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

exams are 

moving online
Making healthcare: 

—Simple 

—Affordable 

—Efficient 

—Patient centered
Cost savings for patients 

Just $20 for an exam compared to a cost of $150+ for an inperson renewal

Access for rural and underserved communities 

Removal of geographic, time, and cost constraints means 

traditionally underserved communities no longer need to abstain 

Greater prescription portability 

Digital prescriptions by default means greater portability and a 

level playing field 

Better wear schedule compliance 

Convenient access to prescription renewal means patients wear 

their contact lenses the way they were intended

THE BENEFITS
WHAT PATIENTS SAY

Makes life easier without having to sit in a 

doctor’s ofce for hours!

Well, what can I say, Simple Contacts 

really emphasizes the word “simple.” I 

opened my app, followed directions for a 

few minutes, and bam new contacts are 

being delivered in the mail. Awesome app!

Simple, elegant solution to skip the 

doctor’s ofce and still get my contacts 

shipped to me.

“

I think it is a great app that saves you the 

trouble of having to spend so much 

money just to renew your prescription

“

“

“

NPS of 

88

4.8 Stars on App Store

>3,000 reviews
How it works
Step 1: Provide medical history
Step 2: Record HD video of eyes
Step 3: Take visual acuity test
Each exam is 

reviewed by an 

Ophthalmologist or 

Optometrist who 

decides to prescribe 

or to refer in-person
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION 10 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98101-3140

OFFICE OF AIR, WASTE, AND TOXICS May 26,2011 

### MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Meeting and Conference Call with Idaho DepartmentofEnvironmental Quality and Stoel Rives, LLP, 5/16/2011, regarding EPA approval ofIdaho'sRegional Haze SIPsubmittal with regard to meeting requirements ofCAA section 1l0(a)(2)(D)(i)(II).**_~~~ ~**  

### FROM: Steven K. Body, Sr. Engineering Planner THRU: Julie Matthews, ORCRegion 10 TO: TheFiles Meeting Participants: Steve Body, EPA Region 10 Julie Matthews, EPA Region 10 Martin Bauer, Idaho Department ofEnvironmental Quality Lisa Carlson, Deputy Attorney General, IDEQ (by phone) Christopher Pooser, Stoel Rives (by phone) Meeting Subject: Mr. Pooserrequested, on behalfofTASCO, that EPA delay final action on the BART provisions ofthe Idaho Regional Haze SIP submittal, as proposed in the Federal Register ofJanuary 11, 2011 (76 FR 1579). This request was based on the negotiations between IDEQ and TASCO on an alternative BART determination for TASCO. TASCO has found no legal obligation for EPA to move forward with final action on the Idaho Regional Haze SIP submittal to meet the June 21, 2011, deadline in the Consent Decree with WildEarth Guardians Case No. 4:09-CV-02453 (N.D. Calif.)
EPA explained that EPA does feel obligated to take final action on the Idaho SIP submittal to meet the Interstate Transport for visibility requirements ofCAA section l1O(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) by the WildEarth Guardians consent decree date ofJune 21, 2011. The State did not request anything ofEPA during this meeting.
CAUSE NO. 01 -14- 00 602- CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE 1ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS

HOUSTON, TEXAS

___________________________

ANTHONY and LIZ REFERENTE,

Appellants

v.

CITY VIEW COURTYARD , L .P. et al

Appellee

___________________________

On Appeal from the 281 st Judicial District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2013-00767

___________________________

UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE BRIEF

1. This case is on appeal from the 281st Judicial District Court of Harris

County, Texas in trial court cause number Trial Court Cause No. 2013-00767

2. Appellee ’ s brief was filed on or about February 18, 2015. Appellants

brief was due March 19, 2015.

3. Appellant requests an extension of time of on month from the due date,

i.e. until Monday, April 20, 2015.

4. No prior extension to file the brief has been received in this cause.

5. The need for the extension is as follows. Appellant’s counsel i s a solo

practitioner. He had already prepared a draft response to the issues on appeal, but

needed to incorporate the record and additional case sites, and to put it in the form ACCEPTED

01-14-00602-cv

FIRST COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS

3/30/2015 7:33:36 AM

CHRISTOPHER PRINE

CLERKrequired by the court

. Counsel had regular clients experience unexpected complex

criminal m atters which required Counsel to act immediately to protect their

interests. Counsel also had to prepare three complex motions and responses to

summary judgment. This in addition to counsel ’ s normal case load prevented him

from completing a full brief. Appellee moves for an extension to April 20, 2015.

WHEREFORE, Appell ee prays that the court grant it an extension of time to

file its brief and for such other and further relief as is just.

