alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Della CAIN (Widow of Luther Cain), Petitioner, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES, Respondent.

No. 01-4306.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

Aug. 12, 2002.

Before MERRITT, and DAUGHTREY, Circuit Judges; and WEBER, District Judge.*

*

 The Honorable Herman J. Weber, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Ohio, sitting by designation.

*ORDER*

This matter is before the court upon a motion by the respondent to remand this case to the district director for an award of benefits. Upon review of the evidence, respondent now concedes that all the elements of entitlement to benefits have been established.

Accordingly, the decisions of the Benefits Review Board and the administrative law judge are vacated, and this matter is remanded to the district director for an award of benefits, with the date benefits should commence to be determined.
#### GULF COAST MINERALS MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, Appellant, v. Jimmy B. MYERS, Appellee.

No. 13889.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. San Antonio.

Feb. 21, 1962.

Rehearing Denied March 21, 1962.

*945King, Anderson & Porter, William R. Anderson, Jr., Corpus Christi, for appellant.

Nye, Cohn & Morris, Corpus Christi, for appellee.

POPE, Justice.

Plaintiff, Jimmy B. Myers, obtained a summary judgment. Defendant, Gulf Coast Minerals Management Corporation, on appeal insists that it should have obtained a summary judgment. The appeal concerns the meaning of a contract. During September, 1960, plaintiff, Myers, wrote a farm-out letter to Gulf Coast. The letter stated the terms by which Gulf Coast could acquire mineral rights to described property in Jim Wells County. The first paragraph of the letter stated:

> “This letter when accepted by you will evidence the understanding and agreement by and between Gulf Coast Minerals Management Corp., hereinafter called ‘Gulf Coast’, and Jimmie B. Myers, under which agreement, Gulf Coast may earn certain rights, title and interest in and to that certain leasehold estate, hereinafter described, subject to the reservations hereafter contained, all in accordance with the following terms, to-wit:”

Those conditions by which Gulf Coast “may earn” were then detailed as (1) its payment of $500.00 upon acceptance of the letter contract, (2) payment of an additional $2,000.00 within thirty more days or when it began drilling operations, whichever was sooner, and (3) the commencement of drilling operations on the tract within sixty days. Subsequent provisions of the letter stated the terms for the drilling operations. Gulf Coast accepted the terms and paid the $500.00 but did nothing further. Plaintiff then sued for the recovery of the $2,000.00. Whether that was owing under the contract is the sole point in the case.

Gulf Coast was under no duty to pay the $2,000.00. The contract gave it the power, if it so willed, to make that payment and commence drilling and thereby gain the rights stated in the contract. The words “may earn” were not compulsive. Instead, they were permissive, and Gulf Coast could either gain the rights or lose them, as it willed. State v. Clements, Tex.Civ.App., 319 S.W.2d 450; Kleck v. Zoning Board of Adjustment of San Antonio, Tex.Civ.App., 319 S.W.2d 406.

The judgment is accordingly reversed and rendered that plaintiff take nothing.
II

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 241

To increase the penalties for sexual exploitation of children, and for other

purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 18 (legislative day, JANUARY 10), 1995

Mr. D’AMATO introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To increase the penalties for sexual exploitation of children,

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 ‘‘Prevention of Sexual

5 Exploitation of Children Act’’.

6 SEC. 2. PENALTIES.

7 (a) SEXUAL EXPLOITATION OF CHILDREN.—Section

8 2251(d) of title 18, United States Code, is amended—

9 (1) by striking ‘‘10 years’’ and inserting ‘‘15

10 years’’; and
2

•S 241 IS

1 (2) by striking ‘‘more than 15 years’’ and in2 serting ‘‘more than 20 years’’.

