alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Navigate to Homepage
Search
Main navigation
  

        
              Explore the Capitol Campus
                          Art
                            Buildings & Grounds
                            Capitol Hill Facts
                            Visitor Resources
                            Our Blog
                            What We Do
                          Areas of Expertise
                            Programs & Ceremonies
                            Projects
                            Publications
                            Strategic Objectives
                            About Us
                          Who We Are
                            History of the AOC
                            News & Notices
                            Organizational Structure
                            Partnerships & Recognition
                            Work With UsSearch Breadcrumb
    Homecommentreply2281Add new comment
Add new comment
        
                  Bill Rogers (not verified)PermalinkFebruary 4, 2021 - 1:08pmA nice trip down memory lane for all the current guides. Proud to say Lauren Shiflet is my niece. She is well informed and proudly serves as a Capitol guide.
ReplyYour name
Email Address
        The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Comment
About text formats
Plain text
  
  
      
          No HTML tags allowed.
                      Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
                      Web page addresses and email addresses turn into links automatically. Serve. Preserve. Inspire.

              Contact Us
                            Accountability
                            Hill Staff Resources
                            AOC Staff Resources
Utility
  

        
              Privacy Policy
                            Image Terms of Use
                            Inspector General
                            U.S. Botanic Garden
                            U.S. Capitol Visitor CenterFacebook
	Twitter
	Flickr
	YouTube
	Instagram
	Subscribe
U. S. Department of Agriculture

Agricultural Marketing Service

NOTICE OF SALE OF COTTON

FOR RELEASE AT 2:00 P.M. CT September 25, 2019

USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service today announced the sale of Cotton. The cotton bales were sold under 

Invitation 2019U0019 dated September 17, 2019.

Invitation 2019U0019

Catalog 

Lot No. 

Catalog Location Purchaser Pounds Sold 

Price Sold 

(per 

Pound)

CCC Revenue 

1 LUBBOCK, TX ALLENBERG COTTON CO. 499 0.4885 $243.76 

2 LUBBOCK, TX ALLENBERG COTTON CO. 469 0.6173 $289.51 

3 ALTUS, OK ALLENBERG COTTON CO. 4022 0.4811 $1,934.98 

4 LUBBOCK, TX ALLENBERG COTTON CO. 2836 0.48 $1,361.28 

5 LUBBOCK, TX ALLENBERG COTTON CO. 455 0.4792 $218.04 

6 LUBBOCK, TX ALLENBERG COTTON CO. 1440 0.4553 $655.63 

7 LUBBOCK, TX ALLENBERG COTTON CO. 503 0.4561 $229.42 

10,224 $4,932.63
Navigate to Homepage
Search
Main navigation
  

        
              Explore the Capitol Campus
                          Art
                            Buildings & Grounds
                            Capitol Hill Facts
                            Visitor Resources
                            Our Blog
                            What We Do
                          Areas of Expertise
                            Programs & Ceremonies
                            Projects
                            Publications
                            Strategic Objectives
                            About Us
                          Who We Are
                            History of the AOC
                            News & Notices
                            Organizational Structure
                            Partnerships & Recognition
                            Work With UsSearch Breadcrumb
    HomeWhat We DoPrograms & Ceremonies
Concerts at the U.S. Capitol
Throughout the year, concerts are often presented on the U.S. Capitol Grounds. All concerts held on the grounds are free and open to the public.
        
                  Image
    Fireworks during the July 4th concert on the U.S. Capitol's West Front Lawn in 2009.

Fireworks during the July 4th concert on the U.S. Capitol's West Front Lawn in 2009.

National Symphony Orchestra (NSO) Series

The NSO performs three starlight concerts annually on the West Front lawn of the U.S. Capitol. These concerts are sponsored by Congress and the Secretary of the Interior, and are held in observance of:

Memorial Day
	Independence Day
	Labor Day**For full details, please go to capitalconcerts.org and kennedy-center.org/nso.**
          
    
    
      We love our jobs. Do you? Come work with us.
        View Job Listings Serve. Preserve. Inspire.

