alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# K-1 APPENDIX K

Residence Time MapsK-2K-3K-4K-5K-6K-7K-8K-9K-10K-11K-12K-13K-14K-15K-16K-17K-18K-19K-20K-21K-22K-23K-24K-25K-26K-27K-28K-29K-30K-31K-32K-33K-34K-35K-36K-37K-38K-39K-40K-41K-42K-43
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3281 

To transfer criminal enforcement and investigative authority and functions 

of certain agencies to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 9, 2013 

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To transfer criminal enforcement and investigative authority 

and functions of certain agencies to the Federal Bureau 

of Investigation. 

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

3 SECTION 1. TRANSFER OF CRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT AND 

4 INVESTIGATIVE AUTHORITY AND FUNCTIONS 

5 TO THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGA6 TION. 

7 (a) REPEAL OF EPA POWERS.—Section 3063 of title 

8 18, United States Code, is repealed. 

9 (b) TRANSFER OF AUTHORITY TO FBI.—Notwith10 standing any other provision of law, any criminal enforcemstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•HR 3281 IH

1 ment authority and functions and any criminal investiga2 tive authority and functions of the Environmental Protec3 tion Agency shall be transferred to the Director of the 

4 Federal Bureau of Investigation, except for any criminal 

5 enforcement authority and functions and any criminal in6 vestigative authority and functions delegated to State or 

7 local law enforcement. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE MARCH
31, 2000 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-K AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FORM 10-K.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                          38,347
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,164
<ALLOWANCES>                                       650
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                44,809
<PP&E>                                           3,335
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,416
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  46,115
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,139
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           131
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    46,115
<SALES>                                         35,186
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                35,186
<CGS>                                           26,207
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   26,207
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                10,673
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,694
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  19
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    128
<INCOME-TAX>                                       109
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        19
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.00


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3242 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3242

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the election to 
   treat the cost of qualified film and television productions as an 
          expense which is not chargeable to capital account.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 3, 2013

  Ms. Titus introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the election to 
   treat the cost of qualified film and television productions as an 
          expense which is not chargeable to capital account.

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

SECTION 1. TWO-YEAR EXTENSION OF SPECIAL EXPENSING RULES FOR CERTAIN 
              FILM AND TELEVISION PRODUCTIONS.

    (a) In General.--Subsection (f) of section 181 of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``December 31, 2013'' and 
inserting ``December 31, 2015''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to productions commencing after December 31, 2013.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3364 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3364

To authorize and request the President to issue a posthumous commission 
in the regular Army to Milton Holland, who, while sergeant major of the 
5th Regiment, United States Colored Infantry, was awarded the Medal of 
               Honor for gallantry during the Civil War.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 29, 2013

  Mr. Stivers (for himself and Mr. Al Green of Texas) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To authorize and request the President to issue a posthumous commission 
in the regular Army to Milton Holland, who, while sergeant major of the 
5th Regiment, United States Colored Infantry, was awarded the Medal of 
               Honor for gallantry during the Civil War.

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

SECTION 1. REQUEST FOR POSTHUMOUS APPOINTMENT OF MILTON HOLLAND AS A 
              COMMISSIONED OFFICER IN THE ARMY.

    (a) Request.--The President is authorized and requested to issue, 
or have issued, a posthumous commission in the grade of captain in the 
regular Army in the name of Milton Holland, who, while sergeant major 
of the 5th Regiment, United States Colored Infantry, was awarded the 
Medal of Honor in recognition of his action on September 29, 1864, 
during the Battle of Chapin's Farm, Virginia, when, as the citation for 
the medal states, Sergeant Major Holland ``took command of Company C, 
after all the officers had been killed or wounded, and gallantly led 
it''.
    (b) Treatment of Benefits.--The provisions of section 1523 of title 
10, United States Code, apply in the case of a commission issued as 
requested in subsection (a).
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3375 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.3375

                     One Hundred Thirteenth 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 fourteen

