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

### (

REPORT XLS-2-2200-21- ICA Revision None, October 15, 2005 

### (

IN ST R UCTIONS FOR CONT INUED AIRWORTHINESS FOR XLS CO., LLC HORIZONTAL STABILI ZER SUPPO RT FITTING SYSTEM FOR COLON I AL C -1 , COLONIAL C-2, LAKE LA-4 , LAKE LA-4A, LAKE LA-4P, AND LAKE LA-4-200 AIRCRAFT

XL..<:; Company , LLC R

e port XLS-2-2200-500 In s tallation I ns tru c tion s and Ln struct i o ns for Co ntinued AirworthinessI '

Revision Affected None (

1 0- 15-05 Log of Revisio n s D esc ription
Initia l Release

page 2 

### (

A ll

XLS Co mpany , LL C R

eport XLS-2-22 00-2 I

- I CA R

ev i s ion None , October I 5 , 2005

# . - ( (

Introduction The XLS Company, LLC Horizontal Stabi li ze r S upport Fitting System is an improved horizontal stabilizer fitting or fitting assemb ly for instal lation on Co lonial C-1 , Co lon ial C-2, Lake LA

- 4 , Lake LA-4A, Lake LA-4P , and Lake LA-4-200 aircraft. Installation of the XLS Company , LLC Horizontal Stabilizer Support Fitting System is an approved replacement fitting system meeting the require ments of AD 2005- 12-02 paragraphs (e)(l)(i), (e)(2 ) (ii) , o r (e)(3). The XLS Company , LLC Horizontal S tabili zer Support Fittin g System is instal led in accordance with XLS Company In s tallation Instructions R eport XLS-2-2200-21-500. Maintenance Instructions 1
. Co ntinue to ma i ntain aircraft and hori z ontal stab ili zer fittings as outlined in the standard aircraft maintenance manual. 2. Inspect XLS fittings and, if applicable , doub lers and spacers as outli ned in AD 2005- 12-02 paragraph (e)(5) every 50 hours TIS o r at each annua l inspection , whichever comes first. Report to FAA if any cracks are found as outlined in paragrap h (e)(6) of AD 2005-12-02. Do not fly an airplane with cracks in the horizontal s tabilizer fittin gs or doub lers. Any c rack s in the hori zontal stabilizer support fittings render the airplane unairworthy. Treat any corrosion found in accordance with AC 43-4A , sectio n 5. 3. Replace XLS fittin gs and , where app li cab le , do ubl ers every 850 hours TIS in accordance with Horizontal Stabilizer Support F itting System In stallation Instruct ions Report XLS-2-2200-21-500.
Airworthiness Limitations "The Airworthiness Limhations sectio n is FAA approved and spec ifi es maintenance required under§§ 43.16 and 91.403 ofthe Federal Aviat ion Regulations unless an a lternative program has been FAA approved." The fo ll owing parts are lif e l imited and must be replaced every 850 hours time in service. XLS-2-2200-22 I Land XLS-2-2200-22 1R fitt in gs XLS-2-2200-21 fitti ngs and XLS

- 2-2200- I 2 1 doublers Replace life limited parts in accordance with Horizontal Stabilizer Su pport Fitti ng System Installation Instructions Report XLS-2-2200-21-500.

page 3 XLS Company, LL C Report X LS-2-2200-21- ICA Revision None , October 15 , 2005
No. 10-120.

#### James D. Schneller, Petitioner v. Fox Subacute at Clara Burke, et al.

562 U.S. 1003, 131 S. Ct. 505,

178 L. Ed. 2d 370,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8572.

November 1, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.

Same case below, 368 Fed. Appx. 275.
EXHIBIT 31.2RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATIONS, ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACTOF 2002I, Russell Van Zandt certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Veridien Corporation;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have: a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;  b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  c) disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s most recentfiscal quarter (the small business issuer’s fourth physical quarter in the case of anannual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.5. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small businessissuer’s auditors and the audit committee of small business issuer’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the small business issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and  b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.                  Date: August 14, 2006                     /s/ Russell Van Zandt                 Russell Van Zandt        Chief Financial Officer  
21
No. 10-5809.

