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

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 449 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 449

 To amend title 38, United States Code, to expand the availability of 
health care provided by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs by adjusting 
            the income level for certain priority veterans.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 9, 2009

  Mr. Sestak introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 38, United States Code, to expand the availability of 
health care provided by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs by adjusting 
            the income level for certain priority veterans.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Health Care for America's Heroes 
Act''.

SEC. 2. EXPANSION OF AVAILABILITY OF HEALTH CARE PROVIDED BY SECRETARY 
              OF VETERANS AFFAIRS BY ADJUSTING THE INCOME LEVEL FOR 
              CERTAIN PRIORITY VETERANS.

    (a) Adjustment of Income Level.--Subsection (a)(7) of section 1705 
of title 38, United States Code, is amended by striking ``who are 
eligible for treatment as a low-income family'' and inserting ``whose 
incomes do not exceed 200 percent of the maximum income of a family 
that is eligible for treatment as a low-income family''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply with respect to patient enrollments in the system of annual 
patient enrollment under section 1705 of title 38, United States Code, 
for fiscal years beginning on or after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

CINCINNATI

ALYSSA PORTNOY, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

NATIONAL CREDIT SYSTEMS, INC.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 1:17-CV-00834-MRB

JUDGE MICHAEL R. BARRETT

DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR ONE DAY EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE 

RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR ORDER TO 

PROHIBIT NATIONAL CREDIT SYSTEMS, INC. FROM TRANSFERRING ASSETS

[DOC. 89]

NOW COMES Defendant NATIONAL CREDIT SYSTEMS, INC., by counsel, and 

requests a one-day extension of time (through April 23, 2021) within which to file a response in 

opposition to Plaintiff’s “Motion for Order” [Doc. 89]. This extension is needed due to the press 

of other business. The undersigned contacted Plaintiffs’ counsel who refused to consent to this 

one-day extension. Defendant’s proposed response is attached hereto.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/Boyd W. Gentry

Boyd W. Gentry (0071057)

Law Office of Boyd W. Gentry, LLC

4031 Colonel Glenn Highway

First Floor

Beavercreek, Ohio 45431

Tel. 937.839.2881

Fax 800.839.5843

bgentry@boydgentrylaw.com

Counsel for Defendant
2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on April 23, 2021, a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing 

document was sent by Electronic service by the Court’s CM/ECF system to all attorneys of record. 

/s/Boyd Gentry

Boyd Gentry (0071057)
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

Statement Required by 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

 

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350,the undersigned officer of Archipelago Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”), herebycertifies that, to such officer’s knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Qof the Company for the period  endedSeptember 30, 2004 (the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date:   November 9, 2004 | /s/ Gerald  D. Putnam                               |
|-------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------|
|                          | Gerald D.  Putnam                                   |
| * *                      | *Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer* |
| * *                      | * *                                            |
| * *                      | * *                                            |
| Date:   November 9, 2004 | /s/ Nelson  Chai                                    |
|                          | Nelson Chai                                         |
| * *                      | *Chief Financial Officer*                           |

 

The foregoing certification isbeing furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed aspart of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company andwill be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

 

----
**Exhibit 23.1**

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm 

HeadwatersIncorporated 

South Jordan, Utah 

Wehereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the previously filed open Registration Statements on Form S-3 (File Nos. 333-67371, 333-76724, 333-155565, 333-156794 and 333-159541) and on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-39674, 333-39676, 333-39678,333-103527, 333-113704, 333-124803 and 333-147599) of Headwaters Incorporated of our reports dated November 20, 2009, relating to the consolidated financial statements and the effectiveness of Headwaters Incorporated’s internal controlover financial reporting which appear in this Form 10-K. 

/s/ BDO Seidman, LLP 

Costa Mesa, CA 

November 20, 2009
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-20-00012-CV

Iglesia Pentecostal Filadelfia, Inc.

v.

Jose I. Rodriguez Jr.

On Appeal from the

357th District Court of Cameron County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2018-DCL-05262

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED. Costs of the appeal are adjudged 

against appellant.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

December 29, 2021
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 10 (Friday, January 14, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 2456]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-00655]


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

JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES


Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules; Meeting of the Judicial 
Conference

AGENCY: Judicial Conference of the United States.

