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

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3207 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3207

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 114 Mill Street in Hookstown, Pennslyvania, as the ``Staff Sergeant 
                  Dylan Elchin Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 11, 2019

 Mr. Lamb (for himself, Ms. Wild, Mr. Fitzpatrick, Mr. Reschenthaler, 
   Mr. Kelly of Pennsylvania, Mr. Thompson of Pennsylvania, and Mr. 
Michael F. Doyle of Pennsylvania) introduced the following bill; which 
         was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 114 Mill Street in Hookstown, Pennslyvania, as the ``Staff Sergeant 
                  Dylan Elchin Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. STAFF SERGEANT DYLAN ELCHIN POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 114 Mill Street in Hookstown, Pennsylvania, shall be known 
and designated as the ``Staff Sergeant Dylan Elchin Post Office 
Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Staff 
Sergeant Dylan Elchin Post Office Building''.
                                 <all>
```
No. 10-11228.

#### Jose Rosario Sanchez, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 873, 132 S. Ct. 230,

181 L. Ed. 2d 129,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6702.

October 3, 2011.

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

Same case below, 419 Fed. Appx. 504.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 17 (Tuesday, January 27, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3921-3922]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-1919]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree Pursuant to the Comprehensive 
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act

    In accordance with Departmental policy, 28 CFR 50.7, notice is 
hereby given that a proposed consent decree in United States v. Young 
Refining Company, Civil Action No. 1-96-CV-1002-JEC, was lodged on 
December 31, 1997, with the United States District Court for the 
Northern District of Georgia. The consent decree settles a claim 
brought under Section 107(a) of the Comprehensive Environmental 
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (``CERCLA''), 42 U.S.C. 
9607(a), for response costs incurred by the United States at the Basket 
Creek Drum Disposal site (the ``Basket Creek site'') in

[[Page 3922]]

Douglasville, Georgia. Under the proposed consent decree, Continental 
Trading Company and Dr. Fred W.J. Liu will pay $67,500 to the United 
States in reimbursement of response costs incurred by the Environmental 
Protection Agency (``EPA'') in connection with the Basket Creek site. 
Most of the removal of hazardous substances from the Basket Creek Site 
was conducted by Chem-Nuclear Systems, Inc. EPA has incurred costs of 
approximately $678,000 in connection with the Basket Creek Site.
    The Department of Justice will receive, for a period of thirty (30) 
days from the date of this publication, comments relating to the 
proposed consent decree. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant 
Attorney General for the Environmental and Natural Resources Division, 
Department of Justice, Washington, DC 20530, and should refer to United 
States v. Young Refining Company, DOJ Ref. #90-11-2-755.
    The proposed consent decree may be examined at the office of the 
United States Attorney, Richard Russell Federal Building, Suite 1800, 
75 Spring Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30335; the Region 4 Office of 
the Environmental Protection Agency, 61 Forsythe St., SE., Atlanta, 
Georgia 30303; and at the Consent Decree Library, 1120 G Street, NW., 
4th Floor, Washington, DC 20005, (202) 624-0892. A copy of the proposed 
consent decree may be obtained in person or by mail from the Consent 
Decree Library, 1120 G Street, NW., 4th Floor, Washington, DC 20005. In 
requesting a copy please refer to the referenced case and enclose a 
check in the amount of $4.50 (25 cents per page reproduction costs), 
payable to the Consent Decree Library.
Walker B. Smith,
Deputy Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and 
Natural Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 98-1919 Filed 1-26-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-15-M
ALLOW EXTRA

TIME TO PUT ON

YOUR LEGS.

Brandon, Age 31, Diagnosed at 18

North Dakota

Smoking causes immediate damage to your body. 

For Brandon, it caused Buerger’s disease, which 

cut off blood flow and led to amputation. You can 

quit. For free help, call 1-800-QUIT-NOW
No. 11-5642.

#### Theodore Shove, et al., Petitioners v. United States District Court Judges, et al.

565 U.S. 917, 132 S. Ct. 336,

181 L. Ed. 2d 210,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5891,

October 3, 2011.