              Contact Us
                            Accountability
                            Hill Staff Resources
                            AOC Staff Resources
Utility
  

        
              Privacy Policy
                            Image Terms of Use
                            Inspector General
                            U.S. Botanic Garden
                            U.S. Capitol Visitor CenterFacebook
	Twitter
	Flickr
	YouTube
	Instagram
	Subscribe
26063

#### State v. Paneto

Affirmed
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 99 

To prohibit anticompetitive activities and to provide that health insurance 

issuers and medical malpractice insurance issuers are subject to the 

antitrust laws of the United States, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 6, 2015 

Mr. CONYERS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To prohibit anticompetitive activities and to provide that 

health insurance issuers and medical malpractice insurance issuers are subject to the antitrust laws of the 

United States, 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 ‘‘Health Insurance In5 dustry Antitrust Enforcement Act of 2015’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION OF ANTICOMPETITIVE ACTIVITIES. 

7 Notwithstanding any other provision of law, nothing 

8 in the Act of March 9, 1945 (15 U.S.C. 1011 et seq., comVerDate Sep 11 2014 22:41 Jan 10, 2015 Jkt 049200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H99.IH H99

tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 99 IH

1 monly known as the ‘‘McCarran-Ferguson Act’’), shall be 

2 construed to permit health insurance issuers (as defined 

3 in section 2791 of the Public Health Service Act (42 

4 U.S.C. 300gg–91)) or issuers of medical malpractice in5 surance to engage in any form of price fixing, bid rigging, 

6 or market allocations in connection with the conduct of 

7 the business of providing health insurance coverage (as de8 fined in such section) or coverage for medical malpractice 

9 claims or actions. 

10 SEC. 3. RESTORING THE APPLICATION OF ANTITRUST 

11 LAWS TO HEALTH SECTOR INSURERS. 

12 (a) AMENDMENT TO MCCARRAN-FERGUSON ACT.— 

13 Section 3 of the Act of March 9, 1945 (15 U.S.C. 1013), 

14 commonly known as the McCarran-Ferguson Act, is 

15 amended by adding at the end the following: 

16 ‘‘(c) Nothing contained in this Act shall modify, im17 pair, or supersede the operation of any of the antitrust 

18 laws with respect to the business of health insurance. For 

19 purposes of the preceding sentence, the term ‘antitrust 

20 laws’ has the meaning given it in subsection (a) of the 

21 first section of the Clayton Act, except that such term in22 cludes section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act to 

23 the extent that such section 5 applies to unfair methods 

24 of competition.’’. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 99 IH

1 (b) RELATED PROVISION.—For purposes of section 

2 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 45) 

3 to the extent such section applies to unfair methods of 

4 competition, section 3(c) of the McCarran-Ferguson Act 

5 shall apply with respect to the business of health insurance 

6 without regard to whether such business is carried on for 

7 profit, notwithstanding the definition of ‘‘Corporation’’ 

8 contained in section 4 of the Federal Trade Commission 

9 Act. 

Æ 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Order filed, March 18, 2013

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 12

- 01031

- CV

____________ ARSENIO CANTU , Appellant

V.

VERONICA PENA , Appellee

On Appeal from the Co Civil Ct at Law No 4

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1017967



### ORDER
The reporter’s record in this case was due March 5, 2013

. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.1. The court has not received a request to extend time for filing the record. The record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporte r’s record has not been filed timely, we issue the following order.

We order Karen Field , the official court reporter, to file the record in this appeal within 30 days of the date of this order

. PER CURIAM
Docket ID: FAA - 2015 - 1428 Dir ID: 2015 - NM - 023 - AD
26167

#### State v. Johnson

Affirmed
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

No. 04-12-00796-CV

IN RE Manuel A. BENAVIDES, Individually and on Behalf of GM Rentals, Ltd.

Original Mandamus Proceeding1

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

Karen Angelini, Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Delivered and Filed: December 14, 2012

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED

On November 28, 2012, Relators Manuel A. Benavides, Individually and on Behalf of 

GM Rentals, Ltd., filed a petition for writ of mandamus. The court has considered the relators’ 

petition and determined that the relators are not entitled to the relief sought. Therefore, the 

petition is DENIED. TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a).

PER CURIAM

 

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2011-CV-F000997-D1, styled Manuel A. Benavides, Individually 

and on Behalf of G.M. Rentals, Ltd. v. Guillermo Benavides, Jr., et al., pending in the 49th Judicial District Court, 

Webb County, Texas, the Honorable Jose A. Lopez presiding.
#### In the Matter of Rudolph F. Kreck, Petitioner, *v.*Board of Public Safety of the City of Oneonta et al., Respondents.

