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

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1307 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1307

 To amend title 39, United States Code, to require mail-in ballots to 
    use the Postal Service barcode service, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 24, 2021

  Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney of New York introduced the following bill; 
      which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 39, United States Code, to require mail-in ballots to 
    use the Postal Service barcode service, and for other purposes.

    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 ``Vote by Mail Tracking Act''.

SEC. 2. MAIL-IN BALLOTS AND POSTAL SERVICE BARCODE SERVICE.

    (a) In General.--Section 3001 of title 39, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(p) Any ballot sent within the United States for an election for 
Federal office is nonmailable and shall not be carried or delivered by 
mail unless the ballot is mailed in an envelope that--
            ``(1) contains a Postal Service barcode (or successive 
        service or marking) that enables tracking of each individual 
        ballot;
            ``(2) satisfies requirements for ballot envelope design 
        that the Postal Service may promulgate by regulation;
            ``(3) satisfies requirements for machineable letters that 
        the Postal Service may promulgate by regulation; and
            ``(4) includes the Official Election Mail Logo (or any 
        successor label that the Postal Service may establish for 
        ballots).''.
    (b) Application.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply 
to any election for Federal office occurring after the date of 
enactment of this Act.
    (c) Reimbursement to States.--
            (1) In general.--The Federal Government shall reimburse 
        each State (including the District of Columbia and any 
        territory or possession of the United States) for the cost of 
        using the Postal Service barcode service as required under 
        subsection (p) of section 3001 of title 39, United States Code, 
        as added by subsection (a).
            (2) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
        to be appropriated for fiscal year 2022 and each fiscal year 
        thereafter such sums as may be necessary, to be derived from 
        the general fund of the Treasury, for reimbursing States for 
        such cost.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>



                                                                       EXHIBIT 3



                      ARTICLE IV, SECTION 1 OF THE BY-LAWS
                 OF PXRE CORPORATION, AS AMENDED ON JUNE 8, 1995


          "Section 1. Number. The Board of Directors shall elect from its
members a Chief Executive Officer, who shall also have the title of President
and/or Chairman of the Board as the Board shall determine. The other principal
officers of the Corporation shall be a President, one or more Vice Presidents, a
Treasurer and a Secretary. The Corporation may also have, at the discretion of
the Board of Directors, such other officers as may be appointed in accordance
with the provisions of these By-Laws. One person may hold the offices and
perform the duties of any two or more of said offices, except the offices and
duties of President and Secretary."


<PAGE>
<PAGE>
                                                               EXHIBIT 10.5
                                  SECOND AMENDMENT
                                       TO THE
                        AMENDED AND RESTATED BRIDGE AGREEMENT


            THIS SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDED AND RESTATED BRIDGE AGREEMENT 
(the "Amendment") dated as of September 30, 1996, is between SPS TRANSACTION 
SERVICES, INC. ("Borrower") and DEAN WITTER, DISCOVER & CO. ("DWDC").

            WHEREAS, Borrower and DWDC are parties to an Amended and Restated 
Bridge Agreement, dated as of September 1, 1995, and a First Amendment to the 
Amended and Restated Bridge Agreement, dated as of September 1, 1996 
(collectively, the "Amended and Restated Bridge Agreement"), pursuant to which 
DWDC has agreed to make certain loans to the Borrower; and

            WHEREAS, the Borrower and DWDC desire to further amend the Amended 
and Restated Bridge Agreement.

            NOW THEREFORE, the Amended and Restated Bridge Agreement is amended 
as follows:

                  1.   Each capitalized term used in this Amendment (and not  
            otherwise defined herein) shall have the same meaning as set forth 
            in the Amended and Restated Bridge Agreement.

                  2.   Section 1 of the Amended and Restated Bridge Agreement 
            is hereby amended in its entirety and henceforth shall read as 
            follows:

                       1.   Amount:  The maximum aggregate amount that DWDC 
                  shall be required to lend hereunder at any time shall be 
                  $250,000,000; provided, however, that DWDC may, from time to 
                  time and upon written notice to Borrower, reduce such maximum 
                  commitment by an amount not to exceed the total amount of  
                  credit card receivables that are sold by Hurley State Bank, a 
                  wholly owned subsidiary of Borrower, pursuant to any  
                  securitization agreement entered into after the date of this 
                  Amended and Restated Bridge Agreement; provided, that, except 
                  as provided in Section 5(a), any such reduction shall not 
                  affect the status of any loans then outstanding hereunder.

                  3.   Except as provided herein, the terms and conditions of 
            the Amended and Restated Bridge Agreement shall remain in full 
            force and effect.


            IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Amendment to be 
duly executed as of the date first written above.

SPS TRANSACTION SERVICES, INC.          DEAN WITTER, DISCOVER & CO.

