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

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4911 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4911

 To temporarily extend the programs under the Higher Education Act of 
                     1965, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 9, 2006

 Mr. McKeon (for himself, Mr. Tiberi, Mr. Keller, Mr. George Miller of 
  California, Mr. Kildee, and Mr. Hinojosa) introduced the following 
    bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the 
                               Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To temporarily extend the programs under the Higher Education Act of 
                     1965, 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 ``Higher Education Extension Act of 
2006''.

SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF PROGRAMS.

    Section 2(a) of the Higher Education Extension Act of 2005 (Public 
Law 109-81; 20 U.S.C. 1001 note) is amended by striking ``March 31, 
2006'' and inserting ``June 30, 2006''.

SEC. 3. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.

    Nothing in this Act, or in the Higher Education Extension Act of 
2005 as amended by this Act, shall be construed to limit or otherwise 
alter the authorizations of appropriations for, or the durations of, 
programs contained in the amendments made by the Higher Education 
Reconciliation Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-171) to the provisions of 
the Higher Education Act of 1965 and the Taxpayer-Teacher Protection 
Act of 2004.
                                 <all>
```
No. 09-9426.

#### Darryl McGore, Petitioner v. Nick Ludwick, Warden, et al.

559 U.S. 1110, 130 S. Ct. 2414,

176 L. Ed. 2d 931,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3845.

May 3, 2010.

Petition for writ of certio-rari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
No. 09-9554.

#### Germon Montrel Winston, Petitioner v. United States.

559 U.S. 1080, 130 S. Ct. 2119,

176 L. Ed. 2d 744,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3439.

April 19, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 355 Fed. Appx. 822.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET AT DECEMBER 31, 1995 AND THE STAEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE TWELVBE MONTHS
ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1995 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED AS PART OF ITS ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K FOR THE
PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1995
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                       1,109,678
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  589,878
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,699,556
<PP&E>                                      17,104,812
<DEPRECIATION>                               6,110,733
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              12,693,635
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           17,981
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  12,675,654
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                12,693,635
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,703,705
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,046,106
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,657,599
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5107 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5107

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 3, 2006

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 
                        and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 1400 West Jordan Street in Pensacola, Florida, as the ``Earl D. 
                     Hutto 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 1400 
West Jordan Street in Pensacola, Florida, shall be known and designated 
as the ``Earl D. Hutto 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 ``Earl D. Hutto Post Office 
Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives May 2, 2006.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
No. 09-7853.

#### Dennis H. Wendell, Petitioner v. United States District Court for the Northern District of New York.

559 U.S. 1117, 130 S. Ct. 2431,

176 L. Ed. 2d 943,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3823.

May 3, 2010.

Petition for rehearing denied.

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

Former decision, 559 U.S. 963, 130 S. Ct. 1570, 176 L. Ed. 2d 152, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 1053.
Print
  
 Pursuant to Section 5602(a) and (b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
(FY) 2020
(hereafter “the Act”), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Department 
of Homeland Security (DHS), in consultation with the Office of the Director of National 
Intelligence (ODNI), including the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), and the 
Department of Justice (DOJ), jointly produce a report containing a strategic intelligence 
assessment and data on domestic terrorism (DT). The Act requires the report to contain a 
strategic intelligence assessment, a discussion of specified activities, certain data on DT matters, 
and recommendations. Section 5602(d) of the Act requires the Director of the FBI and the 
Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) 
in a manner consistent with the authorities and responsibilities of such Director, to jointly submit 
to the appropriate Congressional committees annual updates to those reports. This report 
constitutes the annual updates for FY 2022. Click here to download.
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15**  **- 6740** 

JAMES L. JACK , Plaintiff

– Appellant ,
v. MICHAEL L. CHAPMAN, Sheriff, LCSO; SEAN DIKEMAN, #2233, Deputy, LCSO; LIMA, Deputy, LCSO , Defendants

- Appellees
.

**No. 15**  **- 7179** 

JAMES L. JACK , Plaintiff

– Appellant ,
v. MICHAEL L. CHAPMAN, Sheriff, LCSO; SEAN DIKEMAN, #2233, Deputy, LCSO; LIMA, Deputy, LCSO , Defendants

- Appellees
.

Appeal s from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Richmond
. James R. Spencer, Senior District Judge. ( 3:14

- cv - 00390

- JRS

- RCY )

Submitted : October 20, 2015 Decided: October 22, 20152 Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and THACKER , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. James L. Jack, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.3 PER CURIAM: James L. Jack appeals from the district court’s orders dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint without prejudice for failure to particularize his complaint. Regarding
No. 15

- 6740, after Jack filed his notice of appeal, the district court vacated the order to afford Jack extra time to respond. As the challenged order is no longer in force, we dismiss the appeal as moot. Turning to No. 15

- 7179, because Jack may refile his suit in district court with a particularized complaint, the dismissal order is interlocutory and not appealable. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392 , 10 F.3d 1064, 1066

- 67 (4th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal as well. 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
process.

DISMISSED