Supreme Court, Otsego County,

January 13, 1971.

*Frank W. Qetman*for petitioner. *Harold C. Vrooman*for respondents.

Joseph P. Molihari, J. An article 78 proceeding under the CPLR has been brought before this court on behalf of a policeman of the City of Oneonta Police Department for a review of the proceedings, acts and determination of the Board of Public Safety of the City of Oneonta.

After a hearing held before said board, the petitioner was found guilty of the charge, and was punished by a forfeiture of 10 days’ pay.

It further appears that said hearing was held under section 75 of the Civil Service Law of the State of New York.

The petitioner feels aggrieved by the above-mentioned penalty and appeals the same pursuant to section 76 of the aforesaid Civil Service Law.

To be sure, the burden of proving incompetency or misconduct of the petitioner rests upon the person alleging the same, viz: the Board of Public Safety of the City of Oneonta. Said section 75 further provides that compliance with technical rules of evidence shall not be required.

It appears to be undisputed that the present record before the court on appeal is incomplete due to some malfunction in the operation of the transcribing instrument. It also appears from the argument before the court that the petitioner, together with a fellow officer, while investigating the unlocked condition of a store in the City of Oneonta, took a couple of pieces of cheese from the premises, and while eating them, thanked the manager for the .same.

*380It further appears that the petitioner has been employed by the city in his present capacity, with an unblemished record, for a substantial number of years, this being his first alleged offense of any nature, and his superior, the Chief of Police, rating the petitioner as a more than efficient officer.

It is the opinion of the court that the forfeiture of 10 days’ pay due the petitioner, which exceeds the sum of $100, is illegal in view of the fact that said sum is greater than the maximum fine permitted under section 75 (subd. 3) of the Civil Service Law.

This court does not condone any improper act on the part of any law enforcement officer; however, in view of the incomplete record before it, and further in view of the petitioner’s prior good conduct record, and also in view of the facts presented at the hearing, it would seem that a reprimand by the board of the petitioner would have been sufficient under all the circumstances.

An order may be submitted directing that the petitioner be reimbursed for the 10 days’ forfeiture of pay, heretofore directed by the Public Safety Board of the City of Oneonta, New York, and that the determination of said board against the petitioner herein is hereby reversed, and that charges be dismissed.
#### Souza v. Metcalf

18699

10/21/96

Vacated and Remanded
26566

#### Diplomat Tours and Travel, Inc. v. Sanga

Affirmed
EXHIBIT
23.1










CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM








We have
issued our reports dated January 29, 2009, with respect to the consolidated
financial statements and schedule and management’s assessment of the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting included in the
Annual Report of Chattem, Inc. on Form 10-K for the year ended November 30,
2008.  We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said
reports in the Registration Statements of Chattem, Inc. on Form S-3 (File
No. 333-69397, effective December 22, 1998), Form S-3ASR
(File No. 333-143986, effective June 22, 2007, and File
No. 333-141300, effective March 14, 2007), Form S-4
(File No. 333-113808, effective March 22, 2004) and Form S-8
(File No. 333-125149, effective May 23, 2005; File No. 33-35386,
effective June 13, 1990; File No. 33-78524, effective May 4, 1994; File No.
33-78522, effective May 4, 1994; File No. 333-104888, effective May 1,
2003; File No. 333-39558, effective June 19, 2000;
File No. 333-79809, effective June 2, 1999; File
No. 33-55640, effective December 10, 1992; and
File No. 333-61267, effective August 12, 1998).







/s/ GRANT
THORNTON LLP







Charlotte,
North Carolina


January
29, 2009
<TABLE> <S> <C>

 <ARTICLE>                          5
 <LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
COMPANY'S  FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS  CONTAINED IN THE COMPANY'S 10-Q FOR THE PERIOD
ENDED MARCH 31, 1998 AND IS  QUALIFIED  IN ITS  ENTIRETY  BY  REFERENCE  TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
 </LEGEND>
         
