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

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3542 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3542

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permanently extend the 
       Indian coal production tax credit, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 27, 2019

Mr. Gianforte introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permanently extend the 
       Indian coal production tax credit, 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. PERMANENT EXTENSION OF INDIAN COAL PRODUCTION TAX CREDIT.

    (a) In General.--Section 45(e)(10) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
1986 is amended--
            (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``the applicable 
        dollar amount per ton of Indian coal'' and all that follows and 
        inserting the following: ``$4.00 per ton of Indian coal--
                            ``(i) produced by the taxpayer at an Indian 
                        coal production facility, and
                            ``(ii) sold (either directly by the 
                        taxpayer or after sale or transfer to one or 
                        more related persons) to an unrelated person 
                        during such taxable year.'', and
            (2) by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the 
        following:
                    ``(B) Inflation adjustment.--In the case of any 
                calendar year after 2018, the dollar amount in 
                subparagraph (A) shall be equal to the product of such 
                dollar amount and the inflation adjustment factor 
                determined under paragraph (2)(B) for the calendar 
                year, except that such paragraph shall be applied by 
                substituting `2017' for `1992'.''.
    (b) Definition of Indian Coal.--Subparagraph (A) of section 
45(c)(9) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read as 
follows:
                    ``(A) In general.--The term `Indian coal' means 
                coal which is produced from coal reserves which are--
                            ``(i) owned or controlled by an Indian 
                        tribe,
                            ``(ii) owned or controlled by an enrolled 
                        member of an Indian tribe, or
                            ``(iii) held in trust by the United States 
                        for the benefit of an Indian tribe or its 
                        members.''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to coal produced and sold after January 1, 2018.
                                 <all>
```
No. 11-6136.

#### Mohammad Norouzian, Petitioner v. Truman Medical Center, Inc.

565 U.S. 985, 132 S. Ct. 515,

181 L. Ed. 2d 362,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 7911.

October 31, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
FINAL – August 4, 2010 

MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IMMUNIZATION PRACTICES (ACIP) 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

1600 Clifton Road, NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30333 USA 

Thursday, August 5, 2010 

10:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time (U.S.) 

TELECONFERENCE

Dial in number: Toll-free number (U.S. and Canada): 1-800-857-9629

 Toll number: 1-210-234-0010 

Passcode: 3908107 

AGENDA ITEM PURPOSE PRESIDER/PRESENTER(s)

10:00 Welcome & introductions Dr. Carol Baker (Chair, ACIP)

Dr. Larry Pickering(Executive Secretary, 

ACIP; CDC)

10:05 Background on use of CSL trivalent inactivated 

influenza vaccine in Australia - 2010

Information Dr. Tim Uyeki (CDC, National Center for 

Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, 

Influenza Division)

10:15 Influenza Work Group update: vote on use of 

CSL trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine in 

the United States, 2010-2011

Information

Discussion

Vote

Dr. Wendy Keitel (ACIP, WG Chair)

11:50 Public comment Dr. Carol Baker (Chair, ACIP)

12:00 Adjourn Dr. Carol Baker (Chair, ACIP)

This document can be found on the CDC website at: http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/recs/acip/downloads/agenda-aug10.pdf
(1) Adjusting Price $16.15 CWT

(2) Base Price $16.88 CWT

(3) Change from Base Price per CWT ($0.73)

(4) Price change per gallon ($0.0628)

(Line (3) divide by 11.63 gallons/cwt)

(5) Price change per half gallon ($0.0314)

Price change per quart ($0.0157)

Price change per pint ($0.0078)

Price change per 12-oz pg. ($0.0059)

Price change per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) ($0.0049)

Price change per half pint ($0.0039)

(6) Price adjustment per gallon ($0.06)

Price adjustment per half gallon ($0.03)

Price adjustment per quart ($0.02)

Price adjustment per pint ($0.01)

Price change per 12-oz pg. ($0.01)

Price adjustment per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) ($0.00)

Price adjustment per half pint ($0.00)

NOTE: Numbers in brackets are negative or decreases, all others are positive or increases.

Monthly EPA Calculation for Class I Milk (Clause 52.216-9032 Alt. I)

Based on California Dept. of Food and Agriculture Announcement of Minimum Prices

 Effective Date: August 5, 2018
FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### March 10, 2016 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT

JAMES M. ROBINSON, Petitioner - Appellant,

v. VALERIE ESTRADA, Respondent - Appellee. No. 15-1370 (D.C. No. 1:12-CV-02659-LTB) (D. Colo.)

ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY *

Before GORSUCH , BALDOCK , and McHUGH , Circuit Judges.
