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

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4594 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4594

         To suspend temporarily the duty on Octanoyl chloride.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 24, 2012

 Mrs. Myrick introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
         To suspend temporarily the duty on Octanoyl chloride.

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

SECTION 1. OCTANOYL CHLORIDE.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00        Octanoyl chloride   Free            No change      No change      On or before     ''.
                          (CAS No. 111-64-                                                  12/31/2015
                          8) (provided for
                          in subheading
                          2915.90.50)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### CLAYTON v. STATE.

No. 26727.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 6, 1954.

No attorney on appeal for appellant.

James Pearson, County Atty., Sweetwa-ter, Wesley Dice, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

BELCHER, Commissioner.

Appellant was convicted for the offense of driving an automobile upon a public highway while intoxicated, and his punishment was assessed at a fine of $100.

The complaint and information, as well as all matters of procedure, appear regular. The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception, in the absence of which nothing is presented for review.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Opinion approved by the court
```

[Federal Register: March 31, 2011 (Volume 76, Number 62)]
[Notices]               
[Page 17839]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr31mr11-34]                         

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

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

 
Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE: 11 a.m., Friday April 29, 2010.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission 
Conference Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Surveillance and Enforcement Matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Sauntia S. Warfield, 202-418-5084.

Sauntia S. Warfield,
Assistant Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2011-7703 Filed 3-29-11; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
```
#### REECE v. STATE.

No. 23933.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 25, 1948.

No appearance for appellant.

Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

KRUEGER, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of the offense of possessing intoxicating liquor in a , dry area for the purpose of sale. Her punishment was assessed at a fine of $300.

 The record is before us with the statement of facts incorporated in the transcript which is in violation of Sec. 2, Art. 760, C.C.P., Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P. art. 760, subd. 2. Therefore, the same cannot be considered. In the absence of a statement of facts, we cannot determine the insufficiency of the evidence nor properly appraise her bills of exception. See Beevers v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 209 S.W.2d 175, but not yet reported [in State reports].

The complaint and information seem to be sufficient to charge the offense.

. From what we have said it follows that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed and it is. so ordered.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion Of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by .the Court.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 21-0260

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

DANIELLE WOOD,

Defendant and Appellant. 

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and 

good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including May 9, 2022, within which to prepare, file, and 

serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

April 4 2022

04/04/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0260
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporation byreference in the Registration Statement Numbers 333-126992 and 333-137146 on Form S-8 and in the related Prospectuses of our reports dated July 20, 2007, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Chaparral Steel Company andsubsidiaries, Chaparral Steel Company’s management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Chaparral Steel Company andsubsidiaries, included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended May 31, 2007. 

 

Dallas, Texas 

July 20, 2007
II 

Calendar No. 393 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4628 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 7, 2012 

Received; read the first time 

MAY 8, 2012 

Read the second time and placed on the calendar 

AN ACT 

To extend student loan interest rates for undergraduate 

Federal Direct Stafford Loans. 

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


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 4628 PCS 

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Interest Rate Reduc3 tion Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. INTEREST RATE EXTENSION. 

5 Subparagraph (D) of section 455(b)(7) of the Higher 

6 Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1087e(b)(7)(D)) is 

7 amended— 

8 (1) in the matter preceding clause (i), by strik9 ing ‘‘2012’’ and inserting ‘‘2013’’; and 

10 (2) in clause (v), by striking ‘‘2012’’ and insert11 ing ‘‘2013’’. 

12 SEC. 3. REPEALING PREVENTION AND PUBLIC HEALTH 

13 FUND. 

14 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 4002 of the Patient Pro15 tection and Affordable Care Act (42 U.S.C. 300u–11) is 

16 repealed. 

17 (b) RESCISSION OF UNOBLIGATED FUNDS.—Of the 

18 funds made available by such section 4002, the unobli19 gated balance is rescinded. 

20 SEC. 4. COMPLIANCE WITH STATUTORY PAY-AS-YOU-GO 

21 ACT OF 2010. 

22 The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of 

23 complying with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, 

24 shall be determined by reference to the latest statement 

25 titled ‘‘Budgetary Effects of PAYGO Legislation’’ for this 

26 Act, submitted for printing in the Congressional Record 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

HR 4628 PCS 

1 by the Chairman of the House Budget Committee, pro2 vided that such statement has been submitted prior to the 

3 vote on passage. 

Passed the House of Representatives April 27, 2012. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 393 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4628 

AN ACT 

To extend student loan interest rates for 

undergraduate Federal Direct Stafford Loans. 

