alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EN EL TRIBUNAL SUPREMO DE PUERTO RICO 

In re:

Extensión de términos por motivo de 

concesión de los días 28 de marzo, 26 

de julio, 29 de noviembre, 23, 24, 30 

y 31 de diciembre de 2024; 17 de 

abril, 28 de noviembre, 24 y 31 de 

diciembre de 2025 y 5 de enero de 2026

2024 TSPR 2

213 DPR ___

Número del Caso: EM-2024-0001

Fecha: 16 de enero de 2024

Materia: Extensión de términos del Poder Judicial.

Este documento está sujeto a los cambios y correcciones del proceso 

de compilación y publicación oficial de las decisiones del Tribunal 

Supremo. Su distribución electrónica se hace como un servicio público 

a la comunidad.
 

EN EL TRIBUNAL SUPREMO DE PUERTO RICO

 

 

RESOLUCIÓN

En San Juan, Puerto Rico, a 16 de enero de 2024.

La Jueza Presidenta, Hon. Maite D. Oronoz 

Rodríguez, emitió la Orden Administrativa Núm. OAJP2023-111 de 16 de octubre de 2023, con el fin de dar 

continuidad a las medidas de control de gastos 

adoptadas por el Poder Judicial a partir del año fiscal 

2014-2015. Entre las medidas instituidas, se 

decretaron unas fechas de cierres totales del Tribunal 

General de Justicia entre marzo de 2024 y enero de 

2026.

La Orden Administrativa Núm. OAJP-2023-111 

dispone que los días siguientes serán de cierre total 

en el Poder Judicial: 28 de marzo de 2024, 26 de julio 

de 2024, 29 de noviembre de 2024, 23, 24, 30 y 31 de 

diciembre de 2024, 17 de abril de 2025, 28 de noviembre 

de 2025, 24 y 31 de diciembre de 2025, y 5 de enero de 

2026. Durante un cierre total, los Centros Judiciales 

y otras salas de los Tribunales de Primera Instancia, 

el Tribunal de Apelaciones y el Tribunal Supremo 

permanecerán cerrados, con excepción de los jueces y 

juezas de turno que operarán como se acostumbra en un 

día feriado.

Como resultado de lo anterior, y al amparo de 

nuestra facultad para reglamentar los procedimientos 

judiciales, al computar los términos en las distintas 

In re:

Extensión de términos por 

motivo de concesión de los 

días 28 de marzo, 26 de julio, 

29 de noviembre, 23, 24, 30 y 

31 de diciembre de 2024; 17 de 

abril, 28 de noviembre, 24 y 

31 de diciembre de 2025 y 5 de 

enero de 2026

EM-2024-01
EM-2024-01 2

leyes, reglas o reglamentos de los procedimientos y trámites 

judiciales de los casos y asuntos a celebrarse en todas las 

Regiones Judiciales, se aplicará lo dispuesto en los 

artículos 388 y 389 del Código Político de 1902, 1 LPRA secs. 

72 y 73. Por tal razón, los días decretados como cierres 

totales se considerarán como si fueran feriados. Cualquier 

término que venza durante las fechas decretadas se extenderá 

al día laborable siguiente.

Se ordena la difusión pública de esta Resolución.

Lo acordó el Tribunal y certifica el Secretario del 

Tribunal Supremo. 

 Javier O. Sepúlveda Rodríguez

 Secretario del Tribunal Supremo
**Exhibit 31.01****CERTIFICATIONS**I, Sean E. Belanger, Chief Executive Officer, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Viseon, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presentedin this report; 4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the small business issuer and have:(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;(b) [Paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8238 and 34-47986];(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter(the small business issuer’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small businessissuer’s auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer’s board of directors(or persons performing the equivalent functions):(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the smallbusiness issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.Date:May 15, 2006
#### SCOTT v. STATE.

No. 26031.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

*Nov.*12, 1952.

No attorney, on appeal.

George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

WOODLEY, Commissioner.

