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

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4688 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

1 Boyden Street in Badin, North Carolina, as the ‘‘Mayor John Thompson ‘Tom’ Garrison Memorial Post Office’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 1, 2006 

Mr. HAYES (for himself, Mrs. MYRICK, Mr. PRICE of North Carolina, Mr. 

COBLE, Mr. WATT, Mr. MILLER of North Carolina, Mr. BUTTERFIELD, 

Mr. MCHENRY, Mr. JONES of North Carolina, Mr. ETHERIDGE, Ms. 

FOXX, Mr. MCINTYRE, and Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina) introduced 

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Government 

Reform 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 1 Boyden Street in Badin, North Carolina, 

as the ‘‘Mayor John Thompson ‘Tom’ Garrison Memorial 

Post Office’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. MAYOR JOHN THOMPSON ‘‘TOM’’ GARRISON ME4 MORIAL POST OFFICE. 

5 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

6 Postal Service located at 1 Boyden Street in Badin, North 
2 

•HR 4688 IH 

1 Carolina, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Mayor 

2 John Thompson ‘Tom’ Garrison Memorial Post Office’’. 

3 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg4 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

5 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

6 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Mayor John Thomp7 son ‘Tom’ Garrison Memorial Post Office’’. 

Æ
-82 -80 -78 -76 -74 -72

 36

 38

 40

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 100

18 12 06 00

05/27

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 27 May 07

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 39.41 N 76.30 W Meters AGL
No. 11-7534.

#### Demauriae Nolan, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 1149, 132 S. Ct. 1058,

181 L. Ed. 2d 792,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 414.

January 9, 2012.

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

Justice Breyer took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.

Same case below, 443 Fed. Appx. 259.
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT JACKSON

September 15, 2020 Session

TIMOTHY A. BAXTER v. JENNIFER D. ROWAN

Appeal from the Juvenile Court for Madison County

No. 55-48873 Larry McKenzie, Judge

___________________________________

No. W2018-02209-COA-R3-JV

___________________________________

KENNY ARMSTRONG, J., concurring separately.

I concur in the majority’s holding that an unwed father, who previously executed a 

VAP, has standing to sue for custody and visitation rights to his minor child. I also 

concur in the holding reversing the trial court’s award of visitation rights to the paternal 

grandmother. I write separately only to highlight my concern about the procedure used 

by the unwed father in this case to obtain his visitation rights. Here, father filed his 

motion to obtain visitation rights under Tennessee Code Annotated section 36-6-301.

However, from my research, section 36-6-301 is inapplicable to custody and visitation 

proceedings that involve parents who have never been married. Rather, I am of the 

opinion that, in cases such as the one at bar, where the parents were never married, 

Tennessee Code Annotated section 36-2-311 is the only mechanism by which visitation 

rights may be obtained. Section 36-2-311 is the parentage statute that specifically 

addresses a trial court’s authority to make an order determining custody and visitation 

rights where unwed parents are involved. Graham v. Caples, 325 S.W.3d 578, 582 

(Tenn. 2010) (citation omitted) (“Where a conflict is presented between two statutes, a 

more specific statutory provision takes precedence over a more general provision.”). 

Section 36-2-311 provides, in pertinent part, that, “Upon establishing parentage, the court 

shall make an order declaring the father of the child. This order shall include the 

following . . . [d]etermination of visitation or parental access pursuant to chapter 6 of this 

title.” Because father is claiming visitation rights based on his execution of a VAP and 

because mother and father were never married, I conclude that the only mechanism by 

which father may seek visitation is through section 36-2-311.

 s/ Kenny Armstrong 

KENNY ARMSTRONG, JUDGE

12/15/2020
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23
- 7305

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. DEMETRIUS DWAYNE SWINTON, a/k/a Meat, a/k/a Million Dolla Meat , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Beaufort

. Richard Mark Gergel , District Judge. ( 9:17

- cr - 00945

- RMG

- 1 )

Submitted : June 13, 2024 Decided: June 18, 2024

Before RUSHING and HEYTENS , Circuit Judges , and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge

.
Dismiss ed by un published per curiam opinion

. Demetrius Dwayne Swinton, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-7305 Doc: 7 Filed: 06/18/2024 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM: Demetrius Dwayne Swinton seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for relief from the district court’s prior order denying relief

on his 28 U.S.C. § 225 5 motion

. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)( B )

. See generally United
States v. McRae , 793 F.3d 392, 400 & n.7 (4th Cir. 2015) . A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists c ould find the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong. See Buc k v. Davis , 580 U.S. 100, 115

- 17 (2017). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Gonzalez v. Thaler , 565 U.S. 134, 140

- 41 (2012) (citing Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000))

. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Swinton has not made the requisite showing. We deny Swinton’s pending motions to supplement his informal brief and for judicial notice. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional proc ess. DISMISSED USCA4 Appeal: 23-7305 Doc: 7 Filed: 06/18/2024 Pg: 2 of 2
# C_2018242EN.01004901.xml

| 10.7.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 242/49 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.7.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 242/49

---

P8_TA(2017)0007

Conclusion of the Agreement continuing the International Science and Technology Center ***

European Parliament legislative resolution of 19 January 2017 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of the Agreement continuing the International Science and Technology Center (08558/2016 — C8-0214/2016 — 2016/0120(NLE))

(Consent)

(2018/C 242/10)

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament

| — | having regard to the draft Council decision (08558/2016), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the draft Council decision (08558/2016),

| — | having regard to the draft Agreement continuing the International Science and Technology Center (12681/2015), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the draft Agreement continuing the International Science and Technology Center (12681/2015),

| — | having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Articles 31(1) and 37 of the Treaty on European Union and Articles 180 and 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C8-0214/2016), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Articles 31(1) and 37 of the Treaty on European Union and Articles 180 and 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C8-0214/2016),

| — | having regard to Rule 99(1) and (4) and Rule 108(7) of its Rules of Procedure, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Rule 99(1) and (4) and Rule 108(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

| — | having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A8-0363/2016), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A8-0363/2016),

| 1. | Gives its consent to conclusion of the Agreement; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Gives its consent to conclusion of the Agreement;

| 2. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of participating Parties to the Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of participating Parties to the Agreement.

---
Montana Eighth Judicial District Court. County of Cascade.

#### STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff, -vs- CHRISTOPHER WADE LUM, Defendant.

CAUSE NO. DC-13-053

DECISION

On January 7, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to serve a seventy-five (75) year commitment to the Montana State Prison with no time suspended, for the offense of Sexual Assault, a Felony, in violation of §45-5-502, MCA. Pursuant to MCA §46-18-203(3), the Defendant is not eligible for parole for a period of twenty-five (25) years due to the risk the Defendant poses to the community. The Defendant was designated a Tier III Sex Offender. The Defendant was given credit for 233 days of time served.

On February 4, 2016, the Defendant’s Application for review of that sentence was heard by the Sentence Review Division of the Montana Supreme Court (hereafter “the Division”).

The Defendant appeared by video conferencing from the Crossroads Correctional Center and was represented by Jennifer Streano of the Office of *15the State Public Defender. The State was not represented. Prior to the hearing, Justice John Warner asked the Defendant if he remembered Justice Warner had presided over a procedural matter in the Defendant’s case as a substitute judge in Cascade County. After a brief discussion, the Defendant waived any conflict of interest and was okay to proceed with the Sentence Review hearing.

Done in open Court this 4th day of February, 2016.

DATED this 29th day of February, 2016.

Before hearing the Application, the Defendant was advised that the Division has the authority not only to reduce the sentence or affirm it, but also to increase it. The Defendant was further advised that there is no appeal from a decision of the Division. The Defendant acknowledged that he understood this and stated that he wished to proceed.

Rule 12, Rules of the Sentence Review Division of the Supreme Court of Montana, provides that, “The sentence imposed by the District Court is presumed correct. The sentence shall not be reduced or increased unless it is clearly inadequate or clearly excessive.” (Section 46-18-904(3), MCA).

The Division finds that the reasons advanced for modification are insufficient to hold that the sentence imposed by the District Court is clearly inadequate or clearly excessive.