                                 An Act

 
To designate the community-based outpatient clinic of the Department of 
    Veterans Affairs to be constructed at 3141 Centennial Boulevard, 
 Colorado Springs, Colorado, as the ``PFC Floyd K. Lindstrom Department 
                      of Veterans Affairs Clinic''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. PFC FLOYD K. LINDSTROM DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS 
CLINIC.
    (a) Designation.--The community-based outpatient clinic of the 
Department of Veterans Affairs to be constructed at 3141 Centennial 
Boulevard, Colorado Springs, Colorado, shall be known and designated as 
the ``PFC Floyd K. Lindstrom Department of Veterans Affairs Clinic''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, regulation, map, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the building referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``PFC Floyd 
K. Lindstrom Department of Veterans Affairs Clinic''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________ No. 98-2915WA

_____________ City of Texarkana, Arkansas, * * Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the Western * District of Arkansas. Four Thirteen, Inc.; Aetna Casualty and * Surety Company, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellees. *

_____________ Submitted: February 10, 1999

Filed: February 18, 1999

_____________ Before BOWMAN, Chief Judge, and FAGG and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

_____________ PER CURIAM. The City of Texarkana, Arkansas, (the city) contracted with Four Thirteen, Inc. (the contractor) to build a road. The contractor’s completed work did not meet the city’s satisfaction, so the city refused to pay the contractor for additional materials used in the project and demanded the contractor rebuild the road. The contractor admitted it did not build the road to the contract’s specifications, but claimed the w eather hindered work and the city took no steps to correct known problems with the roadbed’s subgrade. As ordered by the contract, the parties submitted the dispute to arbitration. An arbitrator awarded each party damages and the contractor received a-2-

net award of more than fifteen thousand dollars. The city sued in an Arkansas state court, contesting the award. The contractor and its surety, Aetna Casualty and Surety Co. (Aetna), removed the case to federal court and the district court granted the contractor’s and Aetna’s motion for summary judgment. The city appeals, claiming the arbitrator exceeded his authority in rendering the award. Our review of arbitration awards is extremely narrow. See Executive Life Ins. Co. v. Alexander Ins. Ltd. , 999 F.2d 318, 320 (8th Cir. 1993) (per curiam). If the arbitratoris arguably construing or applying the contract within the scope of the arbitrator’s authority, a court cannot overturn the arbitrator’s decision even if the court is convinced the arbitrator committed serious error. S ee id. at 320. We can set aside the arbitration award only if the award fails to draw its essence from the contract. See Osceola County Rural Water Sys., Inc. v. Subsurfco, Inc. , 914 F.2d 1072, 1075 (8th Cir. 1990). Having carefully reviewed the record, we are satisfied that the arbitrator did not exceed his authority in determining the award. The arbitratorcould grant relief in a manner he “deem[ed] just and equitable,” and we cannot say the arbitrator’s award is not drawn from the essence of the contract. We conclude the district court correctly granted summary judgment for the reasons stated in its memorandum opinion, and we affirm without further discussion. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Exhibit ‘J’

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 118-10 Filed 11/04/22 Page 1 of 2
D 000055
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 Commerce

###### International Trade Administration 

# AGENCY:

International Trade Administration, Commerce. 

# ACTION:

Notice of assignment and the reaffirmation of authority to make initial denials under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

# SUMMARY:

This assigns or reaffirms the authority of Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration officials listed in the attachment to make initial decisions with respect to public requests for ITA records under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Peter Han, Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration, Office of Organization and Management Support, 14th & Constitution Ave., NW., Room 4001, Washington, DC 20230. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The officials listed in the October 19, 2000 memorandum from Timothy J. Hauser, Deputy Under Secretary for International Trade, will be responsible for making initial decisions for records in accordance with FOIA. 

Dated: October 20, 2000. 

Peter Han, 

ITA Freedom of Information Officer, Office of Organization and Management Support. 

      ( print page 64429)          ( print page 64430)          ( print page 64431)          ( print page 64432)    

BILLING CODE 3510-25-P 

[FR Doc. 00-27670  Filed 10-26-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-25-C
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

TERRY A. MITCHELL, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D18-2836

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

___________________________________)

Opinion filed September 11, 2019.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for 

Hillsborough County; Nick Nazaretian, 

Judge.

Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and 

Robert D. Rosen, Assistant Public 

Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, and Cerese Crawford Taylor, 

Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for 

Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

KHOUZAM, C.J., and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM and SMITH, JJ., Concur.
#### TINSLEY v. STATE.

No. 26023.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 12, 1952.

No attorney on appeal.

George P. Blackburn, Statels Atty., Austin, for the State.

WOODLEY, Commissioner.

The conviction is on a plea of guilty before the court for the offense of selling whisky in a dry area, the punishment being a fine of $2-50.

No statement of facts or bills of exception are found in the record, and the proceedings appear to be regular.

The judgment is affirmed.

Opinion approved by the'Court.'
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 99-50947

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JAIME ARANDA-LUGO, also

known as Jaime Lugo-Aranda,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. EP-99-CR-420-ALL-H

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

June 15, 2000

Before JOLLY, DAVIS, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Jaime Aranda-Lugo appeals from his conviction for illegal

reentry into the United States after deportation in violation of

8 U.S.C. § 1326. He argues that the district court erred by

admitting evidence that he had been deported on three prior

occasions. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

error. Evidence of Aranda-Lugo’s repeated prior re-entries and

deportations tended to prove that Aranda-Lugo intended to enter

the United States on the instant occasion. See United States v.

Osum, 943 F.2d 1394, 1404 (5th Cir. 1991). The district court
No. 99-50947

-2-

did not abuse its discretion by admitting evidence of ArandaLugo’s prior deportations. Accordingly, the judgment of the

district court is AFFIRMED. 

AFFIRMED.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6566

CURTIS LAMONT MCCOY,

 Petitioner – Appellant,

v.

DIRECTOR, VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,

 Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Senior

District Judge. (3:13-cv-00857-JRS)

Submitted: July 23, 2015 Decided: July 28, 2015

Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Curtis Lamont McCoy, Appellant Pro Se. Craig Stallard, Assistant 

Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Curtis Lamont McCoy seeks to appeal the district court’s order 

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying 

his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. We dismiss the appeal for 

lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely 

filed.

Parties in a civil action in which the United States is not 

a party are accorded 30 days after the entry of the district 

court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R. App. P. 

4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the appeal period 

under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under 

Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he timely filing of a notice of 

appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement.” Bowles 

v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket on March 

11, 2015. The notice of appeal was filed, at the earliest, on 

April 13, 2015.1 Because McCoy failed to file a timely notice of 

appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period,2

 1 We assume that the date McCoy signed and dated the notice 

of appeal is the earliest date it could have been properly 

delivered to prison officials for mailing to the court. Fed. R. 

App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988).

2 McCoy did not explicitly request additional time in which 

to file his notice of appeal, nor did he request a reopening of 

the appeal period. He dated his notice of appeal April 13, 2015, 

which would make his notice untimely. The postmark on the envelope 
3

we dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the 

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

DISMISSED

 

is dated April 16, 2015. The notice of appeal was not sworn or 

notarized in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1). “‘[A] bare 

notice of appeal should not be construed as a motion for extension 

of time, where no request for additional time is manifest.’” 

Washington v. Bumgarner, 882 F.2d 899, 901 (4th Cir. 1989) (quoting 

Shah v. Hutto, 722 F.2d 1167, 1168-69 (4th Cir. 1983) (en banc)).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
S.D. Warren Company's (the "Company") condensed consolidated statements of
operations for the quarter ended June 28, 2000 and Balance sheet as of June 28,
2000 on page 4 and 6 respectively, of the Company's Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-27-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-28-2000
<CASH>                                          23,500
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   54,900
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,300
<INVENTORY>                                    231,500
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               369,600
<PP&E>                                       1,385,400
<DEPRECIATION>                                 431,200
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,446,800
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          272,600
<BONDS>                                        462,500
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     321,400
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,446,800
<SALES>                                      1,128,700
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,128,700
<CGS>                                          887,600
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,003,900
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              45,700
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 85,100
<INCOME-TAX>                                    33,800
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             51,300
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               (10,600)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    40,700
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.51
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.41


</TABLE>