By:/s/ Thomas M. Goldstein              By:/s/ Birendra Kumar     

Title: Vice President - Finance         Title: Treasurer
Eric Martin DISHNER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-2272

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 2, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
|   | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|--------|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:  August 12, 2010                       |   |   |   |   |
|--------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|--------|
|                                                   |   |   |   |   |
| /s/ RAYMOND P. WARRELL, JR., M.D.*                     |   |   |   |   |
| Name:  Raymond P. Warrell, Jr., M.D.         |   |   |   |   |
| Title:  Chairman and Chief Executive Officer |   |   |   |   |
<PAGE>   1


                                   EXHIBIT 11


<TABLE>
                         BACK BAY RESTAURANT GROUP, INC.
                                AND SUBSIDIARIES
                        COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
                      (in thousands, except per share data)


                                                     13 WEEKS ENDED
                                             MARCH 30, 1997    MARCH 31, 1996
                                             --------------    --------------


<S>                                             <C>               <C>     
Net loss                                        $   (89)          $  (324)
                                                =======           =======
                                                                 
Weighted average number of common                                
  shares outstanding                              3,434             3,434
                                                                 
Add                                                              
                                                                 
Weighted average number of common                                
  equivalent shares outstanding                       -                 2
                                                -------           -------
Weighted average number of common                                
  and common equivalent shares                                   
  outstanding                                     3,434             3,436
                                                =======           =======
                                                                 
Net loss per share                              $  (.03)          $  (.09)
                                                =======           =======
                                                         
</TABLE>


                                       14
M.T., A Child, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D17-2019

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[March 15, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
# Navy: ROM Is Official Duty Status

## From Chief Mass Communication Specialist Michael Russell 

According to NAVADMIN 295/20, personnel executing a Restriction of Movement (ROM) are considered to be in a duty status and ROM periods will not be charged as leave. Leave is the authorized absence of a Sailor from a place of duty, which is chargeable. Sailors who are on leave are considered to be in a non-duty status as they are away from their place of duty. 

Command Pay/Personnel Administrators (CPPAs) should have seen Pay and Personnel Information Bulletin (PPIB) 20-34, released Nov. 4. This bulletin explains that ROM due to COVID-19 is a mandatory, official duty function performed by Sailors with their ROM location considered as the official duty location.

Sailors taking leave outside their designated permanent duty station area and directed to perform ROM upon their return from leave should not be charged leave for the ROM period.

Commanders must conduct a risk assessment for service members requesting leave or liberty outside the local area to ensure appropriate force health protection measures are in place. Commanders must also ensure sufficient command readiness and retain the authority to disapprove leave as appropriate.

Hardship Duty Pay-Restriction of Movement (HDP-ROM) is not authorized for Sailors in a leave status. However, a Sailor who is placed in ROM due to COVID-19 exposure during leave may receive HDP-ROM if all eligibility criteria are met.

Members incorrectly charged leave while performing directed or ordered ROM should work with their command to have that leave restored.

For more information please review NAVADMIN 295/20 at www.npc.navy.mil, or contact MyNavy Career Center (MNCC) at 1-833-330-6622, email - askmncc@navy.mil.
Exhibit
23











CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





We
consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements No.
33-76518, No. 333-70135, No. 333-82673, No. 333-35978, No. 333-40256, No.
333-134009, No.333-144058 and No. 333-151474 on Form S-8, No. 333-152751 on Form
S-3 and No. 333-126147 on Form S-4 of our reports dated  February 24,
2009, relating to the financial statements of M/I Homes, Inc., and the
effectiveness of M/I Homes, Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting,
appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of M/I Homes, Inc. for the year
ended December 31, 2008.









/s/Deloitte
& Touche LLP


Deloitte
& Touche LLP







Columbus,
Ohio


February
24, 2009
Exhibit 32.2


                           Immtech International, Inc.

                                  Certification
                       pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
                             as adopted pursuant to
                  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
                  ---------------------------------------------

In connection with the Quarterly Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly
period ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof, I, Gary C. Parks, Treasurer, Secretary and Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

            1)    the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
                  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
                  amended; and

            2)    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
                  all material respects, the financial condition and results of
                  operations of the Company.

                  /s/        Gary C. Parks
                  --------------------------------------------
                  Name:      Gary C. Parks
                  Title:     Treasurer, Secretary and Chief Financial Officer
                             (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
                  Date:      February 9, 2006
#### Patricia Marino, Appellant, v Oakwood Care Center et al., Respondents.

[774 NYS2d 562]

*741In an action to recover damages, inter alia, for fraudulent misrepresentation, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Baisley, J.), dated December 18, 2002, which granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiff’s contention, the Supreme Court properly concluded that the defendants offered her at-will employment. New York continues to adhere to the traditional common-law rule that absent an agreement establishing a fixed duration, an employment relationship is presumed to be a hiring at will, terminable at any time by either party *(see Horn v New York Times,*100 NY2d 85, 90-91 [2003]; *Sabetay v Sterling Drug,*69 NY2d 329, 333 [1987]). Here, it is undisputed that the defendants offered the plaintiff the position of Director of Social Work at a skilled nursing facility which was still under construction. The plaintiff did not allege that the parties entered into an agreement which required the defendants to employ her for a definite and specified term, or which otherwise limited the defendants’ right to change the terms of their employment offer by deferring her proposed starting date. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly found that the plaintiff was merely a prospective employee at will.