After a Colorado jury convicted him of public indecency, Mr. Robinson filed a habeas petition challenging his conviction under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. But when Mr. Robinson repeatedly disregarded court deadlines without a colorable excuse, the court dismissed the petition for lack of prosecution under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Mr. Robinson asks us to grant him a certificate of appealability and hold that the district court abused its discretion in reaching this decision, but we don’t see how we might.

*This order is not binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.In an ideal world all cases would be resolved on their merits rather than on the basis of process fouls, but we do not live in an ideal world. Sometimes people miss court deadlines by accident or for a good reason, and often their mistakes are excused. But no litigant can without good reason repeatedly disregard court orders and fail to expect that dismissal will follow. See, e.g. , Lee v. Max Int’l,
LLC , 638 F.3d 1318, 1323-24 (10th Cir. 2011). That’s what happened here. After Mr. Robinson filed his federal habeas petition, the district court realized he hadn’t exhausted his state remedies. Rather than dismiss the case outright, though, the court offered to stay the federal proceedings until Mr. Robinson could exhaust the state remedies still available to him. The court clearly and pointedly advised Mr. Robinson that he would have thirty days to reopen his habeas petition once the state proceedings finished. But rather than following those directions, Mr. Robinson waited nearly a year after exhausting his state remedies before moving to reopen his federal habeas action and he offered no colorable excuse or justification for his delay. Because of this, the district court issued an order asking Mr. Robinson to show cause within thirty days why his action should not be dismissed. But Mr. Robinson disregarded this deadline too, and did so again without offering any colorable excuse or justification. Only then did the district court finally dismiss his case. Under these circumstances it cannot reasonably be disputed that the district court acted within the discretion afforded it by law. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Lee , 638

- 2 -F.3d at 1321-24. Mr. Robinson’s request for a certificate of appealability is denied and this appeal is dismissed.

ENTERED FOR THE COURT

Neil M. Gorsuch Circuit Judge

- 3 -
No. 11-148.

#### Marvin L. Beauchamp, Petitioner v. Wisconsin.

565 U.S. 1078, 132 S. Ct. 814,

181 L. Ed. 2d 525,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8824.

December 5, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Wisconsin denied.

Same case below, 333 Wis. 2d 1, 796 N.W.2d 780.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 149 (Tuesday, August 4, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 41540]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-20663]


========================================================================
Notices
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules 
or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings 
and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings, 
delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency 
statements of organization and functions are examples of documents 
appearing in this section.

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 149 / Tuesday, August 4, 1998 / 
Notices

[[Page 41540]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Agricultural Research Service


Notice of National Genetic Resources Advisory Council Meeting

AGENCY: Agricultural Research Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Agricultural Research Service, USDA, announces a meeting 
of the National Genetic Resources Advisory Council.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The National Genetic Resources Advisory 
Council consists of 16 members to provide advice to the Secretary and 
Director regarding the advancement of the USDA's National Genetic 
Resources Program. The meeting will discuss matters concerning the 
germplasm banks and the food genome initiative among other matters.
TIMES AND DATES: September 29, 1998, 8:30 a.m.-5:00 p.m.; September 30, 
1998, 8:30 a.m.-4:00 p.m.

PLACE: Room 3109, USDA South Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, 
SW, Washington, DC 20250.

TYPE OF MEETING: Open to the public. Persons may participate in the 
meeting as time and space permit.

COMMENTS: The public may file written comments before or after the 
meeting with the contact person listed below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Henry L. Shands, Director, National 
Genetic Resources Program, Room 323-A Jamie L. Whitten Federal 
Building, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250-0300. 
Telephone 202-205-7835, Fax 202-690-1434.

    Done at Washington, DC on this 17th Day of July 1998.
Henry L. Shands,
Assistant Administrator for Genetic Resources, USDA-ARS.
[FR Doc. 98-20663 Filed 8-3-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-03-P
No. 11-6784.

#### Alvaro Murillo, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 1020, 132 S. Ct. 566,

181 L. Ed. 2d 408,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8040.

November 7, 2011.

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

Same case below, 442 Fed. Appx. 277.
No. 11-6435.

#### Andre Chung, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 970, 132 S. Ct. 470,

181 L. Ed. 2d 307,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 7482.

October 17, 2011.

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

Same case below, 428 Fed. Appx. 906.
No. 11M28.

#### Brandie Atkins, Administrator of the Estate of William O. Atkins, Deceased, Petitioner v. City of Chicago, Illinois, et al.

565 U.S. 939, 132 S. Ct. 444,

181 L. Ed. 2d 253,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 7422.

October 11, 2011.

Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis without an affidavit of indigency executed by petitioner denied.

Same case below, 631 F.3d 823.
