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

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1328 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1328

 To prohibit Federal agencies from purchasing or leasing new vehicles 
      that are not zero-emission vehicles, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 25, 2021

 Ms. Brownley introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                   Committee on Oversight and Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To prohibit Federal agencies from purchasing or leasing new vehicles 
      that are not zero-emission vehicles, 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 ``Green Federal Fleet Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON THE PURCHASE OR LEASE OF VEHICLES THAT ARE NOT 
              ZERO-EMISSIONS VEHICLES BY FEDERAL AGENCIES.

    (a) Prohibition.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
except as provided in paragraph (2), the head of a Federal agency may 
not purchase or lease a non-tactical passenger vehicle from a non-
Federal entity unless that vehicle is a zero-emission vehicle.
    (b) Exemption.--The head of a Federal agency may purchase or lease 
a non-tactical passenger vehicle from a non-Federal entity that is not 
a zero-emission vehicle if the head determines that, with respect to a 
particular circumstance, using a zero-emission vehicle will not be 
technically feasible.
    (c) Application.--The prohibition established under subsection (a) 
shall not apply with respect to purchases made and leases entered into 
before the date of the enactment of this Act.
    (d) Definitions.--In this Act:
            (1) Zero-emission vehicle.--The term ``zero-emission 
        vehicle'' means a passenger vehicle that produces zero exhaust 
        emissions of any criteria pollutant, precursor pollutant, or 
        greenhouse gas, other than water vapor, in any mode of 
        operation or condition, as determined by the Administrator of 
        the Environmental Protection Agency.
            (2) Federal agency.--The term ``Federal Agency'' means an 
        establishment in the legislative, judicial, or executive branch 
        of the Federal Government.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 21


                      ALMOST FAMILY, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                  LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2004

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
<S>                                                             <C>
Subsidiaries of Almost Family, Inc.
    Adult Day Care of America, Inc.                              Adult Day Care of Louisville, Inc.
    Adult Day Care of Maryland, Inc.                             HouseCalls, Inc.
    Adult Day Clubs of America Joint Venture, Ltd.               HHJC Holdings, Inc.
    National Health Industries, Inc.
    Pro-Care Home Health of Broward, Inc.


Subsidiaries of National Health Industries, Inc.
    Freelife Medical Equipment,  Inc.                            Caretenders Homecare, Inc.
    Caretenders Infusion of Birmingham, Inc.                     Caretenders of Birmingham, Inc.
    Caretenders of Boston, Inc.                                  Caretenders of Cincinnati, Inc.
    Caretenders of Columbus, Inc.                                Caretenders of Elizabethtown, Inc.
    Caretenders of Indiana, Inc.                                 Caretenders of Indianapolis, Inc.
    Caretenders of Lincoln Trail, Inc.                           Caretenders of Louisville, Inc.
    Caretenders of New Jersey, Inc.                              Caretenders of Northern Kentucky, Inc.
    Caretenders of Richmond, Inc.                                Caretenders of the Bluegrass, Inc.
    Caretenders Visiting Services of Richmond, Inc.              House Calls of America, Inc.
    Caretenders Infusion Corp.                                   Metro Home Care, Inc.
    National Orthopedic & Rehabilitation Services, Inc.          Physician Affiliates, Inc.
    Special Healthcare Services, Inc.                            Reliable Home Healthcare, Inc.
    Caretenders Visiting Services of Cincinnati, Inc.            Caretenders of Cleveland, Inc.
    Caretenders Visiting Services of Columbus, Inc.              Caretenders of Fort Lauderdale, Inc.
    Caretenders of Evansville, Inc.                              Caretenders of West Palm Beach, Inc.
    Caretenders Visiting Services of Indianapolis, Inc.          Caretenders of Charlotte, Inc.
    Caretenders Visiting Services of Southwest FL, Inc.          Caretenders of Southwest Florida, Inc.
    Caretenders Visiting Services of Southeast FL, Inc.