    <S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                  JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                    MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                             (450,640)
<SECURITIES>                                              0
         <RECEIVABLES>                            5,985,679
<ALLOWANCES>                                       (657,373)
<INVENTORY>                                         230,060
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  7,519,285
<PP&E>                                           11,983,460
<DEPRECIATION>                                   (1,421,428)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   18,917,629
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             5,891,553
<BONDS>                                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                               0
<COMMON>                                          3,801,926
<OTHER-SE>                                        3,731,216
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     18,917,629
<SALES>                                          27,400,357
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 27,400,357
<CGS>                                            22,210,386
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    27,146,069
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                          0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  294,904
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     183,208
<INCOME-TAX>                                         43,202
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
                    <EXTRAORDINARY>                       0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                        140,006
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                          0.05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          0.05
        

</TABLE>
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

No. 20

- 50370 Summary Calendar

**United States of America,** Plaintiff

— Appellee **,**

versus **Benedicto Martinez**

**- Sario,**  also known as **Benedicto Sario**

  ** Martinez,** Defendant

— Appellant

**.** Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 4:20

- CR

- 92

- 1

Before **Haynes, Willett,** and **Ho,** Circuit Judges

**. Per Curiam**  **:** * Benedicto Martinez

- Sario appeals his sentence of 14 months of imprisonment and three years of supervised release following his guilty plea to illegal reentry into the United States after deportation . He contends that

* Pursuant to **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  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 cuit**  **R ule**  47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED November 6, 2020 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 20-50370 Document: 00515629731 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/06/2020No. 20

- 50370

2 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) is unconstitutional because it permits a sentence above the otherwise

- applicable statutory maximum, based on facts that are neither alleged in the indictment nor found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. While Marti nez - Sario acknowledges this argument is foreclosed by Almendarez

- Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224 (1998), he nevertheless seeks to preserve it for possible Supreme Court review. The Supreme Court held in Almendarez

- Torres that , for purposes of a st atutory sentencing enhancement, a prior conviction is not a fact that must be alleged in the indictment or found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. 523 U.S. at 239

- 47. This court has held that subsequent Supreme Court decisions , such as Alleyne v. United States , 570 U.S. 99 (2013) and Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000), did not overrule Almendarez

- Torres

. See United States v. Wallace , 759 F.3d 486, 497 (5th Cir. 2014) ; United States v. Pineda

- Arrellano , 492 F.3d 624, 625

- 26 (5th Cir. 2007 ) . Thus, Martinez

Sario is correct that his argument is foreclosed, and summary affirmance is appropriate. See Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis , 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969). The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is **GRANTED** , the distric t court’s judgment is **AFFIRMED** , and the Government’s alternative motion for an extension of time to file a brief is **DENIED** as moot
. Case: 20-50370 Document: 00515629731 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/06/2020
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 4 (Monday, January 7, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 966]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-00126]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the 
Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities 
and Exchange Commission will hold a Closed Meeting on Thursday, January 
10, 2013 at 2:00 p.m.
    Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the 
Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the Closed Meeting. 
Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters also may be 
present.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has 
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth 
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (7), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR 
200.402(a)(3), (5), (7), 9(ii) and (10) permit consideration of the 
scheduled matters at the Closed Meeting.
    Commissioner Paredes, as duty officer, voted to consider the items 
listed for the Closed Meeting in a closed session.
    The subject matter of the Closed Meeting scheduled for Thursday, 
January 10, 2013 will be:

    Institution and settlement of injunctive actions; institution and 
settlement of administrative proceedings; and litigation matters.

    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in 
the scheduling of meeting items.
    For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have 
been added, deleted or postponed, please contact the Office of the 
Secretary at (202) 551-5400.

     Dated: January 3, 2013.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-00126 Filed 1-3-13; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                       5
       
<S>                                               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                    DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                                1,674,068
<SECURITIES>                                                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                                           295,781
<ALLOWANCES>                                                  0
<INVENTORY>                                                   0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                              0
<PP&E>                                                        0
<DEPRECIATION>                                                0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       26,494,341
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                         0
<BONDS>                                                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                         0
<PREFERRED>                                                   0
<COMMON>                                                      0
<OTHER-SE>                                           19,597,525
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         26,494,341
<SALES>                                                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                      2,677,799
<CGS>                                                         0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                 0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                      1,656,074
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         13,145
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                      251,740
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                         756,840
<INCOME-TAX>                                                  0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                     756,840
<DISCONTINUED>                                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                               0
<CHANGES>                                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                                            756,840
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                 0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                 0
        


</TABLE>