3 (b) CERTAIN ACTIVITIES RELATING TO MATERIAL

4 INVOLVING THE SEXUAL EXPLOITATION OF MINORS.—

5 Section 2252(b)(1) of title 18, United States Code, is

6 amended—

7 (1) by striking ‘‘ten years’’ and inserting ‘‘15

8 years’’; and

9 (2) by striking ‘‘more than fifteen years’’ and

10 inserting ‘‘more than 20 years’’.

Æ
### H t t p :// ww w

. a r b

. ca

. g o v / li s p u b / c o m m

/ b cc o mm l o g

. p h

p ? l i s t n a m e = s c s i p07



# B o a r d M ee t i ng C o m m e n t s Log

S end U s Y ou r B oa r d It e m C o m m en ts



## B e l o w i s t he C o mm en t Log f o r S ou t h C o a s t S t a t e I m p l e m en t a ti on ( scs i p07 ).

# R ece i v e d F r om S u b j ect C o m m e nt P e r i od D ate

/ T i m e A dd e d t o D ata b ase A dd i t i o n a l

Fo rm L ette rs
o r A tta c h m e n ts

1 S c h m e l z er , J a s o n , C a li f orn i a C h a m ber C om m er c e C o m m e n t N o n

- R eg 2007-09-25 14 : 45 : 26 A tt a c h m e nt

2 K l e i n , Mere d i t h

, P i ll s b u r y W i n t h rop S h a w P i tt m a n LLP C om m e n t o n P ropo s ed I n c l u s i o n o f C A A P Mea s u r e s i n S I P N o n

- R eg 2007-09-26 11 : 59 : 53 A tt a c h m e nt



## Comments posted to scsip07 t hat w ere presented during t he Board Hearin g:

# R ece i v e d F r om S u b j ect C o m m e nt P e r i od D ate

/ T i m e A dd e d t o D ata b ase A dd i t i o n a l

Fo rm L ette rs
o r A tta c h m e n ts

1 P u g h

, A l e x , Lo s A n g a l e s A rea C h a m ber o f

C om m er c e 2007-10-09 14 : 39 : 17 A tt a c h m e nt

2 H er n a n de z , E d

, A ss e m b l y m e m ber E d

H er n a n de z C om m e n t o n 07- 9- 4 2007-10-09 15 : 05 : 17 A tt a c h m e nt3 Lope z , R a c h e l

, W r i tt e n T e s t i m on y o f R a c h e l Lope z o n 07-9-4 2007-10-09 16 : 12 : 48 A tt a c h m e nt

4 B arrera , Mar c o s , S C S I P 07 C o m m e n t F or m

Le tt er s 2007-10-11 10 : 05 : 32 500

A tt a c h m e nt

5 C a li f orn i a , T rade C oa li t i o n , C a li f orn i a T rade C oa l i t i o n

C om m e n t o f S C S I P 07 2007-10-11 13 : 14 : 37 A tt a c h m e nt

6 R ogge , M i c h ae l

, C a li f orn i a M a n u f a c t u r e s a n d

T e c h n o l o g y A s s o c i a t i o n o n S C S I P 07 2007-10-11 13 : 30 : 33 A tt a c h m e nt

7 B i s h op , R i ck

, W e s t er n Ri v er s i de C o u n c i l o f

G o v e r n m e n t S u ppor t f or S C S I P 07 2007-10-11 13 : 40 : 23 A tt a c h m e nt



## W e e x pect t h at a ny wr i tte n c o mm e n ts rec ei ved d u r i n g t h e B oard Hear i ng wil l be posted w i t h i n o n e we e k of t h e B o a r d Hear i n g.
**Exhibit 21.1**

**SUBSIDIARIES**

Langer, Inc.,a Delaware corporation, owns 100% of the outstanding capital stock of each ofthe following corporations:

1.                LangerBiomechanics Group (UK) Limited, an English limited liability company.

2.                LangerDistribution Services, Inc., a Delaware corporation (formerly known asGoodFoot Acquisition Co.).

3.                LangerCanada Inc., a New Brunswick (Canada) corporation.

Langer  Canada Inc.,owns 100% of the outstanding capital stock of Bi-Op Laboratories Inc., aQuebec (Canada) corporation.