Subsidiary of HHJC Holdings, Inc.
    Home Health of Jefferson County, Inc.                        Caretenders of Marshall County, Inc.

</TABLE>
United State Securities and Exchange Commission Edgar Filing


Exhibit 10.24

DUSKA THERAPEUTICS, INC.

AMENDMENT TO NON-QUALIFIED STOCK OPTION AGREEMENT




THIS AMENDMENT (the “Amendment") TO THE NON-QUALIFIED STOCK OPTION AGREEMENT (the "Original Agreement") dated as of the 26th day of September, 2007 by and between Duska Therapeutics, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the "Company"), and James S. Kuo ("Optionee") is effective as of the 10th day of November, 2008. 




RECITAL




1. Pursuant to the 2004 Equity Incentive Plan (the "Plan") of the Company, the Optionee was issued a non-qualified stock option (the "Option") to purchase 1,124,150 shares of Common Stock of the Company at a price of $1 per share upon the terms and conditions set forth in the Agreement. 




2. In order to reduce the number of the Company's issued and outstanding options, the Optionee has agreed to terminate the Agreement and have the Company cancel the Option. 




AGREEMENT




NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and of the undertakings of the parties hereto contained herein, it is hereby agreed: 




1. The Agreement and the Option granted pursuant to the Agreement are hereby terminated. 







IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the date and year first above written. 







			
	 
	DUSKA THERAPEUTICS, INC. 


	 
	 
	 

	 
	By:

	/s/ Amir Pelleg, Ph.D.


	 
	 
	Name: Amir Pelleg, Ph. D.


	 
	 
	Title: President


	 
	 
	 

	 
	OPTIONEE


	 
	 
	 

	 
	By:

	/s/ James Kuo


	 
	 
	Dr. James Kuo


	 
	 
	1050 Scorlati Place


	 
	 
	La Jolla, CA 92037
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Moises ARELLANO-ROBLES, Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-41722 Conference Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed August 18, 2017

Carmen Castillo Mitchell, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S, Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Moisés Arellano-Robles, Pro Se

Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and ELROD, Circuit Judges,

PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Moisés Arellano-Robles has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S, 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and *United States v. Flores,*632 F.3d 229 (6th Cir. 2011). Arellano-Robles has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

 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 lirpited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
**Alcoa Inc. - Warrick Operations Potline TF Emissions**  **March 1 - August 31, 2013**

Potline 2 Month Roof MonitorPrimary Control DeviceTotal

lbs./ton lbs./ton* lbs./ton March 0.845 0.05060.8956 April 0.919 0.0509 0.9699 May 0.821 0.0497 0.8707 June 1.158 0.05 1.208 July 1.285 0.0508 1.336 August 1.011 0.0509 1.0619

_________ * Emissions based on the 10/17/12 annual tests, wherein 0.3432 lb./hr. of TF was measured.

Potline 3 Month Roof MonitorPrimary Control DeviceTotal

lbs./ton lbs./ton lbs./ton March 1.265 0.489* 1.754 April 1.43 0.321** 1.751 May 1.367 0.322** 1.689 June 1.463 0.322** 1.785 July 1.356 0.321** 1.677 August 1.475 0.325** 1.8

_________ * Emissions based on the 4/19/12 annual tests, wherein 6.61 lbs./hr. of TF was measured.
** Emissions based on the 4/17/13 annual tests, wherein 4.382 lbs./hr. of TF was measured.

Potline 4 Month Roof MonitorPrimary Control DeviceTotal

lbs./ton lbs./ton lbs./ton March 1.189 0.489* 1.678April 1.015 0.321** 1.336

May 0.891 0.322** 1.213 June 1.348 0.323** 1.671 July 1.172 0.321** 1.493 August 1.316 0.325** 1.641

_________ * Emissions based on the 4/19/12 annual tests, wherein 6.61 lbs./hr. of TF was measured.
** Emissions based on the 4/17/13 annual tests, wherein 4.382 lbs./hr. of TF was measured.

