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

# m CONTRO L NO . 

# ^^flJI^ ^ S10-10($304-05 8

• • ^

fca ^ H SACRAMENT O ASIA N SPORT S FOUNDATIO N February 25 , 201 0 Th e Honorabl e Raymon dH . LaHoo d;: ^ Secretar y - Unite dState s Departmen t o f Transportatio n : J 1200Ne w Jerse y Avenue , S.E . • Washington , D.C . 2059 0 ; ^ Dea r Secretary LaHood : ;2 J M y civi c organizatio n i s writin g thi s lette r i n respons e t o th e Departmen t o f Traaisportatton' s (DOT ) proceedin g (Docke t 2010-0018 ) t o as k

tha t DO T allocat e t o San Francisc o on e o f th e four (4 ) ne w opportunitie s fo

r ai r 5Ci~vic e betwee n th e Unite dState s an dTokyo' s Haned aInternationa l Airport . Th e Sa n Francisc o Bay Are ai s no t onl y hom e t o th e nation' s oldes t an dmos t

vibran t Japanese

American community , but ha s lon g been , an dremains , ake y focu s o f economi c activity betwee n th e U.S . an dJapan . Our

organization , thoug h locate di n th e Sacrament o Valley ha s stron g tie s with ou r Sister Cit y i n Matsuyama , Japa n an dhavin g th e Haned aconnectio n woul dallo w ou r visitor s an dgovernmen t official s easie r

acces s t o no t

onl y Sa n Francisc o bu t

t o th e Sacrament o Valley region . Togethe r with th e Sacrament o an dSa n Joaqui n regions , San Francisc o ha s th e secon dlarges t concentratio n o f

Japanes e Americans . I f yo u includ e th e entir e state , California' s Japanes e populatio n fa r exceed s that

o f al l th e res t

o f th e nation , an di s nearl y te n time s tha t o f Ne w Yor

k an d1 5 time s that

o f Illinois . O f particular

importanc e i n thi s Haned aproceedin g i s th e fac t tha t busines s trave l represent s a disproportionat e shar e o f San Francisco-Japa n travel . Nonsto p San Francisc o servic e t o Haned awoul d directl y serv e thi s ke y busines s demand , an dprovid e a n important , economi c enhancemen t fo r th e stat e an dour region . A s Asia' s busies t

airport , with connection s throughou t Japan , Haned aoffer s amajor servic e improvemen t

fo r U.S . travelers , particularl y time-sensitiv e busines s travelers . Haned aservic e coul dcu t a n hou r o r mor e fromtoday' s time-consumin g an dcostl y journe y betwee n dovratow n Toky o an dNarita , an d th e overal l journe y fro mth e U.S . t o Tokyo . Th e publi c interes t

i n maximizin g th e benefit s o f th e newly-negotiate dU.S . carrie r acces s t o Haned aclearl y favor s allocatin g aHaned aservic e opportunit y t o Unite dAirline s —tha t seek s t o serv e th e Ba y Are aan dNorther n California . I congratulat e you r

Departmen t

o n negotiatin g U.S . acces s t o thi s importan t Asian hu b an durg e yo u t o ac t expeditiousl y t o mak e possibl e nonsto p servic e betwee n Sa n Francisc o an dHaned apossible . Re^ectfull y submitted , Kare n Fon g Cotto n

P O Bo x22183 8 Sacramento , C A 9582 2 P 9 I 6.684.653 3 F 9 I 6.684.648 2 www.sasfquest.or g
<PAGE>
Exhibit 10.9A

                               SECOND AMENDMENT
                                      TO
                        GARDEN FRESH RESTAURANT CORP.
                     VARIABLE DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN
                                FOR EXECUTIVES



  Pursuant to Section 11.1 of the Garden Fresh Restaurant Corp. Variable
Deferred Compensation Plan for Executives (the "Plan"), said Plan is amended
as follows:

  1.  Section 4.3 of the Plan relating to the amount of Matching Contributions
made by Garden Fresh Restaurant Corporation is amended to add a new subsection
(III) to read as follows effective for the Plan Year beginning January 1,
1999:

      (III) 100% of deferrals up to $12,000 in deferrals (maximum $12,000
   match).  This enhanced match benefit is only for executive employees listed
   on Appendix II to the Plan.