Respectfully submitted,

____S/James D. Pierce_______________

JAMES D. PIERCE

St ate Bar No. 15994500

Comerica Bank Building

One Sugar Creek Center Blvd., Suite 1080

Sugar L and, Texas 77478

- 3560

(713) 650

- 0150 office

(713) 650

- 0146 facsimile

ATTORNEY FOR APPELL EE

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE

The motion is unopposed.CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

In compliance with Texas Rules of Appellant Civil Procedure, on March 30,

2015 , this plea ding was served upon all parties and counsel of record

electronically.

_____S/James D. Pierce_________________

J AMES D. PIERCE
<PAGE>

                                                                      Exhibit 32


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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of First Wilkow Venture (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2005, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Marc R.
Wilkow, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

      (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13 or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) The information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.


Marc R. Wilkow
--------------
Marc R. Wilkow
General Partner
DATED: November 14, 2005


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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of First Wilkow Venture (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2005, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Peter
Boelke, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

      (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13 or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) The information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.


Peter Boelke
------------
Peter Boelke
Chief Financial Officer, M & J Wilkow, Ltd.
DATED: November 14, 2005




                                       12
EXHIBIT
32.1








CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








In
connection with the Quarterly Report of 1st Source Corporation (1st Source) on Form 10-Q
for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Christopher J. Murphy
III, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that to my knowledge:








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





(2)    The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of 1st Source.











By:








/s/CHRISTOPHER J. MURPHY
III


Christopher
J. Murphy III


Chief
Executive Officer


April 24,
2008
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 116 (Friday, June 15, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 27975]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-12908]


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

BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION

[Docket No. CFPB-2018-0018]


Agency Information Collection Activities: Comment Request; 
Correction

AGENCY: Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.

ACTION: Notice and request for comment.

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

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection published a notice 
in the Federal Register on May 14, 2018 concerning a request for 
comments on the proposed revision of a currently approved collection of 
an Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. The 
information collection title in the notice was incorrect.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Bureau of Consumer Financial 
Protection, (Attention: PRA Office), 1700 G Street NW, Washington, DC 
20552, (202) 435-9575, or email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#064540564459565447466560766428616970"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f4b7b2a4b6aba4a6b5b497928496da939b82">[email protected]</span></a>. If you require this 
document in an alternative electronic format, please contact 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#20636670627f6143434553534942494c49545960434650420e474f56"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d2919482908d93b1b1b7a1a1bbb0bbbebba6ab92b1b4a2b0fcb5bda4">[email protected]</span></a>.

Correction

    In the Federal Register of May 14, 2018 in FR Doc. 2018-10221 on 
page 22254, in the third column, and on page 22255, in the first 
column, correct ``Compliant'' to read: ``Complaint.''

    Dated: June 12, 2018.
Darrin A. King,
Paperwork Reduction Act Officer, Bureau of Consumer Financial 
Protection.
[FR Doc. 2018-12908 Filed 6-14-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4810-AM-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### Charles HENRY, a/k/a Eddie Maddox, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. P-310.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Nov. 4, 1971.

Richard W. Ervin, III, Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Joseph W. DeMember, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appel-lee.

PER CURIAM.

The briefs and the record on appeal having been read and given full consideration, and the appellant having failed to demonstrate reversible error, the judgment of the lower court is affirmed.

CARROLL, DONALD, K., Acting C. J., and RAWLS and JOHNSON, JJ., concur.
#### Barry Cannon et al., Appellants, v Paul Boniello, Respondent.

[722 NYS2d 172]

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Coppola, J.), entered May 25, 2000, granting the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the first and third causes of action.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendant established his entitlement to summary judgment dismissing the first and third causes of action by submitting evidence demonstrating that those causes of action were based on an alleged assault, not negligence *(see, Schetzen v Robotsis,*273 AD2d 220; *Wrase v Bosco,*271 AD2d 440; *Wertzberger v City of New York,*254 AD2d 352). In opposition, the plaintiffs failed to raise an issue of fact requiring a trial *(see,*CPLR 3212).

The plaintiffs’ remaining contentions are without merit *(see, Fahey v County of Ontario,*44 NY2d 934, 935; *Crossman v Harding Indus. Tool,*222 AD2d 1081; *Motteler v 142-144 Green St. Corp.,*173 AD2d 797). Ritter, J. P., Krausman, Florio and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.
No. 00-62.