Therefore, it is the unanimous decision of the Division that the sentence is AFFIRMED.

Hon. Brenda Gilbert, Chairperson, Hon. Brad Newman, Member and Hon. John Warner, Member.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4674 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.4674

                       One Hundred Ninth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
             the third day of January, two thousand and six

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
  110 North Chestnut Street in Olathe, Kansas, as the ``Governor John 
                  Anderson, Jr. Post Office Building''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.
    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 110 
North Chestnut Street in Olathe, Kansas, shall be known and designated 
as the ``Governor John Anderson, Jr. Post Office Building''.
SEC. 2. REFERENCES.
    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Governor John Anderson, Jr. 
Post Office Building''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
# C_2018346EN.01023901.xml

| 27.9.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 346/239 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.9.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 346/239

---

P8_TA(2017)0369

Schengen acquis provisions relating to the Visa Information System in Bulgaria and Romania *

European Parliament legislative resolution of 4 October 2017 on the draft Council decision on the putting into effect of certain provisions of the Schengen acquis relating to the Visa Information System in the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania (10161/2017 — C8-0224/2017 — 2017/0808(CNS))

(Consultation)

(2018/C 346/33)

The European Parliament,

| — | having regard to the Council draft (10161/2017), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the Council draft (10161/2017),

| — | having regard to Article 4(2) of the Act of Accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8-0224/2017), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Article 4(2) of the Act of Accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8-0224/2017),

| — | having regard to Rule 78c of its Rules of Procedure, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Rule 78c of its Rules of Procedure,

| — | having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A8-0286/2017), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A8-0286/2017),

| 1. | Approves the Council draft; |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament; |
| --- | --- |

2.

| 3. | Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to substantially amend the text approved by Parliament; |
| --- | --- |

3.

| 4. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

4.

---
# C_2016337EN.01000601.xml

| 14.9.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 337/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.9.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 337/6

---

Commission communication pursuant to Article 17(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community

Invitation to tender in respect of the operation of scheduled air services in accordance with public service obligations

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2016/C 337/05)

| Member State | Sweden |
| --- | --- |
| Concerned routes | Gällivare-Stockholm (Arlanda) |
| Period of validity of the contract | 18 December 2016-26 October 2019 |
| Deadline for submission of tenders | 60 days after the date of publication of this tender invitation |
| Address where the text of the invitation to tender and any relevant information and/or documentation related to the public tender and the modified public service obligations can be obtained | For further information please contact:





  The Swedish Transport Administration |
| SE-781 87 Borlänge |
| SVERIGE |
| http://www.trafikverket.se/Foretag/Upphandling/Aktuella-upphandlingar/ |
| RFT referens: CTM:146241 |
| Tel. +46 771921921 |
| Contacts: |
| Håkan Jacobsson: hakan.jacobsson@trafikverket.se |
| Anna Fällbom: anna.fallbom@trafikverket.se |

Member State

Sweden

Concerned routes

Gällivare-Stockholm (Arlanda)

Period of validity of the contract

18 December 2016-26 October 2019

Deadline for submission of tenders

60 days after the date of publication of this tender invitation

Address where the text of the invitation to tender and any relevant information and/or documentation related to the public tender and the modified public service obligations can be obtained

For further information please contact:

The Swedish Transport Administration

SE-781 87 Borlänge

SVERIGE

http://www.trafikverket.se/Foretag/Upphandling/Aktuella-upphandlingar/

RFT referens: CTM:146241

Tel. +46 771921921

Contacts:

Håkan Jacobsson: hakan.jacobsson@trafikverket.se

Anna Fällbom: anna.fallbom@trafikverket.se

---
Exhibit 10.38

 

EXECUTION COPY

 

BILL OF SALE

 

January 12, 2012

 

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that ShelterCLEAN of Arizona, Inc., a corporation, (the “Seller”), with principal offices at 3640 East Washington St., Phoenix, Arizona 85034, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby sell, assign, transfer, convey and deliver unto Shelter Clean Services, Inc., a California corporation (the “Purchaser”), having offices located at 10 Fifth Street, 2nd Floor, Valley Stream, New York 11581, pursuant to the Asset Purchase Agreement, dated December 27, 2011, by and among the Triangle Services, Inc., the Seller and GTJ REIT, Inc. (the “Asset Purchase Agreement”), all right, title and interest of Seller in and to the assets listed on Schedule A annexed hereto (the “Assets”).