MAY 8, 2012 

Read the second time and placed on the calendar 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
U.S. Department of 

Transportation 

Office of the Secretary 

ot Transportation 

,_ ' .• 

subject: Exception to Normal Payout Procedures 

for Subsidized Carriers at Shutdown-Airports 

(Docket DOT-OS)T-20~-0303) 

/~~~~-;.. 0.. . cl!j2J!/rvv/1_9--v 

From: Kevin D. Schlemmer, Chief 

EAS and Domestic Analysis, X-53 

To: Gregory Frazier 

Reference: Order 2013-10-8 

Airport Closing 

Memorandum 

Date: July 29, 2014 

Reply 

to Michael Martin, X-53 

Attn. Ext 66494 

of: 

Chippowa County International Airport (CIU), serving Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan, was 

closed from June 2 through June 22, 2014 due to the airport repaving its runway. Delta 

Air Lines, Inc. (Delta) has been operating subsidized EAS at CIU. It has been our policy, 

on a case-by-case basis, to pay the airline its usual subsidy rate when airports have been 

closed on the grounds that the circumstances are beyond the airline's control. Consistent 

with that precedent, we ask you to compensate Delta for flights that could not be operated 

on the dates stated above due to the airport closure. 

cc: 

Delta Air Lines, Inc.
07/19/2010 MON 10:49 FAX 817 222 5092 regional counsel 

& 

U.S. Deportment 

of Tronsportotion 

Federal Aviation 

AdmirastroHon 

Southvvest Region 

Ar1<ansas, Louisiana. 

New Mexico, Oklahoma 

Texas 

Office of Regional Counsel, ASW-7 

2601 Mcacham Blvd. 

Fort Worth. TX 76137 

(617) 22Z-5099 

(817) 222-5945/5092 FAX 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

In the Matter of: 

Freedom Airiines 

* 

* 

FAA Docket No. CP09SW0005 

FAA Case No. 2008SW070080 

ALJ Honorable Richard C. Goodwin 

MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE 

COMES NOW the Administrator and files this Motion for Continuance and as 

cause thereof would show the following. 

t. 

A hearing date of August 11,12 and 13, 2010, has been set for the above c£Lptioned 

matter. 

n. 

The Respondent, Freedom Airlines, is a subsidiary of Mesa Air Group, Tnc, 

which filed a Petition for Bankruptcy on January 5, 2010. 

IT. 

The parties are in the process of settling the case but must have the approval of the 

Bankrupty Trustee. Considering the extenuating circumstances, a continuance in 

these cases would be in the best interest of all parties concerned. 
07/19/2010 MON 10:49 FAI 817 222 5092 regional counsel @1003/004 

WHEREFORE, BY REASON OF THE FOREGOING, the Federal Aviation 

Administration hereby prays that the Motion for Continuance be granted. 

Respectfully Submitted 

LYNETTE WORD 

Regional Counsel 

Soudiwest Region 

By: "Annjen^t ^hennault 

Attorn4 

817-222^5071 
07/19/2010 MON 10:49 FAX 817 222 5092 regional counsel S004/004 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that the original and one copy of the foregoing Motion for 

Continuance has been mailed July 19, 2010, by Certified Mail - Return Receipt 

Requested and fax to: 

Hearing Docket 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright BuUding—Suite 2W1000 

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Motion for Continuance, has been mailed 

July 19, 2010, by Certified Mail-Return Receipt Requested, and fax to the following: 

Honorable Richard C. Goodwin 

Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearing, .M-20, 

Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue , S.E. 

East Building Ground Floor, Room El 2-320 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

Christopher Pappaioanou 

Director, Legal Affairs 

Mesa Air Group 

410 North 44* Street, Suite 700 

Phoenix, AZ 85008 

Tut^^^^^A* ^ 

Marquifta Robinson 

Paralegal Specialist
#### STOKES v. STATE.

No. 24378.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 11, 1949.

None on appeal for appellant.

Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

DAVIDSON, Judge.

The offense is theft; the penalty, two years in the penitentiary.

Notice of appeal herein appears only as a docket entry. This is insufficient; it must he entered of record, which means entered upon the minutes of the court. Art. 827, C.C.P.; Crozier v. State, 141 Tex.Cr.R. 407, 149 S.W.2d 108; Beasley v. State, 144 Tex.Cr.R. 366, 162 S.W.2d 968; Patton v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 203 S.W.2d 224.

The appeal is dismissed.

Opinion approved by the Court.
|                                                                                      
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                      
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                        
|View History: Annual                                                                  
|View History: Annual                                                                  
|View History:                                                                         
|                                                                                      
|Nebraska Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves New Field Discoveries (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                      
|                                                                                      
|Nebraska Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves New Field Discoveries (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                      

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 0     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 1      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | --     | --     | --     | --    
|2020's                                                                                                                            | --     | --     |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
Exhibit 10.12
 SUPPLEMENTAL BENEFITS PLAN
  Purpose
 Effective Date
 Participation
 Benefit Determination Date




---



##### 



Benefit Amount
       Grandfathered Benefit Amount
 Date and Form of Payment  Before 2009
 Date and Form of Payment  After 2008
   - 2 -




---



##### 



1 2
  - 3 -




---



##### 



Interest:
    
    7%Mortality:
    
    UP-1984 Mortality Table, with ages set back 1-1/2 years
   Spouses Death Benefit
   - 4 -




---



##### 



Reemployment After Payments Begin
 Termination and Amendment of the Plan
 Source of Benefit Payments
 Committee
  - 5 -