ACTION: Advisory committee on Bankruptcy Rules; notice of cancellation 
of open hearing.

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

SUMMARY: The following virtual public hearing on proposed amendments to 
the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure has been canceled: Bankruptcy 
Rules Hearing on January 28, 2022. The announcement for this hearing 
was previously published in the Federal Register on August 11, 2021.

DATES: January 28, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bridget Healy, Esq., Acting Chief 
Counsel, Rules Committee Staff, Administrative Office of the U.S. 
Courts, Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building, One Columbus 
Circle NE, Suite 7-300, Washington, DC 20544, Phone (202) 502-1820, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d082a5bcb5a393bfbdbdb9a4a4b5b58f83b5b3a2b5a4b1a2a990b1bffea5a3b3bfa5a2a4a3feb7bfa6"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e4b691888197a78b89898d90908181bbb7818796819085969da4858bca9197878b91969097ca838b92">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Authority: 28 U.S.C. 2073.)

    Dated: January 11, 2022.
Shelly L. Cox,
Management Analyst, Rules Committee Staff.
[FR Doc. 2022-00655 Filed 1-13-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 2210-55-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### Ethel H. Stahl, petitioner for leave to enter appeal.

March 8, 1940.

*C. C. Steadman,*for the petitioner.

*S. Leader, J. P. Keefe, & C. E. Dockser,*for the respondent.

Petition dismissed. This is a petition under G. L (Ter. Ed.) c. 211, § 11, as amended by St. 1933, c. 300, to enter an appeal of the petitioner from a decree in the case of Ethel H. Stahl *vs.*Ethel H. Stahl, In re Estate of Dora W. Knight. The petition and the printed record of the case, which has been submitted in support thereof, do not disclose that a substantial question for determination by this court would be presented if leave to enter the appeal should be granted. *Lovell*v. *Lovell,*276 Mass. 10, 11-12.
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4344 

To prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency from obligating any 

amounts for the regulation of emissions of carbon dioxide. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 16, 2009 

Mr. MCCOTTER (for himself, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, and Mr. TIBERI) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy 

and Commerce 

A BILL 

To prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency from obligating any amounts for the regulation of emissions of 

carbon dioxide. 

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

3 SECTION 1. PROHIBITION OF OBLIGATION OF ANY 

4 AMOUNTS FOR THE REGULATION OF EMIS5 SIONS OF CARBON DIOXIDE. 

6 Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Envi7 ronmental Protection Agency may not obligate any 

8 amounts to regulate emissions of carbon dioxide. 

Æ 


dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
No. 99-21085

-1-

 

* 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. 99-21085

Conference Calendar

 

FRED FRANKLIN ALEXANDER,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

L. A. MASTERS; K. MAXEY; 

L. ASCHBERGER; V. ZIMA; D. KIMBROUGH,

Defendants-Appellees.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-99-CV-2243

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

April 14, 2000

Before WIENER, DeMOSS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Fred Franklin Alexander, Texas prisoner No. 632876, appeals

the district court’s determination that his civil rights

complaint was frivolous because it was time-barred. The district

court record establishes that the complaint was not timely filed. 

Thus, we find that Alexander’s appeal is legally frivolous and it

IS DISMISSED. 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

The district court’s dismissal of Alexander’s complaint and

this court’s dismissal of the appeal as frivolous count as two
No. 99-21085

-2-

“strikes” for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v.

Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 385-87 (5th Cir. 1996). Alexander is

CAUTIONED that if he accumulates three “strikes” under § 1915(g),

he will not be able to proceed IFP in any civil action or appeal 

filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless 

he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See

§ 1915(g).

APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTIONS WARNING ISSUED.
*

The Honorable James D. Todd, United States District Judge for the Western District of

Tennessee, sitting by designation.

-1-

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION

File Name: 05a0134n.06

Filed: February 18, 2005

No. 04-5159

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

LYDIA WISEMAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v.

