alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0001065803
<NAME>                        ORANGE PRODUCTIONS, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. Currency

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Feb-29-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 Mar-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   May-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         12,059
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               12,059
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 12,059
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          8,660
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       206
<OTHER-SE>                                     3,399
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   12,059
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               4,729
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (4,729)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,729)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0



</TABLE>
**
**Exhibit 31.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

**PURSUANTTO 17 CFR 240.13A-14**

**PROMULGATED UNDER**

**SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, John P. McCarthy, Jr., certify that: 

 
 1.I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Starwood Real Estate Income Trust, Inc.; 
 
 2.Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which suchstatements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 
 
 3.Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of theregistrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 
 
 4.The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 
 
 (a)Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 
 
 (b)[Intentionally omitted]; 
 
 (c)Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end ofthe period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 
 
 (d)Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarterin the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 
 
 5.The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 
 
 (a)All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record,process, summarize and report financial information; and 
 
 (b)Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 
Date: March 30, 2018 

 
/s/ John P. McCarthy, Jr.John P. McCarthy, Jr.Chief Executive Officer, President and Director**
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 150 (Wednesday, August 5, 1998)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 41765]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-20815]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 98-138, RM-9309]


Radio Broadcasting Services; Whitehall, MT

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document requests comments on a petition filed by 
Whitehall Broadcasting Company proposing the allotment of Channel 274A 
to Whitehall, Montana, as that community's first local broadcast 
service. The channel can be allotted to Whitehall with a site 
restriction 12.7 kilometers (7.9 miles) northwest of the community. The 
coordinates for Channel 274A are 45-56-11 and 112-13-51.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or before September 21, 1998, and 
reply comments on or before October 6, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC. 20554. In 
addition to filing comments with the FCC, interested parties should 
serve the petitioner's counsel, as follows: Frank R. Jazzo, Andrew S. 
Kersting, Fletcher, Heald & Hildreth, P.L.C., 1300 N. Seventeenth 
Street, 11th Floor, Arlington, Virginia 22209.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen Scheuerle, Mass Media Bureau, 
(202) 418-2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Notice 
of Proposed Rule Making, MM Docket No. 98-138, adopted July 22, 1998, 
and released July 31, 1998. The full text of this Commission decision 
is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in 
the Commission's Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, NW., 
Washington, DC. The complete text of this decision may also be 
purchased from the Commission's copy contractors, International 
Transcription Services, Inc., 1231 20th Street, NW., Washington, DC. 
20036, (202) 857-3800, facsimile (202) 857-3805.
    Provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply 
to this proceeding.
    Members of the public should note that from the time a Notice of 
Proposed Rule Making is issued until the matter is no longer subject to 
Commission consideration or court review, all ex parte contacts are 
prohibited in Commission proceedings, such as this one, which involve 
channel allotments. See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules governing 
permissible ex parte contact.
    For information regarding proper filing procedures for comments, 
see 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Radio broadcasting.

Federal Communications Commission.
John A. Karousos,
Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media 
Bureau.
[FR Doc. 98-20815 Filed 8-4-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
No. 11-7010.

#### Kevin Ray Underwood, Petitioner v. Oklahoma.

565 U.S. 1121, 132 S. Ct. 1019,

181 L. Ed. 2d 752,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 323.

January 9, 2012.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma denied.

Same case below, 252 P.3d 221.
Retention bonus agreement



 Exhibit 10.23 
 RETENTION BONUS AGREEMENT 
 I am chief executive officer of Homeowners Choice, Inc. and effective
January 16, 2012 I am entitled to a $600,000 retention bonus payment from the company. I agree to repay the bonus on a prorata basis if I voluntarily leave service of the company before December 16, 2012. 

 

					
	Effective January 16, 2012	 		 	  

		 		 	Paresh Patel
No. 99-10181

- 1 -

 

*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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 99-10181

Summary Calendar

USDC No. 3:98-CV-2651-T

 

SAMUEL LEE JONES,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT

OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION,

Respondent-Appellee.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

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

March 22, 2000

Before JOLLY, DAVIS and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Samuel Lee Jones, Texas prisoner # 682025, appeals the

district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as

time-barred. This court granted a certificate of appealability

on in the issue of whether the limitations period in 28 U.S.C.