  2.  Section 9.1 of the Plan relating to the amount of the death benefit
payable under the Plan to eligible participants is amended to add the
following sentence after the second sentence of said section:

      For eligible Participants who are executives named in Appendix II to the
      Plan, the Company offers a death benefit of $250,000.


  3.  The Plan is amended to add a new Appendix II to read as follows:

      Appendix II

      Executive Employees entitled to Appendix II enhanced benefits under Plan
  Sections 4.3 (III) and 9.1:  Ken Keane

  4.  The effective date of this Second Amendment to the Plan is January 1,
  1999.

          GARDEN FRESH RESTAURANT CORP.


          By:          /s/ D W QUALLS

          Its:         CFO - Secretary

          Date:        3-30-99
Rel: June 7, 2024

STATE OF ALABAMA -- JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

THE SUPREME COURT OCTOBER TERM, 2023-2024

SC-2023-0690 Jessie Smith, Gail Smith, Lee McKee, Aleshia McKee, Joseph Freda, and Katrina Williams v. Auburn Oaks, LLC (Appeal from Macon Circuit Court: CV-20-900057). MENDHEIM, Justice. AFFIRMED. NO OPINION. See Rule 53(a)(1) and (a)(2)(E), Ala. R. App. P. Parker, C.J., and Shaw, Bryan, and Mitchell, JJ., concur.
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1010

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to acquire parcels of land commonly

known as Fisherman’s Cove and Gull Island for inclusion in the Edwin

B. Forsythe National Wildlife Refuge in Monmouth County and Ocean

County, New Jersey.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 18, 1993

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey introduced the following bill; which was referred

to the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries

A BILL

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to acquire parcels

of land commonly known as Fisherman’s Cove and Gull

Island for inclusion in the Edwin B. Forsythe National

Wildlife Refuge in Monmouth County and Ocean County,

New Jersey.

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

3 SECTION 1. ACQUISITION OF LAND.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Interior, act5 ing through the Director of the United States Fish and

6 Wildlife Service and subject to the availability of appro7 priations, may acquire for inclusion in the Edwin B. For-
2

•HR 1010 IH

1 sythe National Wildlife Refuge the land described in sub2 section (b), or such portion of that land as the Secretary

3 considers appropriate.

4 (b) LAND DESCRIBED.—The lands referred to in sub5 section (a) are the parcel in Monmouth County, New Jer6 sey, commonly known as Fisherman’s Cove, consisting of

7 land bordered by Brielle Road, Third Avenue, and the

8 Manasquan River and depicted on the Borough of

9 Manasquan Tax Map on file with the Borough Engineer,

10 Borough of Manasquan, Monmouth County, New Jersey,

11 and the parcel in Ocean County, New Jersey commonly

12 known as Gull Island, consisting of land located in the

13 Manasquan River.

14 (c) MANAGEMENT OF ACQUIRED LAND.—Land ac15 quired by the Secretary of the Interior under this section

16 shall be managed as part of the Edwin B. Forsythe Na17 tional Wildlife Refuge in accordance with the purposes for

18 which that refuge was established.

Æ
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AMARILLO DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA §

§

v. § 2:22-CR-00089-Z-BR

§

NATHAN POKRAJAC (2) §

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

CONCERNING PLEA OF GUILTY

NATHAN POKRAJAC (2), by consent, under authority of United States v. Dees, 125 F.3d 261 (5th Cir. 1997), has 

appeared before me pursuant to FED. R. CRIM. P. 11, and has entered a plea of guilty to Count 2 of the Indictment. After 

cautioning and examining NATHAN POKRAJAC (2) under oath concerning each of the subjects mentioned in Rule 11, I 

determined that the guilty plea was knowledgeable and voluntary and that the offense charged is supported by an 

independent basis in fact containing each of the essential elements of such offense. I therefore recommend that the plea of 

guilty be accepted, and that NATHAN POKRAJAC (2) be adjudged guilty of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(C) -

POSSESSION WITH INTENT TO DISTRIBUTE METHAMPHETAMINE and have sentence imposed accordingly. After 

being found guilty of the offense by the District Judge,

☒ The defendant is currently in custody and should be ordered to remain in custody.

☐ The defendant must be ordered detained pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3143(a)(1) unless the Court finds by clear and 

convincing evidence that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other person or the community 

if released.