WHAYNE SUPPLY COMPANY,

Defendant-Appellee.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED

STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY

Before: NORRIS and GIBBONS, Circuit Judges; TODD, District Judge.*

PER CURIAM. Lydia Wiseman was employed as an environmental specialist at Whayne

Supply Company (“Whayne Supply”) from October 1995 until December 2000. Wiseman filed a

complaint alleging that Whayne Supply violated the Kentucky Civil Rights Act, Ky. Rev. Stat.

Chapter 344, by discriminating against her on the basis of her sex and by creating a hostile work

environment in the Jefferson County, Kentucky, Circuit Court on February 15, 2001. Whayne

Supply removed the action to the United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky

on March 2, 2001. Whayne Supply subsequently filed a motion for summary judgment on May 15,

2003. The district court granted the motion on January 12, 2004. 
-2-

Having had the benefit of oral argument, and having studied the record on appeal and the

briefs of the parties, we are not persuaded that the district court erred in granting summary judgment

to Whayne Supply. Because the reasons for this determination have been fully articulated by the

district court, the issuance of a detailed opinion by this court would be duplicative and would serve

no useful purpose. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court on the basis of the

reasoning set out by that court in its opinion and order entered on January 12, 2004.
Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed December 8 ,

2011

.

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 11

- 00811

- CV

____________ IN THE INTEREST OF S.G.K., AND J.L.A.K , Children

On Appeal from the 506th District Court Grimes County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 31691



### M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
This is an appeal from a n order signed August 19
, 201 1 . On December 2
, 2011
, appellant filed a letter in which he advised this court that he no longer desires to prosecute this appeal. We construe the letter as a motion to dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1. The motion is granted.
Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PE R CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Brown, Boyce, and McCally.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR
. 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 5 TH C IR
. R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-60134 Summary Calendar

JAMIE JONES, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus RANKIN COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT, ET AL.,
Defendants, KEN DICKERSON, BILL PHILLIPS, DefendantsAppellants.

-------------------------------------------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi USDC No. 3:99-CV-816-WS

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

January 24, 2003 Before JONES, STEWART AND DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Ken Dickerson and Bill Phillips appeal the district court’s denial of their motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. On appeal,-2-

Dickerson and Phillips argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity because Jamie Jones did not produce enough competent summary judgment evidence to: (1) establish that any issues of material fact exist; (2) show that Phillips and Dickerson had sufficient personal involvement in the events to justify liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983; or (3) establish that he suffered any injury. If Jones’ factual allegations are accepted as true, as required by Behrens v. Pelletier , 516 U.S. 299, 313 (1996), it is not apparent that Dickerson and Phillips are entitled to qualified immunity as a matter of law. See Hope v. Pelzer , 122 S.Ct. 2508, 2512 (2002). Because facts material to the question of qualified immunity are in dispute, this court lacks jurisdiction over the Dickerson and Phillips’ appeal. See Mangieri v. Clifton , 29 F.3d 1012, 1016 (5th Cir. 1994). Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. In light of the disposition of this case, all outstanding motions are denied. APPEAL DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION; ALL OUTSTANDING MOTIONS ARE DENIED.
#### People v Payton,

No. 90873;

Court of Appeals No. 113278.
Exhibit 10.71.4


                       SECOND AMENDMENT TO LOAN AGREEMENT

         This Second Amendment to Loan Agreement (the "Amendment") is executed
this 26th day of September, 2001, by and between HEADWATERS INCORPORATED,
("Borrower") and ZIONS FIRST NATIONAL BANK (the "Lender").

         WHEREAS, Borrower and Lender entered into that certain Loan Agreement
dated October 18, 2000, an amended on February 1, 2001, which provided, among
other things, for Lender to extend a Revolving Line of Credit in the maximum
principal amount of Ten Million and 00/100 Dollars ($10,000,000.00) (the "Loan
Agreement"); and

         WHEREAS, Borrower has requested Lender to remove the borrowing base
requirement and amend certain financial covenants, and;

         WHEREAS, Lender has agreed to such request provided, among other
things, Borrower executes and delivers this Amendment.

         NOW, THEREFORE, for valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency
of which are hereby acknowledged, the Loan Agreement as amended is hereby
amended as follows:

         1. The section entitled "BORROWING BASE" is hereby deleted in its
entirety.

         2. The section entitled "NET WORTH" is hereby deleted in its entirety
and replaced with the following:

         Tangible Net Worth. Borrower shall maintain a ratio of total
         liabilities, minus deferred revenue as of the date of this agreement,
         to tangible net worth of not more than 1.35:1, measured quarterly.