§ 2244(d) should be equitably tolled based on Jones’ assertion 

that his prison law library did not receive a copy of the

Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA), which
No. 99-10181

- 2 -

included the one-year limitations provision for filing for relief

under § 2254, until March 10, 1997, and that he did not receive

notice of the AEDPA’s limitations period until late August or

early September of 1997 because it first was circulated only to

inmates in administrative segregation. In light of this court’s

decision in Felder v. Johnson, 2000 WL 144178 (5th Cir. Feb. 9,

2000) (No. 98-21050), this argument is without merit. Therefore,

the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

AFFIRMED.
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3474 

To amend title 49, United States Code, to include truck combinations in 

the definition of automobile transporter for purposes of certain length 

limitations. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 25, 2019 

Mr. LUETKEMEYER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To amend title 49, United States Code, to include truck 

combinations in the definition of automobile transporter 

for purposes of certain length limitations. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LENGTH LIMITATIONS FOR AUTOMOBILE 

4 TRANSPORTERS. 

5 Section 31111(a)(1) of title 49, United States Code, 

6 is amended by inserting ‘‘and truck tractors attached to 

7 trailers designed for the transportation of assembled high8 way vehicles’’ after ‘‘camper units’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
No. 11-5578.

#### Catherine L. Bradica, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 915, 132 S. Ct. 330,

181 L. Ed. 2d 205,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6292.

October 3, 2011.

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

Same case below, 417 Fed. Appx. 139.
No. 11-6420.

#### Juan Torres-Torres, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 1117, 132 S. Ct. 1003,

181 L. Ed. 2d 744,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 259.

January 9, 2012.

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

*745Same case below, 429 Fed. Appx. 411.
No. 11-7462.

#### Orlando Carrero-Hernandez, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 1132, 132 S. Ct. 1052,

181 L. Ed. 2d 742,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 249.

January 9, 2012.

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

Same case below, 643 F.3d 344.
No. 11-5991.

#### Edmund Zagorski, Petitioner v. Tennessee.

565 U.S. 1063, 132 S. Ct. 762,

181 L. Ed. 2d 491,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8594.

November 28, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee, Middle Division, denied.
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3426 

To amend title 49, United States Code, to condition airport improvement 

program grants on certain assurances from airport owners and operators 

regarding television equipment in airport terminals. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 21, 2019 

Mr. KING of Iowa introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To amend title 49, United States Code, to condition airport 

improvement program grants on certain assurances from 

airport owners and operators regarding television equipment in airport terminals. 

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 ‘‘Television Freedom 

5 at Our Nation’s Airports Act of 2019’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HR 3426 IH

1 SEC. 2. AIP ASSURANCES REGARDING TELEVISION EQUIP2 MENT IN AIRPORT TERMINALS. 

3 Section 47107 of title 49, United States Code, is 

4 amended— 

5 (1) in subsection (a)— 

6 (A) in paragraph (20), by striking ‘‘and’’ 

7 at the end; 

8 (B) in paragraph (21), by striking the pe9 riod at the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

10 (C) by adding at the end the following: 

11 ‘‘(22) the owner or operator will ensure that— 

12 ‘‘(A) television equipment in the airport’s 

13 terminals is not owned exclusively by a broad14 cast television network or cable television news 

15 network; and 

16 ‘‘(B) the content displayed on such tele17 vision equipment is not controlled under an 

18 agreement between the owner or operator and 

19 a broadcast television network or cable tele20 vision news network.’’; and 

21 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

22 ‘‘(x) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

23 ‘‘(1) BROADCAST TELEVISION NETWORK.—The 

24 term ‘broadcast television network’ means a tele25 vision network in the United States which offers an 

26 interconnected program service on a regular basis 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
3 

•HR 3426 IH

1 for 15 or more hours per week to at least 25 affili2 ated broadcast stations in 10 or more States. 

3 ‘‘(2) CABLE TELEVISION NEWS NETWORK.— 

4 The term ‘cable television news network’ means a 

5 television news network in the United States that 

6 transmits video programming to consumers on a reg7 ular basis via cable systems, fiber optic cable sys8 tems, satellite television systems, or other non-broad9 cast television systems.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
No. 11-313.

#### Tuan Anh Do, Petitioner v. Phuong Due Dang, et al.

565 U.S. 1035, 132 S. Ct. 581,

181 L. Ed. 2d 422,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8286.

November 14, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, First Appellate District, denied.
No. 11-6957.

#### In re Hattie L. King, Petitioner.

565 U.S. 1056, 132 S. Ct. 785,

181 L. Ed. 2d 510,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8457.

November 28, 2011.