Appellant was convicted of the felony offense of driving a motor vehicle upon a public highway while intoxicated after he had been previously convicted of a misdemeanor in so driving while intoxicated. The jury assessed the punishment at 90 days in jail and a fine of $100 and judgment and sentence duly pronounced and entered.

No notice of appeal is found in the record, in the absence of which we have no ■ jurisdiction to enter any order except to dismiss the appeal.

The appeal is dismissed.

Opinion approved by the Court.
<PAGE>   1




                                                               EXHIBIT 10.31

                             FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE
               AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

This First Amendment to the Amended and Restated Employment Agreement (the
"Agreement") by and between F.Y.I. Incorporated, a Delaware corporation (the
"Company") and Joe A. Rose ("Employee") is hereby entered into and effective as
of June 17, 1998.


         Paragraph 2(a) is hereby amended and restated as follows:

         2.       Compensation.  For all services rendered by Employee,
the Company shall compensate Employee as follows:

         (a)      Base Salary; Annual Bonus. The base salary payable to Employee
shall be $165,000 per year, payable on a regular basis in accordance with the
Company's standard payroll procedures but not less than monthly (pro-rated for
any year in which Employee is employed for less than the full year). For 1998
and subsequent years, it is the Company's intent to develop a written Incentive
Bonus Plan setting forth the criteria under which Employee and other officers
and key employees will be eligible to receive year-end bonus awards. Employee
shall be eligible for a bonus opportunity of up to 50% of Employee's annual base
salary in accordance with this Incentive Bonus Plan, pro-rated for any year in
which Employee was employed for less than the full year. The award of any bonus
shall be based on the total performance of the business unit managed and shall
be payable in various increments based on the performance of the business unit
versus targeted goals. The incremental payments and the Company's targeted
performance shall be determined by the Board of Directors (the "Board") or the
compensation committee thereof.


         Paragraph 4 is hereby amended and restated as follows:

         4.       Term; Termination; Rights on Termination. The term of this 
Agreement shall begin on June 17, 1997 and continue for two (2) years 
(the "Term"). This Agreement and Employee's employment may be terminated in any 
one of the following ways:


                                             EMPLOYEE:

                                             /s/  JOE A. ROSE
                                             ------------------------------
                                             Joe A. Rose


                                             F.Y.I. INCORPORATED


                                             By:/s/  ED H. BOWMAN, JR.
                                                ---------------------------
                                             Title: President and Chief
                                                    Executive Officer
Email Correspondence between Justin Pimpare and Damon Highsmith, Carey Johnston

From: Justin Pimpare/R1/USEPA/US

To: Damon Highsmith/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Carey

 Johnston/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 05/05/2011 08:49 AM

Subject: Fw: City of Manchester 2011 Dental Inspections

Attached is a list of dental inspections conducted by the City of

Manchester in NH. As you can see, there are almost 50 dentists

in the City. I think the completed spreadsheet provides some good basic

information and an important item listed is the date of

last service, which other than the date of installation is the key

component to maintenance.

Hope you find this useful.

Jay

Justin Pimpare

Regional Pretreatment Coordinator

EPA New England

5 Post Office Square

Suite 100 OEP 06-03

Boston, MA 02109

Phone: 617-918-1531

Fax: 617-918-0531

Forwarded by Justin Pimpare/R1/USEPA/US on 05/05/2011 08:43 AM

From: "Crowley,Chris" <CCrowley@ci.manchester.nh.us> 

To: Justin Pimpare/R1/USEPA/US@EPA 

Date: 05/05/2011 08:21 AM 

Subject: FW: City of Manchester 2011 Dental Inspections 

Hi Jay,

Just a FYI...we completed our 2011 dental office inspections, I didn’t

know if you wanted a copy of what we did so I’m sending it to you.

Hope your doing well.....next time you’re in the neighborhood we have to

do lunch.