#### David A. Sneed, Petitioner v. David Johnson, Warden.

562 U.S. 1006, 131 S. Ct. 508,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8548.

178 L. Ed. 2d 376,

November 1, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.

*377Same case below, 600 F.3d 607.
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2656 

To amend title II of the Social Security Act to disregard certain contributions 

to ABLE accounts when determining an individual’s ability to engage 

in substantial gainful activity, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 9, 2019 

Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia (for himself, Mr. GARAMENDI, Mrs. 

HARTZLER, and Mr. CRAWFORD) introduced the following bill; which was 

referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend title II of the Social Security Act to disregard 

certain contributions to ABLE accounts when determining an individual’s ability to engage in substantial 

gainful activity, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘ABLE Accounts for 

5 Veterans Act of 2019’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HR 2656 IH

1 SEC. 2. CERTAIN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ABLE ACCOUNTS DIS2 REGARDED IN DETERMINATION OF SUBSTAN3 TIAL GAINFUL ACTIVITY. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 223(d)(4) of the Social 

5 Security Act (42 U.S.C. 423(d)(4)) is amended by adding 

6 at the end the following: 

7 ‘‘(D) In determining when earnings derived from 

8 services demonstrate an individual’s ability to engage in 

9 substantial gainful activity, in the case of earnings earned 

10 in a month by an individual who receives compensation 

11 for a service-connected disability for such month under 

12 chapter 11 of title 38, United States Code, the Commis13 sioner of Social Security shall disregard an amount of 

14 such earnings equal to the amount of any contribution 

15 made by the individual in such month to a qualified ABLE 

16 program (as defined in section 529A of the Internal Rev17 enue Code of 1986) established for the benefit of such in18 dividual.’’. 

19 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

20 subsection (a) shall apply with respect to earnings earned 

21 for months beginning after the date that is 6 months after 

22 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
No. 10-269.

#### Charles Gersten, Petitioner v. Ethel Joyce Gersten.

562 U.S. 1004, 131 S. Ct. 511,

178 L. Ed. 2d 372,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8472.

November 1, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division One, denied.

Same case below, 223 Ariz. 99, 219 P.3d 309.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 204 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 204

 To transfer title to certain lands in Shenandoah National Park in the 
               State of Virginia, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

             January 26 (legislative day, January 5), 1993

 Mr. Warner (for himself and Mr. Robb) introduced the following bill; 
   which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                           Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To transfer title to certain lands in Shenandoah National Park in the 
               State of Virginia, 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. TRANSFER TO THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA.

    (a) In General.--Subject to subsection (b), the Secretary of the 
Interior may convey, without consideration or reimbursement, all right, 
title, and interest of the United States in and to the roads specified 
in subsection (c) to the Commonwealth of Virginia.
    (b) Conditions of Conveyance.--
            (1) Existing roads.--A conveyance pursuant to subsection 
        (a) shall be limited to the roads described in subsection (c) 
        as the roads exist on the date of enactment of this Act.
            (2) Reversion.--A conveyance pursuant to subsection (a) 
        shall be made on the condition that if at any time any road 
        conveyed pursuant to subsection (a) is no longer used as a 
        public roadway, all right, title, and interest in the road 
        shall revert to the United States.
    (c) Roads.--The roads referred to in subsection (a) are those 
portions of roads within the boundaries of Shenandoah National Park 
that, as of the date of enactment of this Act, constitute portions of--
            (1) Madison County Route 600;
            (2) Rockingham County Route 624;
            (3) Rockingham County Route 625;
            (4) Rockingham County Route 626;
            (5) Warren County Route 604;
            (6) Page County Route 759;
            (7) Page County Route 611;
            (8) Page County Route 682;
            (9) Page County Route 662;
            (10) Augusta County Route 611;
            (11) Augusta County Route 619;
            (12) Albemarle County Route 614;
            (13) Augusta County Route 661; and
            (14) Rockingham County Route 663.

