the provisions of the 2014-2015 U.S.-China Protocol.

Number of Flights: two (2) one-way charters1

Flight Date(s): November 17-November 18, 2014; and November 30-December 1, 2014 

Points: Shanghai (PVG) – Anchorage (ANC)*- Chicago (ORD)

 

Equipment: B747

The U.S. carrier operating the above charter flights should report, in writing, to the U.S. Air Carrier Licensing 

Division (X-44), Office of International Aviation, Department of Transportation, on its operations for the 

preceding month by the tenth of each month whether the flights operated.

This notice is valid only for the flights contained in the above program.

* Denotes technical stop only.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide Web at:

www.regulations.gov

 1 Following our grant of Southern Air Inc.’s request for two (2) one-way charter allocations, 42 one-way charter allocations remain 

available in the Zone 1 charter pool for the 2014/15 charter year.
Alchemist	Aerials

ATTN:	Andrzej	Mrotek

2409	Townlake	Circle

Suite	221

Austin,	TX	78741

Tel.	941.735.4039

info@alchemistaerials.com

May	31,	2015

U.S.	Department	of	Transportation

Docket	Management	System

1200	New	Jersey	Ave	S.E.

Washington,	D.C.	20590

Re: FAA

- 2015

- 1614

- 0002

Comment	filed	by	Antonelli,	Jeffrey	concerning	Antonelli	Law Counsel

.

Dear	Sir	or	Madam:

It	was	our	misunderstanding	and	error	to	list	Antonelli	Law	and	their	affiliates :

Mark	C.	Del	Bianco	and	Kate	Fletcher as	counsel	in	our	submission. We	spoke	to the

Antonelli	Law	Firm prior	to	submitting

, h owever their	services	were	not	retained

and it	was	a	misunderstanding	that	we	cannot	list	them	as our counsel .	My	apologies

for	the	confusion and thank you to	Antonelli	Law	Firm	for	bringing	it	to	our

attent ion.

Sincerely,

Andrzej	Mrotek

Alchemist	Aerials
#### ECONOMY MACHINE SHOP v. TWEED.

No. 39162.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Jan. 1970.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 211 So.2d 850.
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.



## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2007-1570

JASON S. CRAIG,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

FOLDFAST, INC. and HSN, L.P.,

Defendants-Appellees.

Stanley B. Kita , Howson & Howson LLP, of Fort Washington, Philadelphia, argued

for plaintiff-appellant.

Martin B. Woods , Stearns Weaver Miller Weissler Al hadeff & Sitterson, P.A., of Fort

Lauderdale, Florida, argued for de fendants-appellees. With him on the brief was Mark D.

Bowen

.

Appealed from: United States District C ourt for the Southern District of Florida

Judge K. Michael MooreNOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.



## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2007-1570

JASON S. CRAIG,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

FOLDFAST, INC. and HSN, L.P.,

Defendants-Appellees.



# Judgment

ON APPEAL from the UNITED ST ATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

In CASE NO(S). 06-CV-61009.

This CAUSE having been hear d and considered, it is

ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

Per Curiam: (MAYER, GAJARSA and MOORE, Circuit Judges ):

AFFIRMED . See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

DATED: _March 4, 2008 ____ / s / Jan Horbaly

Jan Horbaly, Clerk
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1969 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to address disparity in 

Medicare Advantage benchmark rates for regions with low Medicare 

fee-for-service penetration. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 17, 2021 

Miss GONZA ́LEZ-COLO ́N introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee 

on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by 

the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to address 

disparity in Medicare Advantage benchmark rates for 

regions with low Medicare fee-for-service penetration. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Medicare Advantage 

5 Integrity Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1969 IH

1 SEC. 2. ADDRESSING DISPARITIES IN MEDICARE ADVAN2 TAGE BENCHMARK LEVELS BASED ON PENE3 TRATION. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1853(n) of the Social Se5 curity Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w–23(n)) is amended— 

6 (1) in paragraph (1)(B), by striking ‘‘subse7 quent year’’ and inserting ‘‘subsequent year, subject 