Take care,

Chris

From: Crowley,Chris

Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2011 8:11 AM

To: 'Carlson, George'

Cc: McNeill, Fred; Robinson, Robert; Kilrain, Michael

Subject: City of Manchester 2011 Dental Inspections

Hello George,

I want to inform you that The City of Manchester EPD has completed the

2011 inspections of the Dental offices within the city limits.

We have inspected all the dental offices to make sure they are in
compliance with the Amalgam Separator Rule No. Env-Ws 905.01.

Attached is the 2011 List of Dentists that Mike Kilrain had inspected.

Within the inspection sheet is the following information:

1. Env-Ws 905.04 Meets all Hazardous Waste Rules

2. Env-Ws 905-05 Certification Letter

3. Env-Ws 905.07 Compliance Period

EPD will continue to inspect the dental offices on a bi-yearly basis and

send you the database for your review and files.

If you have any further questions or concerns, please feel free to

contact me.

Thank you,

Chris

Christopher J. Crowley

Pretreatment Supervisor

Environmental Protection Division

300 Winston Street

Manchester, New Hampshire 03103

W (603) 624-6513 C (603) 235-6627

E ccrowley@manchesternh.gov

(See attached file: City of Manchester Dental Insp 2011 (without

names).xls)
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.                  

###### International Trade Commission

# AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: 

United States International Trade Commission.

# TIME AND DATE:

 November 2, 2000 at 11 a.m. 

# PLACE:

 Room 101, 500 E Street S.W., Washington, DC 20436 Telephone: (202) 205-2000. 

# STATUS: 

Open to the public. 

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 

1. Agenda for future meeting: none 

2. Minutes 

3. Ratification List 

4. Inv. Nos. AA1921-197; 701-TA-231, 319-320, 322, 325-328, 340, 342, and 348-350; and 731-TA-573-576, 578, 582-587, 604, 607-608, 612, and 614-618 (Review) (Certain Carbon Steel Products from Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Japan, Korea, Mexico, the Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, and the United Kingdom. (The Commission is currently scheduled to transmit its determination and Commissioners' opinions to the Secretary of Commerce on November 20, 2000.) 

5. Outstanding action jackets: 

(1.) Document No. GC-00-071: Administrative matters. 

In accordance with Commission policy, subject matter listed above, not disposed of at the scheduled meeting, may be carried over to the agenda of the following meeting. 

Issued: October 23, 2000. 

By order of the Commission: 

Donna R. Koehnke,

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 00-27596 Filed 10-23-00; 2:12 pm] 

BILLING CODE 7020-02-U
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health,

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Cancer Institute Special Emphasis Panel Molecular Target Drug Discovery For Cancer: Exploratory Grants.                    

*Date:*                         November 29-December 1, 2000.                    

*Time:*                         6:30 pm to 9:00 pm.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         Double Tree Hotel, 1750 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Thomas M. Vollberg, PHD, Scientific Review Administrator, Special Review, Referral and Resources Branch, Division of Extramural Activities, National Cancer Institute, National Institute of Health, 6116 Executive Boulevard, Room 8049, Rockville, MD 20852, 301/594-9582.                    

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.392, Cancer Construction; 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Cancer Control, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: October 25, 2000.

LaVerne Y. Stringfield,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 00-28106  Filed 11-01-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
### Faulk, Scott (OST) From: 

### Sent: To: 

### Subject:
To whom it may concern, Ann Ellingson <annieellingson@gmail.com> Monday, May04, 2015 3:30 PM Faulk, Scott (OST) Dot- Ost -2000- 6945

I'm writing in support ofcontinuing the Island Air mail service contract forthe Moser Bay/Olga Bay/ Alitak route on Kodiak Island. Island Air has provided excellent mail service forthe south end of Kodiak, very prompt, friendly, reliable and professional. As a resident atthe south end of Kodiak since 1983 and in Alaska since 1979 this service is invaluable. We appreciate aservice contractorwho is well established, has afloat plane already, familiarwith the area and able to transition from yeartoyear seamlessly. We appreciate yourthoughtful consideration when extending Island Air's mail service contract to an reputable entity. Sincerely, Rick and Ann Ellingson PO Box KMY Kodiak, AK 99615 Sent from my iPhone

1
#### STATE OF CONNECTICUT *v.*MARCUS GONZALEZ-RIVERA

*Pamela S. Nagy,*in support of the petition.