Potline 5 Month Roof MonitorPrimary Control DeviceTotal

lbs./ton lbs./ton* lbs./ton March 1.296 0.026 1.322 April 1.053 0.0257 1.0787 May 1.592 0.0256 1.6176 June 1.859 0.0258 1.8848 July 1.604 0.0256 1.6296 August 1.549 0.0254 1.5744

_________ * Emissions based on the 10/15/12 annual tests, wherein 0.176 lb./hr. of TF was measured.

Potline 6 Month Roof MonitorPrimary Control DeviceTotal

lbs./ton lbs./ton* lbs./ton March 1.64 0.0248 1.6648 April 1.543 0.0245 1.5675 May 1.575 0.0247 1.5997 June 1.712 0.0247 1.7367 July 1.459 0.0243 1.4833 August 1.33 0.0245 1.3545

_________* Emissions based on the 10/16/12 annual tests, wherein

0.1684 lb./hr. of TF was measured.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Roy Rene VILLAREAL, Jr., Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-51083 Conference Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed August 18, 2017

Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Roy Rene Villareal, Jr., Pro Se

Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Roy Rene Villareal, Jr., has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders*v. *California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and *United States v. Flores,*632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Villareal has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, .counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is' excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

 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.
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION

The undersigned certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, that:



|(1) | The accompanying quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                  |  |  |  |                                   
|----------------- |  |  |  | ----------------------------------
|Date: May 8, 2009 |  |  |  |                                   
|                  |  | 
|                  |  |  |  | /s/ Stryker Warren, Jr.           
|                  |  |  |  | Stryker Warren, Jr.               
|                  |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer           
|                  |  | 
|                  |  |  |  | /s/ Rebecca J. Weber              
|                  |  |  |  | Rebecca J. Weber                  
|                  |  |  |  | Controller and Director of Finance
# Navy Resumes Regular Urinalysis Operations

## From MC1 Mark D. Faram, Chief of Naval Personnel Public Affairs 

The Navy has resumed regular urinalysis testing with the release of NAVADMIN 100/21 on May 21. 

The message cancels the temporary policy allowing for the suspension of collection operations to mitigate Sailor exposure during the COVID-19 pandemic.  This aligns with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announcement supporting the safe return to many activities halted during the pandemic. 

Additionally, maintaining a robust and drug free workplace is Navy’s best deterrence to misuse of illicit and prescription drugs.

“Commands will return to normal testing procedures and requirements,” wrote Vice Adm. John B. Nowell, Jr, the Chief of Naval Personnel, in the message.

Commands not able to resume testing must explain those reasons to their echelon 3 commanders. This includes commands in the remaining areas and situational environments where COVID-19 restrictions limit or prevent testing. 

“Commands shall not recall individuals who are restricted in movement or quarantined, except in cases of probable cause, or as determined by the commanding officer in consultation with a local Judge Advocate General officer,” Nowell wrote.

Telework does not excuse an individual from participating in urinalysis, the message said. Also, Sailors assigned to non-Navy activities will follow their current command’s policies.

Commands must ensure everyone involved in urinalysis specimen collection observes current Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended COVID-19 safety measures, including wearing masks, washing hands and maintaining social distancing.

After each collection, Sailors, Urinalysis Program Coordinators and observers gathering specimens must wipe down all surfaces contacted, including tables, faucets and door handles. Avoid any personal touching if possible and wash hands if any contact occurs during the process.