                                 <all>
```
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-09-00362-CV

Harvey Leroy Sossamon, III, Appellant

v.

Brad Livingston, Director of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 200TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. D-1-GN-08-002020, HONORABLE STEPHEN YELENOSKY, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

On September 21, 2009, we notified appellant Harvey Leroy Sossamon, III that the

appellate record in this case did not appear to contain a final or otherwise appealable order. This

Court’s jurisdiction is limited to the review of final judgments and certain interlocutory orders signed

by the trial court. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. §§ 51.012, .014 (West 2008); see also

Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). Sossamon’s response to this notice

fails to demonstrate that a final or otherwise appealable order has been signed by the trial court.

Sossamon seeks to appeal from the trial court’s order permitting him to take a pre-suit deposition

and denying a motion for a protective order filed by the individual to be deposed. See Tex. R. Civ.

P. 202.1. Specifically, Sossamon wishes to appeal from the following language in the order:

“However, Plaintiff [Sossamon] must follow theTexas Rules of Civil Procedure, including the rules

regarding costs and fees.” A trial court’s order stating that the applicable procedural rules shall apply
2

to a pre-suit deposition is not an appealable interlocutory order. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code

Ann. § 51.014. No appealable judgment or order appears in the record. Accordingly, the appeal is

dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

___________________________________________

Diane M. Henson, Justice

Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Waldrop and Henson

Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction

Filed: October 15, 2009
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2643 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2643

    To direct the Federal Communications Commission to establish a 
challenge process to verify fixed and mobile broadband service coverage 
                                 data.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 9, 2019

 Mr. Latta (for himself and Mr. Welch) introduced the following bill; 
       which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To direct the Federal Communications Commission to establish a 
challenge process to verify fixed and mobile broadband service coverage 
                                 data.

    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 ``Broadband Mapping After Public 
Scrutiny Act of 2019'' or the ``Broadband MAPS Act of 2019''.

SEC. 2. VERIFICATION OF BROADBAND SERVICE COVERAGE DATA.

    (a) Rulemaking.--Not later than 6 months after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, the Commission shall initiate a rulemaking to 
establish a challenge process to collect and use fixed and mobile 
broadband service coverage data submitted to the Commission by private 
entities and State, local, and Tribal government entities to verify 
fixed and mobile broadband service coverage data reported to the 
Commission by fixed and mobile broadband service providers.
    (b) Data Submission Standards.--The process established under 
subsection (a) shall include uniform standards for data submitted 
through such process to ensure consistent and accurate reporting 
methods.
    (c) Data Validation.--The process established under subsection (a) 
shall include an evidence-based method to validate the accuracy of data 
submitted through such process.
    (d) Definitions.--In this section:
            (1) Commission.--The term ``Commission'' means the Federal 
        Communications Commission.
            (2) State.--The term ``State'' has the meaning given such 
        term in section 3 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 
        153).
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32





Section 1350 Certifications




Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned officers of Shearson American REIT, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the Company), hereby certify that:






To my knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (Amendment No. 1)  of the Company for the period ended June 30, 2010 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.






Dated:  April 1, 2011







/s/ John Williams


John Williams


Chief Executive Officer


(Principal Executive Officer)





Dated:  April 1, 2011








/s/ John D. Glassgow


John D. Glassgow


Chief Financial Officer


(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-1560

DANIEL P. WOODLIN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

THE HON COMPANY,

Defendant - Appellee.

THOMAS H. ROBERTS, Esq.,

Movant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District

Judge. (CA-02-186-3)

Submitted: July 2, 2003 Decided: July 28, 2003

Before LUTTIG and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Daniel P. Woodlin, Appellant Pro Se. Lynn Forgrieve Jacob, Dana

C.M. Peluso, WILLIAMS, MULLEN, CLARK & DOBBINS, Richmond, Virginia,

for Appellee.
2

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Daniel P. Woodlin has filed a second notice of appeal from the

district court’s order granting summary judgment to his former

employer in his action alleging employment discrimination. We

previously affirmed the district court’s order in Woodlin’s first

appeal of that order. See Woodlin v. Hon Co., No. 03-1161, 2003 WL

21154294 (4th Cir. May 20, 2003) (unpublished). Our affirmance of

the order is now the law of the case, see Christianson v. Colt

Indus. Operating Corp., 486 U.S. 800, 815-16 (1988); Sejman v.

Warner-Lambert Co., 845 F.2d 66, 68-69 (4th Cir. 1988), and thus we

dismiss the instant appeal. We dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### Rivera v. W.C.A.B. (Pro Pallet, LLC)

12/16/2015

515 MAL (2015)

Denied
Opinion issued June 13 , 2023

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01
- 23
- 004 24
- CR

——————————— IN RE JB BLACK , Relat or

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDU M OPINION Relator, J.B. Black, has filed a petition for writ of mandamus compelling the trial court to rule on relator’s “Memorandum and Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction.” 1 We deny the petition. PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Goodman, Landau, and Rivas

- Molloy

. Do not publish. T EX
. R. A PP
. P . 47.2(b).

1 The underlying case is State of Texas v. J.B. Black , cause number 1 629964 , pending in the 17 4 th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Hazel B. Jones presiding.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2637 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2637

  To prevent the Secretary of Homeland Security from closing certain 
          international field offices, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 9, 2019

 Mr. Espaillat (for himself, Mr. Garcia of Illinois, and Miss Rice of 
  New York) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
Committee on Homeland Security, and in addition to the Committee on the 
 Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, 
 in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
                jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To prevent the Secretary of Homeland Security from closing certain 
          international field offices, 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 ``Preserving Overseas Immigration 
Services Act''.

SEC. 2. INTERNATIONAL OPERATIONS DIVISION.

    The Secretary of Homeland Security may not close or consolidate any 
field office of the International Operations Division of the Refugee, 
Asylum, and International Operations Directorate of the United States 
Citizenship and Immigration Services unless the Secretary obtains the 
approval of the Committee on the Judiciary and the Committee on 
Homeland Security of the House of Representatives and the Committee on 
the Judiciary and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 
Affairs of the Senate.
                                 <all>
```
EX-10.1