8 to paragraph (6),’’; and 

9 (2) by adding at the end the following new 

10 paragraph: 

11 ‘‘(6) AVERAGE GEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENT

12 FLOOR.—For 2022 and each subsequent year, when 

13 calculating the adjusted average per capita cost 

14 under section 1876(a)(4) for the purposes of estab15 lishing the base payment amount specified in para16 graph (2)(E), the average geographic adjustment 

17 shall not be less than 0.70 for any area. For pur18 poses of the previous sentence, the Secretary may 

19 define the term ‘average geographic adjustment’ by 

20 program instruction or otherwise.’’. 

21 (b) ENSURING PLAN PAYMENTS FLOW TO PRO22 VIDERS.—Section 1857(e) of the Social Security Act (42 

23 U.S.C. 1395w–27(e)) is amended by adding at the end 

24 the following new paragraph: 

25 ‘‘(6) STRENGTHENING SUPPORT TO HEALTH

26 CARE PROVIDERS.—A contract under this section 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1969 IH

1 with an MA organization shall require that, with re2 spect to any increase in blended benchmark amount 

3 attributable to section 1853(n)(6), the plan shall 

4 provide that no less than 50 percent of such increase 

5 is directed toward provider compensation.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-1235
WILLIAM SANFORD GADD; EDDIE BRADFORD LEE, Plaintiffs - Appellants, versus ROBERT D. POTTER, United States District Judge, Defendant - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, District Judge. (CA-97-640-3-MU) Submitted: April 16, 1998 Decided: May 1, 1998 Before WILKINS and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William Sanford Gadd, Eddie Bradford Lee, Appellants Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellants appeal the district court's order dismissing theircomplaint as frivolous. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Gadd v. Potter , No. CA-97-640-3-MU (W.D.N.C. Jan. 15, 1998). We further find that this appeal is frivolous. We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Exhibit 32




         Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act

                                                            November 13, 2003

Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549

Ladies and Gentlemen:

The certification set forth below is being submitted in connection with the
quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Comcast Holdings Corporation (the "Report") for
the purpose of complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act") and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of
Title 18 of the United States Code.

Brian L. Roberts, the Chief Executive Officer, Lawrence S. Smith, the Co-Chief
Financial Officer and John R. Alchin, the Co-Chief Financial Officer of Comcast
Holdings Corporation, each certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:

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

     2.  the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
         Comcast Holdings Corporation.



/s/ BRIAN L. ROBERTS
---------------------------------
Name: Brian L. Roberts
Chief Executive Officer

/s/ LAWRENCE S. SMITH
---------------------------------
Name: Lawrence S. Smith
Co-Chief Financial Officer

/s/ JOHN R. ALCHIN
---------------------------------
Name: John R. Alchin
Co-Chief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 228 (Wednesday, November 26, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63193-63194]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-31051]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-33,715]


Brandon Apparel Group, Incorporated Columbus, WI; Notice of 
Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration

    By letter of October 21, 1997, petitioners requested administrative 
reconsideration of the Department of Labor's Notice of Negative 
Determination Regarding Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment 
Assistance for workers of the subject firm. The denial notice was 
signed on September 11, 1997, and published in

[[Page 63194]]

the Federal Register on October 14, 1997 (62 FR 53347).
    The petitioner presents evidence that Department's collection of 
information regarding company sales and imports was incomplete for the 
time period relevant to the investigation.

Conclusion

    After careful review of the application, I conclude that the claim 
is of sufficient weight to justify reconsideration of the Department of 
Labor's prior decision. The application is, therefore, granted.

    Signed at Washington, D.C. this 31st day of October 1997.
Grant D. Beale,
Acting Director, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 97-31051 Filed 11-25-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
#### Mrs. Kathleen Delmas Haas FORD v. J. Norton HAAS, Jr.

No. 45624.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Feb. 9, 1970.

Floyd & Floyd, Gulfport, for appellant.

Michael D. Haas, Bay St. Louis, for ap-pellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.