☐ The Government does not oppose release.

☐ The defendant has been compliant with the current conditions of release.

☐ I find by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other 

person or the community if released and should therefore be released under § 3142(b) or (c).

☐ The Government opposes release.

☐ The defendant has not been compliant with the conditions of release.

☐ If the Court accepts this recommendation, this matter should be set for hearing upon motion of the 

Government.

☐ The defendant must be ordered detained pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3143(a)(2) unless (1)(a) the Court finds there is a 

substantial likelihood that a motion for acquittal or new trial will be granted, or (b) the Government has 

recommended that no sentence of imprisonment be imposed, or (c) exceptional circumstances are clearly shown 

under § 3145(c) why the defendant should not be detained, and (2) the Court finds by clear and convincing evidence 

that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other person or the community if released.

Date: November 8, 2022

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE

Failure to file written objections to this Report and Recommendation within fourteen (14) days from the date of its 

service shall bar an aggrieved party from attacking such Report and Recommendation before the assigned United States 

District Judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B).

Case 2:22-cr-00089-Z-BR Document 83 Filed 11/08/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 177
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-16-00474-CR

Miranda HERRERA,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 437th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014CR6337

Honorable Lori I. Valenzuela, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARION, JUSTICE CHAPA, AND JUSTICE PULLIAM

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED.

SIGNED September 21, 2016.

_________________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          NOV-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-02-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-02-1997
<CASH>                                          80,860
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   33,206
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (524)
<INVENTORY>                                     35,164
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               156,274
<PP&E>                                          78,336
<DEPRECIATION>                                  (6,566)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 243,015
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           85,541
<BONDS>                                          1,651
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           195
<OTHER-SE>                                     149,019
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   243,015
<SALES>                                         34,130
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                34,130
<CGS>                                           24,087
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   29,314
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                (1,555)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              (1,188)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  7,559
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,574
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,985
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,985
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .26
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .26
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<CIK> 0000942789
<NAME> VALRICO BANCORP, INC.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                           4,877
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 1,937
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                      7,077
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           3,007
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                             3,023
<LOANS>                                         37,967
<ALLOWANCE>                                        533
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  59,126
<DEPOSITS>                                      51,311
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              3,837
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           297
<OTHER-SE>                                       3,681
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                  59,126
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                    903
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  160
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    16
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 1,079
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                 378
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 396
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                              683
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       30
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                    599
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    170
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         170
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       104
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     .349
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     .349
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    5.08
<LOANS-NON>                                        232
<LOANS-PAST>                                        27
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                    272
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   501
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        2
<RECOVERIES>                                         4
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  533
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
AAM-09-185-E 

Nov 29 2010 

 Exemption No. 9852A 

 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2009-0289 

Mr. Kevin Waters 

Director of Operations 

Waters Aero-Marine, Inc. 

P.O. Box 273 

South Thomaston, ME 04915 

Dear Mr. Waters: 

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption 9852. It 

explain the basis our decision and describes its effects. 

The Basis for Our Decision 

By letter dated November 15, 2010, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration 

(FAA) on behalf of Waters Aero-Marine, Inc. (Waters Aero-Marine), for an extension of 

Exemption No. 9852, as amended. That exemption § 121, appendices I and J of Title 14, 

Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) allows Waters Aero-Marine to cover its safetysensitive employees under one testing program. 

Although you requested relief from part 121, appendices I and J, that section has since been 

redesignated to part 120. The redesignation was included in the 

“Drug and Alcohol Testing Program” final rule published in the Federal Register on 

May 14, 2009 (74 FR 22649). 

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons 

relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption. 

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition 

in the Federal Register because the requested exemption would not set a precedent, and any 

delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Waters Aero-Marine. 
2 

Our Decision 

The FAA has determined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 9852, as 

amended, remains valid with respect to this exemption and is in the public interest. 

Therefore, under the authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA 

Administrator has delegated to me, I grant your petition. 

Conditions and Limitations 

1. Employees of Waters Aero-Marine are subject to the drug and alcohol regulations 

at all times while conducting operations under part 135 or part 91. 

2. The drug and alcohol testing program must be implemented under the auspices of 

the Waters Aero-Marine part 135 operation, not under part 91. 