Amendment to Employment Agreement of Robert L. Belk





This agreement, effective upon your signature below, will serve to amend your Employment
Agreement of May 1, 2000, by and between you and The Shaw Group Inc.




1. Section 5 is hereby amended to add the following:




(f) You will be provided with use of company-owned aircraft for up to 50 hours per
calendar year, with the value of such use included in compensation as required by law or
regulation




2. Section 7 is hereby amended to add the following:




(j) The options granted October 13, 2004, will vest annually over two years, 50 percent
per year, beginning October 13, 2005. The Company will guarantee that the gain on any
sale of such shares will not be less than the Black-Scholes value calculated on the date
of grant ($8 per share). The effective date of this guarantee will be the expiration of
the 90 day period for exercising options pursuant to the Plan, or the one year period
under 5(e) of your Employment Agreement as the case may be, following termination of
employment. However, at any time during the term of the options, the Company may request
in writing that you exercise the options and sell the shares. In the event you choose to
decline, the Company shall receive a credit against the guaranteed accretion in an amount
equal to the difference between i) the closing share price on the third day after the
date of such written request and ii) the exercise price of the options.




In the event you resign from the Company after at least two years from the effective
date, but prior to the four year vesting period for the restricted stock grant, you agree
to become a consultant to the Company for no greater than 120 hours per year for the
remainder of the vesting period and will be considered an employee for purposes of the
full vesting of such shares. The terms of such consulting agreement will be reasonable,
commercially agreeable terms customary for such a position, to be mutually agreed upon by
the parties at such time. Should you resign prior to two years from the effective date,
vesting of the restricted stock grant shall cease, and unvested shares will be forfeited.




3. Section 7 (c) (i) (D) is amended as follows:




The word “Options” is hereby deleted, and replaced with “Long Term Incentive Awards
pursuant to any Company Plan.”




	 	4.	 	Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, all other provisions of the
Employment Agreement of May 1, 2000, remain unchanged.






Effective this 1st day of December, 2004



	 	 	 
	/s/ Robert L. Belk	 	/s/ Gary P. Graphia
	Robert L. Belk

	 	Gary P. Graphia