         3. A new section entitled "POSITIVE NET INCOME" is hereby added as
follows.

         Positive Net Income. Borrower shall maintain a positive net income,
measured quarterly.

                  4. A new section entitled "NET WORTH" is hereby added as
         follows.

         Net Worth. Borrower shall maintain a positive net worth of not less
         than $20,000,000.00, measured quarterly.

         Except as amended herein, all other terms and conditions of the Loan
Agreement remain in full force and effect and are applicable to this Amendment.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Borrower and Lender have executed this Amendment as
of the date and year first above written.

Borrower:
HEADWATERS INCORPORATED                         Zions First National Bank

By: /s/ Kirk A. Benson                          By: /s/ Tracy Groll
    ------------------------------                 ----------------------------
    Kirk A. Benson, Chairman & CEO                  Tracy Groll, Vice President
#### Witt *v.*Arkansas Game & Fish Commission.

4-4953

Opinion delivered December 6, 1937.

*22
      *Harry C. Robinson,*for appellant.

*Jack Holt,*Attorney General, and *T. H. Humphreys, Jr.,*Assistant, for appellee.

Humpheeys, J.

This suit was brought in the chancery court of Pulaski county by appellant against the Arkansas Game and Pish Commission *et al.,*appellees herein, to enjoin the enforcement of act No. 373 of the Acts of 1937 providing that the open season for killing deer in this state shall be. from December 1 to December 15 of each year.

Appellant challenged the validity of said act on the ground that it is a local act and passed in contravention of amendment No. 12 to the Constitution of Arkansas which prohibits the General Assembly of the state from passing any local or special legislation.

The issue joined as to the validity of said act was submitted to the chancery court of said county, resulting in a decree sustaining the validity of the act and dismissing appellant’s complaint, from which is this appeal.

It is contended that the decree should be reversed because § 5 attempts to preserve that part of special act 678 of the Acts of 1923 dealing with open and closed seasons for killing deer in Chicot, Desha and Phillips counties which is in conflict with the provisions of the said act 373 of the Acts of 1937 relative to open and closed seasons for killing deer. It is argued that because of this attempt act 373 of the Acts of 1937 is itself a local act and the argument would be sound if act 678 of the Acts of 1923 relating to open and closed seasons for taking deer had been in force and effect when said act 373 of the Acts of 1937 was passed by the Legislature, but, when act 373 of the Acts of 1937 was passed, act 678 of the Acts of 1923 had been repealed by act 160 of the Acts of 1927 in so *23far as it related to. open and closed seasons for taking deer. An attempt to preserve a part of a local act which has already been repealed by a prior act cannot and will not revive the repealed act, and the attempt to revive same is of no effect and void; so it follows that such attempt in act 373 of 1937 must 'be eliminated from the act.

The proviso in § 5 of act 373 of the Acts of 1937 is meaningless and must he treated as surplusage. . '

The decree of the chancery court is, therefore, affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 9 (Thursday, January 13, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 2181]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-00604]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Advanced Media Workflow Association, Inc.

    Notice is hereby given that, on December 16, 2021, pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Advanced Media Workflow 
Association, Inc. has filed written notifications simultaneously with 
the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing 
changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose 
of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust 
plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. 
Specifically, Library of Congress, Washington, DC, has been added as a 
party to this venture.
    Also, Sai Sanigepalli (individual member), Freemont, CA, has 
withdrawn as a party to this venture.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership in this group 
research project remains open, and Advanced Media Workflow Association, 
Inc. intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all 
changes in membership.
    On March 28, 2000, Advanced Media Workflow Association, Inc. filed 
its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The 
Department of Justice published a notice in the Federal Register 
pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on June 29, 2000 (65 FR 40127).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on September 
15, 2021. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to 
Section 6(b) of the Act on October 5, 2021 (86 FR 55003).

Suzanne Morris,
Chief, Premerger and Division Statistics, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 2022-00604 Filed 1-12-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P