Petition for writ of mandamus and/or prohibition denied.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-7001

BRYANT K. MCARTHUR,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

ALBERT EARL DAVIS,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge.

(1:05-cv-03266-AMD)

Submitted: July 20, 2006 Decided: July 28, 2006

Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Bryant K. McArthur, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr.,

Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Bryant K. McArthur appeals the district court’s order

denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we

affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. McArthur v.

Davis, No. 1:05-cv-03266-AMD (D. Md. May 18, 2006). 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.

AFFIRMED
If there were a vaccine against cancer, wouldn’t you get it for your kids?

HPV vaccine is cancer prevention. Talk to the doctor about vaccinating your 11–12 year 

sons and daughters against HPV.

www.cdc.gov/vaccines/teens

You are the Key to HPV Cancer Prevention

HPV vaccine is

cancer prevention. 

Talk to the doctor 

about vaccinating 

your 11–12 year old 

sons and daughters 

against HPV.

If there were a 

vaccine against

cancer, wouldn’t

you get it for

your kids?

CS250577-E

June 2015
CS 346894-B January 18, 2024

Only Administer Nirsevimab 

(Beyfortus, Sanofi) to Young Children 

Administer nirsevimab (Beyfortus) 

preventive antibody to:

• Infants younger than 8 months 

• Certain children 8–19 months 

Do NOT administer 

RSV vaccine to 

infants and young 

children

Give ABRYSVO (Pfizer) to pregnant people 

32-36 weeks’ gestation, and to adults 60 

years and older based on shared clinical 

decision making.

Give AREXVY (GSK) to adults 60 and 

older based on shared clinical decision 

making. Do not give to pregnant people.

Strategies to Help Prevent Vaccine Administration Errors

• Order and stock vaccine products that fit best with your patient population. 

• If both nirsevimab (Beyfortus) and one or both RSV vaccines are stocked, label each 

storage bin with correct indications.

• Educate staff on recommendations. If more than 1 product is stocked, train staff about 

the differences in preparation, indications, and dosage.

• Follow medication administration best practices – read and check the product label at 

least 3 times and ask another staff member to confirm that it is the correct product for 

the patient.

CDC Clinical Resources 

For Healthcare Professionals: RSV (Respiratory Syncytial Virus) | CDC
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Brian J. Hayden, Chief Financial Officer of Cell Pathways, Inc. (the
"Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

         the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the three months
         ended March 31, 2003 (the "Report") fully complies with the
         requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
         of 1934, as amended ; and

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

Dated:  May 14 2003

                                                    By: /s/ Brian J. Hayden
                                                        -------------------
                                                        Brian J. Hayden
                                                        Chief Financial Officer


                                       21
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 351 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 351

To direct the Secretary of Defense to carry out a pilot program to lend 
Department of Defense farm equipment to eligible farmers, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 8, 2019

    Mr. Yoho (for himself, Mr. Jones, and Mr. Dunn) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To direct the Secretary of Defense to carry out a pilot program to lend 
Department of Defense farm equipment to eligible farmers, 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 ``Equip Ag Act of 2019''.

SEC. 2. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FARM EQUIPMENT SHARING PILOT PROGRAM.

    (a) Survey of DOD Equipment.--Not later than one year after the 
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, in 
consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture, shall conduct a survey 
of the equipment of the Department of Defense to determine which such 
equipment--
            (1) would be appropriate for use by farmers through an 
        equipment sharing program; and
            (2) could be used in an equipment sharing program without 
        jeopardizing military readiness.
    (b) Pilot Program.--
            (1) In general.--The Secretary of Defense shall establish a 
        pilot program under which the Secretary shall lend equipment of 
        the Department identified pursuant to the survey carried out 
        under subsection (a) to eligible farmers.
            (2) Eligibility.--To be eligible to borrow equipment under 
        the pilot program, a farmer shall--
                    (A) be a new and beginning farmer, as determined by 
                the Secretary; and
                    (B) submit to the Secretary an application 
                containing such information and assurances as the 
                Secretary may require.
            (3) Location.--The Secretary shall carry out the pilot 
        program at locations determined by the Secretary.
            (4) Duration.--The authority to carry out a pilot program 
        under this section shall terminate on the date that is three 
        years after the date of the commencement of the pilot program.
            (5) Report.--Not later than 60 days after the termination 
        of the pilot program under this subsection, the Secretary shall 
        submit to Congress a report on the pilot program that includes 
        the recommendations of the Secretary with respect to the 
        extension and expansion of the program.
                                 <all>
```