Exhibit 10.72





                                                  December 5, 1997

Mr. Jackie L. Boatman
Farah Incorporated
P.O. Box 13800
El Paso, Texas 79925

         Re:    Extension of Employment Agreement

Dear Jackie,

         Reference  is made to that  certain  Amended  and  Restated  Employment
Agreement by and between Farah  Incorporated  (the "Company") and yourself dated
August 25,  1994,  as amended on March 2, 1996 (the  "Agreement").  The  Company
wishes to extend the term of the Agreement. Therefore, the Company proposes that
Section 1(b) of the  Agreement be amended to delete the date "March 1, 1998" and
to insert  the date  "March 1,  1999."  All other  terms and  provisions  of the
Agreement will remain unchanged.

         If the  foregoing  terms are  acceptable to you,  please  indicate your
acceptance by signing below.

                                          Very truly yours,

                                          Farah Incorporated

                                          /s/ Richard C. Allender
                                          Richard C. Allender
                                          Chairman of the Board,
                                          President and Chief Executive Officer



Agreed and accepted as of the 5th day of December, 1997:


/s/ Jackie L. Boatman
Jackie L. Boatman

<PAGE>
(1) Adjusting Price

Base Skim Milk Price for Class I $8.30 CWT 0.965 $8.0095

Advanced Butterfat Pricing Factor $2.5335 LB 3.5 $8.8673

Class I Price $16.8768

(2) Base Price

Base Skim Milk Price for Class I $7.28 CWT 0.965 $7.0252

Advanced Butterfat Pricing Factor $2.6804 LB 3.5 $9.3814

Class I Price $16.4066

(3) Change from Base Price per CWT $0.4702

(4) Price change per gallon $0.0404

(Line (3) divide by 11.63 gallons/cwt)

(5) Price change per half gallon $0.0202

Price change per quart $0.0101

Price change per pint $0.0051

Price change per 12-oz pg. $0.0036

Price change per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) $0.0030

Price change per half pint $0.0025

(6) Price adjustment per gallon $0.04

Price adjustment per half gallon $0.02

Price adjustment per quart $0.01

Price adjustment per pint $0.01

Price change per 12-oz pg. $0.00

Price adjustment per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) $0.00

Price adjustment per half pint $0.00

**No price adjustment is required if the price change per-gallon, in either direction,

is not equal to or greater than +/-$0.0100 (See paragraph (f)(1) of the clause). 

NOTE: Numbers in brackets are negative or decreases, all others are positives or increases. 

Monthly EPA Calculation for Class I Milk (Clause 52.216-9032)

Based on USDA Announcement of Advanced Prices and Pricing Factors

Effective Date: Dec. 3, 2017
Theodore D. Schade

Air Pollution Control Officer

Gnpnr BnsIN UNrrrno AIn Por,r,uTIoN Cournol, DISTRICT

157 Short Street, Bishop, California 9351,4-3537

7 60-872-8211, F ax: 7 60-872-6109

l|v4ay 8,2014

Mr. Kurt Karperos

Chiet Air Quality Planning and Science Division

California Air Resources Board

1001 "I" Street

Sacramento, CA 95814

Re: Rule Adoption - District Rule 701: Air Pollution Episode Plan for Particulate Matter

Dear Mr. Karperos,

On behalf of the Governing Board of the Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District (District),

I am transmitting to the California Air Resources Board the Air Pollution Episode Plan for Particular

Matter (Rule 701), adopted by the District's Governing Board on March 3,2014 (Board Order #140303-

02)

Rule 701 was adopted after a duly-noticed public hearing and opportunity for written and oral public

comment. The Declaration of the District's Board Clerk certifying the facts showing the District's

compliance with the notice and public hearing requirements for the adoption of Rule 701 and copies of

the Board Order certifying the adopted description revision, are attached. The minutes of the March 3,

2014 Goveming Board meeting were recently approved at the May 5, 2014 meeting and are also

attached and should be added to the record of proceedings of the adoption of Rule 701.

ln order to incorporate the requirements of Rule 701, the District respectfully requests an expeditious

review and approval of this rule and transmittal to the U.S. EPA for its approval.