#### CSU, L. L. C. *v.*Xerox Corp.

C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari denied.
|   | (1) | the      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78m(a) or 78o(d),      and, |
|--------|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (2) | the      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the      Company. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:  June      9, 2009 | /s/ Donald W.      Barney                            |
|------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------|
|                               | Donald      W. Barney                                |
|                               | President,      Treasurer and Chief FinancialOfficer |
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D17-4267

_____________________________

CHARLES PEARCE,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Steven B. Whittington, Judge.

November 6, 2018

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROWE, BILBREY, and WINSOR, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Charles Pearce, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Julian E. Markham, 

Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
MIGUEL REYNOZA,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Respondent.

___________________________/ IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 17

- 0 201

Opinion filed February 6, 2017.

Petition for Writ of Prohibition

-- Original Jurisdiction

.

Anabelle Dias of Anabelle Dias P.A., Tallahassee , for Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee , for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of prohibition is denied on the merits

.

LEWIS, BILBREY, and WINOKUR, JJ., CONCUR.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the
dates and for the periods expressed in the Report.
 Date:    December 8, 2009
    /s/ CHARLES A. RATNERName:
    Charles A. RatnerTitle:
    President and Chief Executive Officer/s/ ROBERT G. OBRIENName:
    Robert G. OBrienTitle:
    Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer
#### Bertha RANDALL, a/k/a Kitty Randall, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 69-412.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

Jan. 23, 1970.

Certiorari dismissed.
H. R. 7810 

One Hundred Sixteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Friday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and twenty 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 3519 East 

Walnut Street in Pearland, Texas, as the ‘‘Tom Reid Post Office Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. TILDEN VETERANS POST OFFICE. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 3519 East Walnut Street in Pearland, Texas, 

shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Tom Reid Post Office 

Building’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Tom Reid Post Office Building’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-1998
<CASH>                                         433,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  372,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                      78,412,000
<DEPRECIATION>                            (13,013,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              70,683,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                     48,356,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    19,314,000
<OTHER-SE>                                     842,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                70,683,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,374,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,669,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             906,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                799,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            796,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   796,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .51
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .51
         

</TABLE>
#### Ex parte NEWMAN BROTHERS, INC.

77-277.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

Feb. 24, 1978.

EMBRY, Justice.

WRIT DENIED.

TORBERT, C. J., and BLOODWORTH, FAULKNER and ALMON, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7785 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7785

To amend title 38, United States Code, to extend certain employment and 
reemployment rights to members of the National Guard who perform State 
                              active duty.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 24, 2020

Mr. Rose of New York introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                 to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title 38, United States Code, to extend certain employment and 
reemployment rights to members of the National Guard who perform State 
                              active duty.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF CERTAIN EMPLOYMENT AND REEMPLOYMENT RIGHTS TO 
              MEMBERS OF THE NATIONAL GUARD WHO PERFORM STATE ACTIVE 
              DUTY.

    Section 4303 of title 38, United States Code, is amended in 
paragraph (13) by inserting ``State active duty,'' after ``full-time 
National Guard duty,''.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 23

                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

The Board of Directors
Sandwich Bancorp, Inc.:

We consent to incorporation by reference in Registration Statement NO. 333-39349
on Form S-8 of Sandwich Bancorp, Inc. of our report dated January 26, 1998,
except as to note 17, which is as of March 12,k 1998, relating to the
consolidated balance sheets of Sandwich Bancorp, Inc. and subsidiaries as of
December 31, 1997 and 1996, 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, 1997, which report is included
herein.


                                                       /s/ KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP

                                                           KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP

Boston, Massachusetts
March 23, 1998
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

                         INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT'S REPORT
                         -------------------------------


We have reviewed the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of First West
Virginia Bancorp, Inc. and subsidiaries as of September 30, 2000, and the
related consolidated statements of changes in stockholders' equity, and cash
flows for the nine-month period then ended and the consolidated statements of
income for the nine and three-month period then ended. These financial
statements are the responsibility of the Company's management.

We conducted our review in accordance with standards established by the American
Institute of Certified Public Accountants. A review of interim financial
information consists principally of applying analytical and procedures to
financial data and making inquiries of persons responsible for financial and
accounting matters. It is substantially less in scope than an audit conducted in
accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, the objective of which is
the expression of an opinion regarding the financial statements taken as a
whole. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.

Based on our review, we are not aware of any material modifications that should
be made to the accompanying financial statements for them to be in conformity
with generally accepted accounting principles.

We have previously audited, in accordance with generally accepted auditing
standards, the consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 1999, and the
related consolidated statements of income, changes in stockholders' equity and
cash flows for the year then ended (not presented herein); and in our report
dated January 21, 2000, we expressed an unqualified opinion on those
consolidated financial statements.


/s/ S.R. Snodgrass A.C.



Wheeling, West Virginia
November 7, 2000