For more news from Chief of Naval Personnel, follow us on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/mynavyhr, Twitter at https://twitter.com/mynavyhr or visit https://www.navy.mil/cnp.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1


                             CHEMTRAK INCORPORATED

                     COMPUTATION OF INCOME (LOSS) PER SHARE






<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                           Three months ended                            Nine months ended
                                                             September 30,                               September 30,
                                                ------------------------------------       ---------------------------------------
                                                     1996                   1995                  1996                   1995
                                                ------------            ------------          ------------            ------------
<S>                                            <C>                      <C>                   <C>                     <C>
Weighted average common shares outstanding        10,192,000               9,699,000             9,808,000               9,624,000
                                                ============            ============          ============            ============
Net Income (loss)                               $ (2,087,000)           $ (1,241,000)         $ (6,372,000)           $ (4,723,000)
                                                ============            ============          ============            ============
Net Income (loss) per share                     $      (0.20)           $      (0.13)         $      (0.65)           $      (0.49)
                                                ============            ============          ============            ============
</TABLE>
















                                       13
EPA SANITIZED Page 1 of 12
 

 

EPA SANITIZED Page 2 of 12
 

 

EPA SANITIZED Page 3 of 12
EPA SANITIZED Page 4 of 12
 

 

EPA SANITIZED Page 5 of 12
EPA SANITIZED Page 6 of 12
EPA SANITIZED Page 7 of 12
EPA SANITIZED Page 8 of 12
EPA SANITIZED Page 9 of 12
 

EPA SANITIZED Page 10 of 12
EPA SANITIZED Page 11 of 12
 

EPA SANITIZED Page 12 of 12
Wendy HABEGGER, Appellant, v. UNIVERSITY OF WEST FLORIDA, Board of Trustees, David Dickey, and Wear TV Channel 3, Appellees.

No. 1D17-0151

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 3, 2018 Rehearing Denied May 11, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
III 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 669 

To express the sense of the Senate on United States-Israel cooperation on 

precision-guided munitions. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

AUGUST 6, 2020 

Mr. ROUNDS submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Foreign Relations 

RESOLUTION 

To express the sense of the Senate on United States-Israel 

cooperation on precision-guided munitions. 

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that— 

2 (1) the Department of Defense has cooperated 

3 extensively with Israel to assist in the procurement 

4 of precision-guided munitions, and such cooperation 

5 represents an important example of robust United 

6 States support for Israel; 

7 (2) to the extent practicable, the Secretary of 

8 Defense should take further measures to expedite 

9 deliveries of precision-guided munitions to Israel; 

10 and 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 669 IS 

1 (3) regularized annual purchases of precision2 guided munitions by Israel, in accordance with exist3 ing requirements and practices regarding the export 

4 of defense articles and defense services, coordinated 

5 with the United States Air Force annual purchase of 

6 precision-guided munitions, would enhance the secu7 rity of both the United States and Israel by— 

8 (A) promoting a more efficient use of de9 fense resources by taking advantage of econo10 mies of scale; 

11 (B) enabling the United States and Israel 

12 to address crisis requirements for precision13 guided munitions in a timely and flexible man14 ner; and 

15 (C) encouraging the defense industrial 

16 base to maintain routine production lines of 

17 precision-guided munitions. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
Donna R. WENDLER, Scott G. Wendler and Wendler Properties, III, LLC, Appellants, v. CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE, Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-504

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed March 6, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Edwin L. DEMPS, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D17-2205

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

OCTOBER 24, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Transferred.
Victoria Q. POOLE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-4639

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

February 9, 2018 Rehearing Denied March 23, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
----

----

----

----

----

----

| If to Employer: CytRx Corporation11726 San Vicente Boulevard, Suite 650Los Angeles, California  90049Facsimile:                  (310) 826-5529Attention:                  Chief Executive Officer |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|  If to Employee: Daniel Levitt, M.D., Ph.D._______________                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             |

----

|   | “EMPLOYER” CytRx Corporation  By: /s/ STEVEN A. KRIEGSMAN                                                               Steven A. KriegsmanPresident & Chief Executive Officer |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |  “EMPLOYEE”  /s/ DANIEL LEVITT                                                               Daniel Levitt, M.D., Ph.D.                                                            |