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

Same case below, 407 Fed. Appx. 494.
DLM 4000.25, Volume 2, November 26, 2019

Change 13

AP8.28-1 APPENDIX 8.28

AP8.28. APPENDIX 8.28

RECEIPT CONFIRMATION FOR MATERIEL 

OBLIGATION VALIDATION REQUEST

FIELD LEGEND

RECORD

POSITION(S) ENTRY AND INSTRUCTIONS

Document Identifier Code 1-3 Enter DIC AP9 or APX.

Other Fields 4-40 Duplicate from AN9/ANZ received.

Receipt Acknowledgment 41-44 Enter ordinal day DIC AN9/ANZ were received 

by validating activity. (Enter one position for 

last digit of calendar year and three positions 

for numerical day of year.)

Other Fields 45-80 Duplicate from DIC AN9/ANZ received.
*DLM 4000.25, Volume 2, June 16, 2015*

*Change 5*

**AP11. APPENDIX 11.**

**CORRELATION OF MILSTRAP LEGACY DIC FUNCTIONALITY TO DLMS IMPLEMENTATION CONVENTION CODING**

AP11.1.  This appendix provides a user aid for Military Standard Transaction Reporting and Accountability Procedures (MILSTRAP).  The aid consists of correlation tables between MILSTRAP legacy document identifier code (DIC) series, (e.g., D4_, D6_, D7_, etc.) and DLMS implementation conventions (IC), which provide general functional equivalency between each MILSTRAP DIC and DLMS IC.  In addition to identification of the DIC/DLMS basic cross-references, physical location of the applicable transaction type code(s) within each DLMS IC and clarifying information required to define a valid correlation are provided:

AP11.2.  Correlation of MILSTRAP legacy DIC Functionality to DLMS Transactions (legacy DIC Sequence) 

Correlation of MILSTRAP DIC Functionality to DLMS Transactions:

http://www.dla.mil/Portals/104/Documents/DLMS/eApplications/LogDataAdmin/MILSTRAP_DI_Code_Function_DI_Code_sequence.doc

AP11.3.  Correlation of DLMS Transaction to MILSTRAP legacy DIC Functionality (DLMS Sequence)

Correlation of DLMS Transaction to MILSTRAP DIC Functionality: 

http://www.dla.mil/Portals/104/Documents/DLMS/eApplications/LogDataAdmin/MILSTRAP_DI_Code_Function_InDLMSsequence.doc

AP11-1	APPENDIX 11
No. 11-5240.

#### Eric Watkins, Petitioner v. Anthony Haynes, Warden.

565 U.S. 897, 132 S. Ct. 286,

181 L. Ed. 2d 171,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5679.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-11179

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ALFONSO MERCADO-CRUZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:16-CR-247-1

Before DAVIS, COSTA, and ENGELHARDT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Alfonso MercadoCruz has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with 

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 

229 (5th Cir. 2011). Mercado-Cruz has filed a response. The record is not 

sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Mercado-Cruz’s

claims of ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider the

 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 7, 2018

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 17-11179 Document: 00514504201 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/07/2018
No. 17-11179

2

claims without prejudice to collateral review. See United States v. Isgar, 739 

F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014).

We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record 

reflected therein, as well as Mercado-Cruz’s response. We concur with 

counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for 

appellate review. Accordingly, the 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.

 Case: 17-11179 Document: 00514504201 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/07/2018
No. 10-11160.

#### Carlton Mixon, Petitioner v. Katherine Corrigan, et al.

565 U.S. 870, 132 S. Ct. 222,

181 L. Ed. 2d 123,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 7116.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 132 (Friday, July 10, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37435-37436]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18410]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Declaration of Disaster #3094]


State of Massachusetts

    As a result of the President's major disaster declaration on June 
23, 1998, I find that Bristol, Essex, Middlesex, Norfolk, and Suffolk 
Counties in the State of Massachusetts constitute a disaster area due 
to damages caused by

[[Page 37436]]

heavy rains and flooding beginning on June 13, 1998, and continuing. 