This exemption terminates on April 30, 2013, unless sooner superseded or rescinded. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

Dr. Frederick E. Tilton 

Federal Air Surgeon
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT

FOR THE NORTIIERN DISTRICT OF

DALLAS DTVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

MARTIN LEIJA, JR,

Defendant.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

. CONCERNING PLEA OF GUILTY

MARTIN LEIJA, JR, by consent, under authority of United States v. Dees, 125 F.3d261(5th Cir. 1997), has

appeared before me pursuant to Fed. R. Crim.P. ll, and has entered a plea of guilty to Count(s) 2s of the Superseding

Indictment. After cautioning and examining MARTIN LEIJA, JR under oath conceming each of the subjects mentioned in

Rule 11, I determined that the guilty plea was knowledgeable and voluntary and that the offense(s) charged is supported by

an independent basis in fact containing each of the essential elements of such offense. I therefore recommend that the plea

of guilty be accepted, and that MARTIN LEIJA, JR be adjudged guilty of 2l U.S.C. $ 8al(a)(l) and (b)(l)(C) and 18

U.S.C. $ 2 Possession with the Intent to Distribute a Schedule II Controlled Substance, Aiding and Abetting and have

sentence imposed accordingly. After:being found guilty of the offense by the district judge,

D The defendant is currently in custody and should be ordered to remain in custody.

D The defendant must be ordered detained pursuant to l8 U.S.C. $ 31a3(a)(l) unless the Court finds by clear and

convincing evidence that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other person or the community

if released.

The Govemment does not oppose release.

The defendant has been compliant with the current conditions of release.

I find by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other

person or the community if released and should therefore be released under $ 3142(b) or (c).

The Govemment opposes release.

The defendant has not been compliant with the conditions of release.

If the Court accepts, this recommendation, this matter should be set for hearing upon motion of the

Government.

The defendant must be ordered detained pursuant to 18 U.S.C. $ 3la3(a)(2) unless (l)(a) the Court finds there is a

substantial likelihood that a motion for acquittal or new

recommended that no sentence of imprisonment be im

under $ 3 145(c) why the defendant should not be detai

that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a

Date: lTth day of November,2022.

MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE

Failure to file written objections to this Report and Recommendation within fourteen (14) days from the date of its

service shall bar an aggrieved party from attacking such Report and Recommendation before the assigned United States

District Judge. 28 U.S.C. $636(bXlXB).

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

!

!

n

D

!

D

Numpp_1: 3 i22-CR-003 42-E (3)

NO\/ 1 1 2A22

(al will be granted, or (b) the Government has

c) exceptional circumstances are clearly shown

Court finds by clear and convincing evidence

or the community if released.

Case 3:22-cr-00342-E Document 84 Filed 11/17/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 229
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

MYRA BROWN, ET AL.,

Plaintiffs,

v. No. 4:22-cv-908-P

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION,

ET AL.,

Defendants.

ORDER

Before the Court is Defendants’ Emergency Motion to Stay Judgment 

Pending Appeal (“Motion”). ECF No. 40. The Fifth Circuit denied an 

identical request for a stay pending appeal, and the Supreme Court did 

not overrule that judgment. See Dkt. No. 75-1, Brown v. Dep’t of Educ., 

No. 22-1115 (5th Cir. Nov. 30, 2022) (per curiam), cert. granted, 143 S. 

Ct. 541 (U.S. Dec. 12, 2022) (Mem.). This Court “has no power or 

authority to deviate from” these conclusions See Briggs v. Pa. R. Co., 334 

U.S. 304, 306. Thus, the Motion is DENIED.

SO ORDERED on this 6th day of February 2023.

Mark T. Pittman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:22-cv-00908-P Document 52 Filed 02/06/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 682
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

MICHAEL ODOM, §

#154143, §

§

Plaintiff, §

§

V. § No. 3:22-1934-B

§

SHERIFF GARRETT, ET AL., §

§

Defendants. §

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND

RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

The United States Magistrate Judge made findings, conclusions, and a recommendation in

this case as to Plaintiff’s amended complaint. No objections were filed. The District Court reviewed

the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation for plain error. Finding none, the Court

ACCEPTS the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge.

SO ORDERED.

DATE: May 5, 2023. 

_________________________________

JANE J. BOYLE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:22-cv-01934-B-BN Document 32 Filed 05/05/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 181