4.                Silipos, Inc.,a Delaware corporation.

Silipos, Inc. owns 100% of the outstandingcapital stock of Silipos (UK), Ltd. an English limited liability Company.

----
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Justice

###### Antitrust Division

                    Notice is hereby given that, on December 5, 2023, pursuant to section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301*et seq.*                     (“the Act”), Cooperative Research Group H2                    ICE Demonstration Vehicle (“H2                    ICE”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, Daimler Truck North America LLC, Portland, OR, has been added as a party to this venture.                

                    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and H2                    ICE intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.                

                    On August 14, 2023, H2                    ICE filed its original notification pursuant to section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act on November 20, 2023 (88 FR 80763).                

Suzanne Morris,

Deputy Director Civil Enforcement Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 2024-02251 Filed 2-5-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
II

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 56

For the relief of Susan Rebola Cardenas.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 4, 1995

Mr. INOUYE introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

For the relief of Susan Rebola Cardenas.

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

3 SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENCE.

4 Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for pur5 poses of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.

6 1101 et seq.), Susan Rebola Cardenas shall be held and

7 considered to have been lawfully admitted to the United

8 States for permanent residence as of the date of the enact9 ment of this Act upon payment of the required visa fee.

10 SEC. 2. REDUCTION OF NUMBER OF AVAILABLE VISAS.

11 Upon the granting of permanent residence to Susan

12 Rebola Cardenas as provided in this Act, the Secretary
2

•S 56 IS

1 of State shall instruct the proper officer to reduce by one

2 number during the current fiscal year the total number

3 of immigrant visas available to natives of the country of

4 the alien’s birth under section 203(a) of the Immigration

5 and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(a)).

Æ
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MICHAEL JOHN VONDETTE,

 Petitioner - Appellant,

 v.

JACK FOX,

 Respondent - Appellee.

No. 14-55531

D.C. No. 2:13-cv-07351-DSF

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Dale S. Fischer, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted August 25, 2015** 

Before: McKEOWN, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

Federal prisoner Michael John Vondette appeals pro se from the district

court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction under

28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s decision to deny a

FILED

SEP 01 2015

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
section 2241 habeas petition, see Tablada v. Thomas, 533 F.3d 800, 805 (9th Cir.

2008), and we affirm. 

Vondette contends that the sentencing court was prohibited from delegating

to the Bureau of Prisons the task of establishing the time and manner in which he

was required to pay his court-imposed fines. Vondette’s argument is foreclosed by

Montano-Figueroa v. Crabtree, 162 F.3d 548 (9th Cir. 1998) (per curiam). The

cases upon which Vondette relies, holding that 18 U.S.C. § 3664(f)(2) of the

Mandatory Victims Restitution Act prohibits the delegation of restitution payment

schedules, are inapposite. See United States v. Gunning, 401 F.3d 1145, 1150 (9th

Cir. 2005) (distinguishing Montano-Figueroa’s analysis of fine payments under 18

U.S.C. § 3572(d) from restitution payments under § 3664(f)(2)). Vondette’s

reliance on Southern Union Co. v. United States, 132 S. Ct. 2344 (2012), is also

misplaced, as that case does not address a sentencing court’s ability to delegate fine

payment schedules. 

AFFIRMED.

2 14-55531
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF EARNINGS AND CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
PRESENTED IN THE FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1996.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   2-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1996
<CASH>                                         914,774
<SECURITIES>                                 1,424,694
<RECEIVABLES>                                  380,800
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,800,476
<PP&E>                                          44,953
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,230,807
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,240,153
<BONDS>                                         84,372
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           995
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,710,713
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,230,807
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               817,582
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  571,785
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                101,045
<INCOME-TAX>                                    40,932
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             60,113
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    60,113
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.91
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.91