Furthermore, since the plaintiff was offered only at-will employment, she cannot establish reasonable reliance, a necessary element to recover damages on theories of fraudulent misrepresentation, negligent misrepresentation, and promissory estoppel *(see Arias v Women in Need,*274 AD2d 353 [2000]; *Tannehill v Paul Stuart, Inc.,*226 AD2d 117 [1996]; *Clark v Helmsley Windsor Hotel,*214 AD2d 365 [1995]; *Mayer v Publishers Clearing House,*205 AD2d 506 [1994]; *Bower v Atlis Sys.,*182 AD2d 951 [1992]; *cf. Navaretta v Group Health,*191 AD2d 953 [1993]; *Stewart v Jackson & Nash,*976 F2d 86 [1992]).

The plaintiff’s remaining contentions are without merit. Santucci, J.P., Florio, Krausman and Schmidt, JJ., concur.
Ronald E. GARDINER, Appellant, v. Marsha K. GARDINER, Appellees.

Case No. 2D17-2002

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 2, 2018.

Ronald E. Gardiner, pro se.

Marsha K. Gardiner, pro se.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

NORTHCUTT, MORRIS, and LUCAS, JJ., Concur.
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

###### National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

          - [RTID 0648-XB506]

# AGENCY:

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This notice announces that NMFS, acting on behalf of the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary), has found that Northwest Atlantic porbeagle is still overfished.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kathryn Frens, (301) 427-8523.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Pursuant to section 304(e)(2) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), 16 U.S.C. 1854(e)(2), NMFS, on behalf of the Secretary, must publish a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     whenever it determines that a stock or stock complex is subject to overfishing, overfished, or approaching an overfished condition.                

NMFS has determined that Northwest Atlantic porbeagle is still overfished. This determination is based on the most recent assessment, conducted in 2020 and using data through 2018, which indicates that this stock is overfished because the biomass is below the threshold. NMFS manages Northwest Atlantic porbeagle sharks under the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic Highly Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan and its amendments. NMFS continues to work with the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas to rebuild this stock through an international rebuilding program.

Dated: January 28, 2022.

Ngagne Jafnar Gueye,

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 2022-02156 Filed 2-1-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. GALE B., a juvenile, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 02-30436.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 10, 2004.*

Decided May 18, 2004.

Before: CANBY, KOZINSKI and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Gale B., a juvenile, appeals the district court’s revocation of probation and imposition of a 24-month term of imprisonment, upon his admitted violation of a modified condition of probation. He was originally convicted of juvenile delinquency occurring within Indian country (burglary) in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1153 and 5032. Pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), counsel for Gale B. has filed a brief stating that he finds no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been timely filed.

Our examination of the brief and our independent review of the record pursuant to *Penson v. Ohio,*488 U.S. 75, 83, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), disclose no grounds for relief on direct appeal.

Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Edward S. MOORE, DOC #S38324, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-3128

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 2, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 147 (Monday, August 1, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45881-45882]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-19298]

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

NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES

National Endowment for the Arts; Proposed Collection; Comment 
Request

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), as part of its 
continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, conducts a 
preclearance consultation program to provide the general public and 
federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed and/or 
continuing collections of information in accordance with the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA95) [44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(A)]. This program 
helps to ensure that requested data can be provided in the desired 
format, reporting burden (time and financial resources) is minimized, 
collection instruments are clearly understood, and the impact of 
collection requirements on respondents can be properly assessed. 
Currently, the NEA is soliciting comments concerning the proposed 
information collection on grant applicant satisfaction with application 
guidance and materials provided on the NEA website and by NEA staff. A 
copy of the current information collection request can be obtained by 
contacting the office listed below in the address section of this 
notice.

DATES: Written comments must be submitted to the office listed in the 
address section below on or before September 1, 2011. The NEA is

[[Page 45882]]

particularly interested in comments which:
     Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is 
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, 
including whether the information will have practical utility;
     Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the 
burden of the proposed collection of information including the validity 
of the methodology and assumptions used;
     Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the 
information to be collected; and
     Minimize the burden of the collection of information on 
those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate 
automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection 
techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting 
electronic submissions of responses.

ADDRESSES: Sunil Iyengar, National Endowment for the Arts, 1100 
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Room 616, Washington, DC 20506-0001, 
telephone (202) 682-5424 (this is not a toll-free number), fax (202) 
682-5677.

Kathleen Edwards,
Director, Administrative Services, National Endowment for the Arts.
[FR Doc. 2011-19298 Filed 7-29-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7537-01-P
```