Applications for loans for physical damages as a result of this 
disaster may be filed until the close of business on August 22, 1998, 
and for loans for economic injury until the close of business on March 
23, 1999 at the address listed below or other locally announced 
locations: U.S. Small Business Administration, Disaster Area 1 Office, 
360 Rainbow Blvd., South, 3rd Floor, Niagara Falls, NY 14303.
    In addition, applications for economic injury loans from small 
businesses located in the following contiguous counties may be filed 
until the specified date at the above location: Plymouth and Worcester 
Counties in Massachusetts; Bristol, Newport, and Providence Counties in 
Rhode Island; and Hillsborough and Rockingham Counties in New 
Hampshire.
    The interest rates are:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Physical Damage:                                                        
  Homeowners with credit available elsewhere..................     7.000
  Homeowners without credit available elsewhere...............     3.500
  Businesses with credit available elsewhere..................     8.000
  Businesses and non-profit organizations without credit                
   available elsewhere........................................     4.000
  Others (including non-profit organizations) with credit               
   available elsewhere........................................     7.125
For Economic Injury:                                                    
  Businesses and small agricultural cooperatives without                
   credit available elsewhere.................................     4.000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 309406. 
For economic injury the numbers are 990300 for Massachusetts, 990400 
for Rhode Island, and 990500 for New Hampshire.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 59002 and 
59008)

    Dated: June 30, 1998.
James E. Rivera,
Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.
[FR Doc. 98-18410 Filed 7-9-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

REGION 5 

77 WEST JACKSON BOULEVARD 

CHICAGO, IL 60604-3590 

REPL Y T O TH E ATTENTIO N O F 

Mr. David Thornton 

Assistant Commissioner 

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 

520 Lafayette Road North 

St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-4194 

Dear Mr. Thornton: 

This letter is in response to your June 12, 2014, submission of the Clean Air Act (CAA) Section 

110(a)(1) and (2), "Infrastructure" State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the 2008 8-hour Ozone, 

2010 Nitrogen Dioxide (N02 ), 2010 Sulfur Dioxide (S02), and 2012 annual fine Particle Matter 

(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The requested submission is 

intended to demonstrate that the state of Minnesota has all necessary authority, resources, and 

personnel to implement and satisfactorily complete the air quality management requirements set 

forth in section 110(a)(1) and (2) ofthe CAA with respect to each NAAQS. 

Specifically, the SIP submission is intended to address the requirements of CAA section 

110(a)(2)(A) - section 110(a)(2)(M) for each NAAQS, with the following exceptions: section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2008 Ozone, 2010 S02, and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, i.e., 

Minnesota's SIP submission intended to address section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) applies only to the 

2010 NO2 NAAQS; and, section 110(a)(2)(I) for each NAAQS, as the requirements contained in 

this section are not part of the Infrastructure SIP process. 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has determined that the submission is complete for 

each of the remaining elements for each NAAQS, except for narrow portions relating to the 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD). Minnesota did not submit a complete SIP to 

address section 110(a)(2)(C) and (J) related to PSD permitting programs required by part C of 

Title I of the CAA. Minnesota also did not submit a complete SIP to address section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) related to interference with other states' PSD permitting programs required by 

part C by sources in Minnesota. Minnesota also failed to submit a complete SIP to address 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) related to notification to other states. However, the applicable PSD 

requirements contained in sections 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), and (J) are already addressed 

for Minnesota, as EPA has delegated authority to the state to administer the Federally 

promulgated PSD regulations contained in 40 C.F.R. 52.21. 

A finding of completeness merely indicates that the submission meets the criteria that any plan 

must satisfy for EPA to take rulemaking action on it. A completeness finding is not a finding on 

the merits ofthe plan or whether it meets EPA's SIP approval requirements. 

Recycled/Recyclable • Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 50% Recycled Paper (20% Postconsumer) 
If you have any questions or need additional information please contact me, or Andy Chang, of 

my staff, at 312-886-0258. 