</TABLE>
---

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

The undersigned, Bondy Tan, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:

|(1) | the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Lightscape
      Technologies Inc. for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 (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 Lightscape Technologies Inc.                                                                  



Dated: May 21, 2010



| | /s/ Bondy Tan                                            
| | ---------------------------------------------------------
| | Bondy Tan                                                
| | President and Chief Executive Officer                    
| | (Principal Executive Officer, Principal                  
| | Financial Officer and Principal Accounting
      Officer)

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Lightscape
Technologies Inc. and will be retained by Lightscape Technologies Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 457 Referred in House (RFH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 457

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 18, 1995

               Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to update references in 
     the classification of children for purposes of United States 
                           immigration laws.
    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. DEFINITION OF CHILD.

    Section 101(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
1101(b)) is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (1)--
                    (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``legitimate 
                child'' and inserting ``child born in wedlock''; and
                    (B) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``an 
                illegitimate child'' and inserting ``a child born out 
                of wedlock''; and
            (2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``an illegitimate child'' 
        and inserting ``a child born out of wedlock''.
            Passed the Senate July 17 (legislative day, July 10), 1995.

            Attest:

                                             KELLY D. JOHNSTON,

                                                             Secretary.
```
EXHIBIT 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the 
incorporation of our reports included or incorporated by reference in this
Form 10-K/A into the Company's previously filed Registration Statements 
File Nos. 33-45015, 33-42561, 33-23294, 33-16585, 33-6604, 33-959, 2-91008,
33-40623, 33-46874, 33-46875, 33-50628, 33-57519, 33-63637, 333-7279 
and 33-62257.


                                                             ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP


Stamford, Connecticut
April 29, 1997

<PAGE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6911
SYLVIA RYAN WEBSTER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus VANESSA ADAMS, Alderson Prison Camp, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. David A. Faber, Chief District Judge. (CA-03-690-1) Submitted: August 12, 2004 Decided: August 20, 2004 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Sylvia Ryan Webster, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Sylvia Ryan Webster appeals the district court’s order accepting the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing her complaint filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000), and also considered under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Fed. Bureau of Narcotics , 403 U.S. 388 (1971). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. SeeWebster v. Adams , No. CA-03-690-1 (S.D.W. Va. filed May 13, 2004 & entered May 14, 2004). We dispense wi th oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-7709

RONALD CLIFFORD JOHNSON, Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

KIM MCBRIDE; LEON DUJOUN; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER ALGER; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER DUSING; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER JONES, Defendants - Appellees,

and

CLARKE-FAUQUIER-FREDERICK-WINCHESTER REGIONAL ADULT DETENTION CENTER; RONALD WERDEBAUGH; FRED D. HILDEBRAND; LARRY T. OMPS; NANCY RHODES OMPS, Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Glen E. Conrad, District Judge. (7:04-cv-00050-gec)
Submitted: January 18, 2007 Decided: January 24, 2007
Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and GREGROY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.- 2 - Ronald Clifford Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Rosalie Pemberton Fessier, TIMBERLAKE, SMITH, THOMAS & MOSES, PC, Staunton, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 3 - PER CURIAM: Ronald Clifford Johnson appeals the district court’s order entering judgment on the jury verdict and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Johnson v. Clarke-Fauquier , No. 7:04-cv-00050-gec (W.D. Va. Sept. 27, 2006). We further deny Johnson’s motion for the preparation of trial transcripts at government expense. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
| Name of Entity             | State of Organization |
|----------------------------|-----------------------|
| Merisel Americas, Inc.     | Delaware              |
| Merisel Properties, Inc.   | Delaware              |
| Color Edge LLC             | Delaware              |
| Color Edge Visual LLC      | Delaware              |
| Comp 24 LLC                | Delaware              |
| Crush Creative LLC         | Delaware              |
| Dennis Curtin Studios, LLC | Delaware              |
| MADP, LLC                  | Delaware              |
| Advertising Props, Inc.    | Georgia               |
| Fuel Digital, LLC          | Delaware              |