Phill

Senior Research & Systems Analyst

Enclosures (8 hardcopies, 4 electronic copies)

I . Affidavit of Service by the Clerk of the Board

2. GBUAPCD March 3,2014 Staff Report (with attachments)

3. GBUAPCD Board Order No. 140303-02

Page I of 2
Mr. Kurt Kaperos

Adoption of Rule 701

May 8,2014

4. Adopted Rule 701 - Air Pollution Episode Plan for Particulate Matter

5. Public Comments and GBUAPCD Responses

6. SIP Completeness Checklist

7. California Air Resources Board APCD/AQMD Rule Evaluation Form

8. Adopted March 3,2014 Governing Board Meeting Minutes

Cc: (Hardcopy & Electronic Copy)

Sylvia Vanderspek, CARB, Chiet Air Quality Planning Branch

Webster Tasat, CARB, Manager, Central Valley Air Quality Section

Kasia Turkiewicz, CARB, Air Resources Engineer, Central Valley Air Quality Planning Section

(Electronic Copy Only)

Peter Westdal, LADWP, Manager of Eastern Sierra Environmental and Aqueduct Reliability

David Edwards, LADWP, Deputy CityAttorney

Page2 of2
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 19-15180

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 1:19-cr-00053-WS-B-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

 versus

TERRANCE DWAYNE WILLIAMS, 

 Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Alabama

________________________

(May 22, 2020)

Before WILLIAM PRYOR, JILL PRYOR and MARCUS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: 

The Government’s motion to dismiss this appeal pursuant to the appeal 

waiver in Williams’s plea agreement is GRANTED. As the record reflects, 

Case: 19-15180 Date Filed: 05/22/2020 Page: 1 of 3
2

Williams knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal his sentence. 

During the plea colloquy, the court specifically questioned him about the waiver, 

and in describing it, the court told Williams that he was “waiving [his] right to 

appeal [his] conviction and sentence either by filing a direct appeal or a collateral 

appeal, with the following limited exceptions: . . . punishment in excess of the 

statutory maximum, any punishment constituting an upward departure of the 

guideline range, and any claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.” Williams 

acknowledged that he understood the waiver’s terms. Thus, the record establishes 

that Williams knowingly and voluntarily agreed to the sentence appeal waiver. See

United States v. Bushert, 997 F.2d 1343, 1350-51 (11th Cir. 1993) (holding that a 

sentence appeal waiver will be enforced if it was made knowingly and voluntarily).

Further, no exception to the appeal waiver applies. Williams’s 151-month 

prison sentence did not exceed the applicable guideline range, and it did not exceed 

the statutory maximum penalty. Williams also has not raised any issues of 

ineffective assistance of counsel. Moreover, Williams’s counsel filed an Anders

brief conceding that the appeal waiver was made knowingly and voluntarily, thus 

barring his appeal. Finally, although Williams objected to his career-offender 

status during sentencing, an enforceable appeal waiver is not made unenforceable 

by issues disputed at sentencing and waives the right to appeal debatable legal 

Case: 19-15180 Date Filed: 05/22/2020 Page: 2 of 3
3

issues. See United States v. Bascomb, 451 F.3d 1292, 1296 (11th Cir. 2006); 

United States v. Grinard-Henry, 399 F.3d 1294, 1296 (11th Cir. 2005). 

Accordingly, we grant the government’s motion to dismiss Williams’s 

appeal pursuant to the sentence appeal waiver.

DISMISSED.

Case: 19-15180 Date Filed: 05/22/2020 Page: 3 of 3
No. 11-6444.

#### Noel Dean, Petitioner v. Burl Cain, Warden, et al.

565 U.S. 1064, 132 S. Ct. 764,

181 L. Ed. 2d 492, 2011

U.S. LEXIS 8499.

November 28, 2011.

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

Same case below, 432 Fed. Appx. 370.
ID Descriptor L* a* b* c h dL* da* db* dEcmc*

Standard 36251 COLOR CHIP 55.01 -1.15 -0.32

Tolerance

1 36251-1 RED-VIOLET 

LIMIT -0.93 1.82 -0.15 2.62

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Shade Number GRAY, FLAT Chip Number 36251

DLA/NAVY SHADE TOLERANCE PROJECT December 27, 2016

Fabric Nomenclature CLOTH, KNITTED, SIMPLEX, COTTON PD-4673-1

COMMENTS: NUMBERS ARE FOR REFERENCE ONLY 

Equipment Type HUNTER ULTRA SCAN PRO Setting Mode: Specular Included - 

Reflectance

UV Filter – OUT UV Lamp OFF
#### Leroy Cotter in his Own Right and Amy B. Cotter, a Married Woman, Joined by her Husband and Next Friend, Leroy Cotter, Appellants, v. G. O. Warren, *Appellee.*

Division B.

Decision Filed February 6, 1926.

*Kelly & Suitor,*for Appellants;

*J. T. Watson,*for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

— This cause having heretofore been submitted to the court upon the transcript of the record of the decree herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the court that there is no error in the said decree; it is, therefore, considered, *272ordered and adjudged by the court that the said decree of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.