Sincerely, 

George T 

Director ( 

Air and Rac
No. 11-5272.

#### Jason Adam Ingrim, Petitioner v. Larry Denney, Warden.

565 U.S. 898, 132 S. Ct. 290,

181 L. Ed. 2d 175,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5653.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
<PAGE>   1
                                                           EXHIBIT 10.J.1


                             AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE
                        1995 INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN

         Pursuant to Section 9.12 of the El Paso Natural Gas Company 1995
Incentive Compensation Plan (the "Plan"), the Plan is hereby amended as
follows, effective January 1, 1996:

         Section 7.1 is amended to add subsection (d), to read as follows:

         (d)     Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b) above, the Plan
         Administrator or Management Committee, as appropriate, may determine
         that a Participant must receive a greater amount of his or her award
         in Restricted Stock, up to and including the entire award in
         Restricted Stock. (For purposes of the Plan, such required shares
         shall be treated as being awarded pursuant to Section 7.1 (a)(ii) or
         Section 7.1 (b)(ii), as applicable.) In such event, a Participant
         shall be entitled to the additional shares of Restricted Stock,
         awarded pursuant to Section 7(c) above.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, El Paso, Natural Gas Company has caused this
amendment to be duly executed on this 10th day of January 1996.

                                           EL PASO NATURAL GAS COMPANY


                                           By:    /s/ JOEL RICHARDS
Attest:                                        --------------------------

/s/ STACY J. JAMES                         Title: Senior Vice President
-------------------                              ------------------------
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF INCOME AND CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                              78
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      889
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0<F1>
<INVENTORY>                                         77
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,442
<PP&E>                                           6,385
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0<F1>
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   8,654
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,050
<BONDS>                                          2,188
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           182
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,681
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     8,654
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,810
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,546
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 120
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    168
<INCOME-TAX>                                        65
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 91
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        91
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.60<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.56<F3>
<FN>
<F1>NOT SEPARATELY IDENTIFIED IN THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OR
ACCOMPANYING NOTES THERETO.
<F2>REPRESENTS BASIC EARNINGS PER SHARE.
<F3>RESTATED TO REFLECT THE COMPANY'S ADOPTION OF STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL
STANDARDS NO. 128, "EARNINGS PER SHARE."
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
w National Infant Immunization Week
No. 10-1530.

#### Gregory Maurice Harding, Petitioner v. Maryland.

565 U.S. 826, 132 S. Ct. 118,

181 L. Ed. 2d 42,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5376.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland denied.

Same case below, 196 Md. App. 384, 9 A.3d 547.
No. 10-11050.

#### Ruffino Tellez-Araujo, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 864, 132 S. Ct. 207,

181 L. Ed. 2d 111,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6317.

October 3, 2011.

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

Same case below, 407 Fed. Appx. 32.
Exhibit 23.1

LOGO

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement of Oxygen Biotherapeutics, Inc. on Form S-8 (No. 333-167175) and
related prospectuses as well as the Registration Statement of Oxygen Biotherapeutics, Inc. on Form S-3 (No. 333-165733) of our audit report dated July 23, 2010, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Oxygen Biotherapeutics, Inc.,
which report appears in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Oxygen Biotherapeutics, Inc. for the years ended April 30, 2010 and 2009.



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|CHERRY, BEKAERT & HOLLAND, L.L.P.    
|                                     
|/s/ Cherry, Bekaert & Holland, L.L.P.
|Raleigh, North Carolina              
|July 23, 2010
No. 10-1298.

#### Robert N. Peirce, et al., Petitioners v. CSX Transportation, Inc.

565 U.S. 816, 132 S. Ct. 96,

181 L. Ed. 2d 24,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6835.

October 3, 2011.

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

*25Same case below, 406 Fed. Appx. 723.
Exhibit 32.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (1)
    
    The Report 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 Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 /s/ ROBERT GREENBERG

Robert GreenbergChief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)May 8, 2009/s/ FREDERICK H. SCHNEIDER

Frederick H. SchneiderChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)May 8, 2009