*LeonF. Dalbec, Jr.,*assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.

Decided July 8, 1998

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 48 Conn. App. 784 (AC 17153), is denied.
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3456 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to improve the enrollment of veterans 

in certain courses of education, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 12, 2013 

Ms. SCHWARTZ (for herself and Mr. ROE of Tennessee) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, 

and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be 

subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration 

of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to improve the 

enrollment of veterans in certain courses of education, 

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. PRIORITY ENROLLMENT FOR VETERANS IN 

4 CERTAIN COURSES OF EDUCATION. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 36 of title 38, United 

6 States Code, is amended by inserting after section 3680A 

7 the following new section: 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3456 IH

1 ‘‘§ 3680B. Priority enrollment in certain courses 

2 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—With respect to an educational 

3 assistance program provided for in chapter 30, 31, 32, 33, 

4 or 35 of this title or chapter 1606 or 1607 of title 10, 

5 if an educational institution administers a priority enroll6 ment system that allows certain students to enroll in 

7 courses earlier than other students, the Secretary or a 

8 State approving agency may not approve a program of 

9 education offered by such institution unless such institu10 tion allows a covered individual to enroll in courses at the 

11 earliest possible time pursuant to such priority enrollment 

12 system. 

13 ‘‘(b) COVERED INDIVIDUAL DEFINED.—In this sec14 tion, the term ‘covered individual’ means an individual 

15 using educational assistance under chapter 30, 31, 32, 33, 

16 or 35 of this title or chapter 1606 or 1607 of title 10, 

17 including— 

18 ‘‘(1) a veteran; 

19 ‘‘(2) a member of the Armed Forces serving on 

20 active duty or a member of a reserve component (in21 cluding the National Guard); 

22 ‘‘(3) a dependent to whom such assistance has 

23 been transferred pursuant to section 3319 of this 

24 title; and 

25 ‘‘(4) any other individual using such assist26 ance.’’. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 3456 IH

1 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections 

2 at the beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting 

3 after the item relating to section 3680A the following new 

4 item: 

‘‘3680B. Priority enrollment in certain courses.’’. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
1

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 37744

STATE OF IDAHO,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

JOHNNY PADILLA AMAYA,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

2011 Unpublished Opinion No. 341

Filed: February 2, 2011

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED

OPINION AND SHALL NOT

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Third Judicial District, State of Idaho, 

Canyon County. Hon. Bradly S. Ford, District Judge. 

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of ten years, with a minimum period 

of confinement of three years, for felony domestic battery, affirmed.

Molly J. Huskey, State Appellate Public Defender; Justin M. Curtis, Deputy 

Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. 

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Russell J. Spencer, Deputy 

Attorney General, Boise, for respondent. 

______________________________________________

Before GRATTON, Chief Judge; LANSING, Judge;

and GUTIERREZ, Judge

PER CURIAM

Johnny Padilla Amaya pled guilty to felony domestic battery. I.C. § 18-903(a), 18-

918(2). The district court sentenced Amaya to a unified term of ten years, with a minimum 

period of confinement of three years, to run concurrent with an unrelated sentence. Amaya

appeals.

Sentencing is a matter for the trial court’s discretion. Both our standard of review and the 

factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the sentence are well established and 

need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez, 121 Idaho 114, 117-18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014-

15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez, 106 Idaho 447, 449-51, 680 P.2d 869, 871-73 (Ct. App. 

1984); State v. Toohill, 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct. App. 1982). When reviewing 
2

the length of a sentence, we consider the defendant’s entire sentence. State v. Oliver, 144 Idaho 

722, 726, 170 P.3d 387, 391 (2007). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record 

in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.

Therefore, Amaya’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.