---



##### 



Claims Procedure
 Right to Make Claim
 Process for Denying a Claim
 Appeal of Denial and Final Review
  Time Frame
 Days to RespondAction
    
    From Last ActionCommittees initial decision
    
    90 daysInterested party requests final review
    
    60 daysCommittees final decision
    
    60 days
  - 6 -




---



##### 



Compliance with Regulations
 Exhaustion of Remedies
 Nonalienation
 No Contract of Employment
 Withholding
 Successors
 Plan Year
 Governing Law
 Headings
  - 7 -




---



##### 



Gender and Number
 Top-Hat Plan
 Construction
  VWR INTERNATIONAL, LLCBy:

/s/
George Van Kula  - 8 -




---



##### 



APPENDIX A
  Name
    
    Additional Credited ServiceMatt Malenfant
    
    9 additional years
  - 9 -
FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEVEN T HC IRC U IT FEB RUARY 23, 2007 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 06- 13856 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D
. C
. D ocketN o. 05 -001 83 -C V -R L V -4 F L O Y D D . M A N N I N G , P la in tif f
- A p p e lle e , v ersu s S T E V E W I L S O N , S h e r if f , W a lk e rC o u n ty , G e o r g ia , in h is O f f ic ia l a n d I n d iv id u a l C ap a c ity , e t a l., D e f e n d a n ts , R O N C L A R K , D e p u ty S h e r if

f , W a lk e rC o u n ty , G e o r g ia , in h is O f f ic ia l a n d I n d iv id u a l C ap a c ity , P A M E L A S . P A N G L E , P a r ol e O f

f i c e r , S t a t e B oa r d of

P a r dons a nd P a r o le s , W a lk e rC o u n ty , G e o r g ia , in h e rO f f ic ia l a n d I n d iv id a l C ap a c ity , D e f e n d a n ts - A p p e lla n ts .

________________________ A pp ea l s f

rom the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e N o r th e rn D is tr ic t o f G e o r g ia

_________________________ ( F e b r u ar y 23, 2007)2

B efo re B L A C K , B A R K E T T an d M A R C U S , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: R on C l a rk a nd P a m e l aP a ngl e appe a l f r om a n a dve r s e s um m a ry j udgm e nt d e n y i n g th e m q u a l i f

i e d i mmu n i ty f

r o m Fl o y d M a n n i n g ’ s c l a i m u n d e r4 2 U
. S. C. § 1983 tha tC l ark a nd P a ngl e vi ol a t e d hi s F our th a nd F our t e e nth A m e ndm e ntr i ght t o be f r e e f r om unr e a s onabl e s e a r c he s a nd s e i z ur e s . I n ourde novo r e vi e w of the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s rul i ng, w e f i r s tr e s ol ve a l l i s s ue s of m a t e r i a l f

a c ti n f a vorof the pl ai nt i ff , and then p roce ed t o the l egal qu es t i on of w hether the defendanti s e nt i t l ed t o qua l i f i e d i m m uni ty unde rhi s ve r s i on of the f a c t s . L e e v. F e rr a r o, 284 F
. 3d 11 88 , 11 90 (11th C i r. 20 02 ). U nd erM anni ng ’ s ver si on of the re l evantfa ct s, C l ark and P angl e “

j i m m i ed” the fr on tl ock o f hi s hou se and sea rc hed the prem i se s
w i tho uta w arrant , and i n the abse nce of any e xi gentci rc um st ance s. If prov en at tr i a l , the s e f

a c t s w oul d c om pe l the c onc l us i on tha tC l a rk a nd P a ngl e , a c t i ng i n a di s c r e t i ona ry c apa c i ty , c om m i tt e d a“ c l e a r l y e s t abl i s he d” c ons t i tut i ona l vi ol a t i on, C rosby v. M on roe C ou nty, 39 4 F
. 3d 13 28 , 13 32 (11th C i r. 20 04 ). T here fore , they
a r e n o t e n title d to q u a lif ie d im m u n ity a n d th e ju d g m e n t o f th e d is tr ic t c o u r t is AF F I RME D.
|                                                                                        
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                        
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                          
|View History: Annual                                                                    
|View History: Annual                                                                    
|View History:                                                                           
|                                                                                        
|Alaska Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Estimated Production from Reserves (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                        
|                                                                                        
|Alaska Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Estimated Production from Reserves (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                        

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 210   
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 195    | 206    | 191    | 186    | 182    | 174    | 178    | 177    | 176    | 171   
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 162    | 167    |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

March 27, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

130214 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PAMELA L. WILLIAMS, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 130214 

 COA: 254906 

Wayne CC: 03-315615-NI

MICHAEL A. WHITFIELD, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 17, 2005 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

p0320 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

March 27, 2006 

Clerk
**Exhibit
32.2**
 
 
 **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 Siboney Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the
period ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, William D. Edwards, Jr. Chief Financial
Officer of the Company do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as
adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
 
 (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.
 
 
 /s/ William D.
Edwards, Jr.
 William D. Edwards,
Jr.
 Chief Financial
Officer
 
 
 May 16,
2005