 

It is the intention of this instrument to convey and transfer to Purchaser all of Seller’s rights, title and interest in and to the Assets, to and for their own, their successors or assigns use and benefit.

 

Seller hereby covenants and agrees that it will warrant and defend the sale of the Assets against each and every person or persons whomsoever claiming to or making claim against any or all of the Assets.

 

The execution and delivery of this Bill of Sale, pursuant to the provisions of the Asset Purchase Agreement and in order to effect such sale and delivery, have been duly authorized in all respects as required by law.

 

This Bill of Sale may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which, when executed, shall be deemed to be an original, and all of which together shall be deemed to be one and the same instrument.  Execution and delivery of this Bill of Sale may be made by electronic or facsimile transmission in such counterparts and the signatures thereon shall be deemed original

 

[SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS]

 











 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Seller has caused this Bill of Sale to be executed as of the date first written above.

 

 

	
 
    	
SHELTERCLEAN   OF ARIZONA, INC.
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
By:
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
Name:
    	
David   J. Oplanich
    
	
 
    	
Title:
    	
Chief   Financial Officer
    


 

[Signature Page to Bill of Sale]

 











 

Schedule A
Exhibit 99.3


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

     In  connection  with the  Quarterly  Report  on Form 10-Q of  Mission  West
Properties,  Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly  period ended March 31, 2003
as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the
"Report"),  each of Carl E.  Berg,  Chairman  of the Board  and Chief  Executive
Officer  of the  Company,  and Wayne N. Pham,  Vice  President  of  Finance  and
Controller of the Company,  hereby certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as
adopted  pursuant to ss. 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, to the best of
his knowledge, that:

     (1) The Report fully  complies  with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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


Carl E. Berg
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
May 14, 2003


Wayne N. Pham
Vice President of Finance and Controller
May 14, 2003


     This  certification  accompanies  this  Report  pursuant  to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 and shall not,  except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  or  otherwise  required,  be  deemed  filed by the
Company  for  purposes  of ss. 18 of the  Securities  Exchange  Act of 1934,  as
amended.
# C_2018263EN.01016601.xml

| 25.7.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 263/166 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.7.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 263/166

---

P8_TA(2017)0058

EU-Liechtenstein Agreement on supplementary rules in relation to the instrument for financial support for external borders and visa ***

European Parliament legislative resolution of 2 March 2017 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion on behalf of the European Union of the Agreement between the European Union and the Principality of Liechtenstein on supplementary rules in relation to the instrument for financial support for external borders and visa, as part of the Internal Security Fund for the period 2014 to 2020 (12852/2016 — C8-0515/2016 — 2016/0247(NLE))

(Consent)

(2018/C 263/24)

The European Parliament,

| — | having regard to the draft Council decision (12852/2016), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the draft Council decision (12852/2016),

| — | having regard to the draft Agreement between the European Union and the Principality of Liechtenstein on supplementary rules in relation to the instrument for financial support for external borders and visa, as part of the Internal Security Fund for the period 2014 to 2020 (12881/2016), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the draft Agreement between the European Union and the Principality of Liechtenstein on supplementary rules in relation to the instrument for financial support for external borders and visa, as part of the Internal Security Fund for the period 2014 to 2020 (12881/2016),

| — | having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 77(2), point (a) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a)(v), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C8-0515/2016), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 77(2), point (a) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a)(v), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C8-0515/2016),

| — | having regard to Rule 99(1) and (4) and Rule 108(7) of its Rules of Procedure, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Rule 99(1) and (4) and Rule 108(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

| — | having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A8-0025/2017), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A8-0025/2017),

| 1. | Gives its consent to conclusion of the agreement; |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the Principality of Liechtenstein. |
| --- | --- |

2.

---