Joris HAARHUIS, Administrator of the Estate of Julie Haarhuis (Deceased) v. Emily CHEEK

No. 332P17-2

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 9, 2019

Stephanie W. Anderson, Walter K. Burton, Greensboro, Cam Bordman, Charles M. Ivey, III, Charles M. Ivey, IV, Darren A. McDonough, Greensboro, Attorneys at Law, For Cheek, Emily.

J. David Stradley, Robert P. Holmes, IV, Raleigh, Leto Copeley, Durham, Attorneys at Law, For Haarhuis, Joris (Administrator), et al.

Meghan Wray Deutsch-Blanco, Attorney at Law

Cynthia L. Van Horne, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, For Burton, Sue & Anderson, LLP.

John P. Barringer, Charlotte, Jeffrey B. Kuykendal, Attorneys at Law, For Universal Insurance Company.

Maynard M. Brown, Wilmington, Stephen C. Baynard, Attorneys at Law, For N.C. Association of Defense Attorneys.

Edward C. Boltz, Attorney at Law, Durham, For National Consumer Bankruptcy Rights Center, et al.

***ORDER***

*699The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 18th of October 2018 by Defendant for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Dissolved by order of the Court in conference, this the 9th of May 2019."

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 18th of October 2018 for Writ of Supersedeas of the judgment of the Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 9th of May 2019."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 18th of October 2018 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 9th of May 2019."

Davis, J. recused
FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT D e c e m be r 9, 2005 T HOM AS K. KAHN CL E RK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O RT H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 05- 11463 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 3 - 0 0 2 7 7 - CR- T- 3 0 - TBM U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s E F R E N D A N I E L M A R Q U E Z - S I L V A , D e f e n d an t- A p p e llan t.

________________________ A pp ea lfr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe M i ddl e D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( D e c e m be r9, 2005) B efo re C A RN E S , P R Y O Ran dC O X , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E RC U R I A M:2

D ui l i o A . E spi no sa -M on t alban, appo i nt ed coun se lfor E fr en D ani el M ar qu ez -S i l va i n thi s di re ctcr i m i nalappeal , has m ov ed t o w i thd raw fr om further re pres ent at i on of the appel l antand fi l ed a bri ef pu rs uantt o A nd er s v. C al i forni a, 386 U . S . 738, 87 S . C t . 1396, 18 L . E d. 2d 493 ( 1967) . O uri nde pe nde ntr e vi e w of the e nt i r e r e c or d r e ve a l s tha tc ouns e l ’ s a s s e s s m e ntof the r e l a t i ve m e r i tof

the appe a li s c orr e c t . B e c aus e i nde pe nde nte xam i na t i on of the e nt i r e r e c or d r e ve a l s no arg u ab l e i ssu es o f m eri t , co u n sel ’ s m o t i o n t o w i th d raw i s G R A N TED , and M ar qu ez -S i l va’ s c on vi ct i on and sent ence ar e AF F I RME D.
# C_2017383EN.01000102.xml

| 14.11.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 383/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.11.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 383/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8621 — Apollo Management/Aegon Ireland)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2017/C 383/02)

On 8 November 2017, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8621. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8621. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
No. 11-7086.

#### In re Tiayon Kardell Evans, Petitioner.

565 U.S. 1056, 132 S. Ct. 793,

181 L. Ed. 2d 510,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8322.

November 28, 2011.

Petition for writ of mandamus denied.
No. 09-8200.

#### Paul Blackmer, Petitioner v. Lawrence Blaisdell, Warden.

559 U.S. 1089, 130 S. Ct. 2145,

176 L. Ed. 2d 762,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3268.

April 19, 2010.

Petition for rehearing denied.

Former decision, 559 U.S. 977, 130 S. Ct. 1698, 176 L. Ed. 2d 190, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 2060.
Exhibit 99

                          Mallon Resources Corporation
                          999 18th Street, Suite 1700
                               Denver, CO 80202

April 4, 2002


Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549

Ladies and Gentlemen:

    This will confirm that Mallon Resources Corporation (the "Company") has
received a letter from Arthur Andersen LLP ("Arthur Andersen") with respect to
Arthur Andersen's audit of the Company's consolidated financial statements for
the year ended December 31, 2001.  Arthur Andersen's letter certifies that the
audit was subject to Arthur Andersen's quality control system for the U.S.
accounting and auditing practice to provide reasonable assurance that the
engagement was conducted in compliance with professional standards, that there
was appropriate continuity of Arthur Andersen personnel working on the audit
and that there was availability of national office consultation to conduct the
relevant portions of the audit.  Availability of personnel at foreign
affiliates of Arthur Andersen is not relevant to this audit.

Sincerely,



Alfonso R. Lopez
Vice President--Finance
UNCLASSIFIED 

OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE
 

DIRECTOR OF THE INTELLIGENCE STAFF
 

WASHINGTON, DC 20511
 

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Electronic Reading Room Certification 

1.	 As directed, we conducted a review of our FOIA Reading Room to ensure we are in 

compliance with the stated requirements. As part of that review, our Information 

Management Office has verified that to the extent they exist, the following categories of 

records have been made available: 

a.	 Final opinions and orders made in the adjudication of cases 

b.	 Specific agency policy statements 

c.	 Administrative staff manuals and instructions that affect the public 

d.	 Records disclosed under the FOIA that may become the subject of subsequent 

requests. 

2.	 No deficiencies were noted during the review of our FOIA Reading Room. Further, 

regarding the disposition of final opinions, we searched and determined our Reading 

Room does not have any subsection (a)(2)(A) records at this time. 

3.	 We certify that our Reading Room is in compliance with the requirements of the FOIA. 

Ronald L. Burgess, Jr. Date 1 r 

Lieutenant General, USA 

UNCLASSIFIED
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5168 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5168

                   For the relief of Eric Westhagen.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 6, 2006

   Mr. Petri (by request): introduced the following bill; which was 
                 referred to the Committee on Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                   For the relief of Eric Westhagen.

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

SECTION 1. RIGHT OF OCCUPANCY.

    (a) In General.--The Secretary of the Interior shall permit 
continued occupancy and use of the property described in subsection (b) 
by Eric Westhagen for the remainder of his natural life, subject to the 
requirements of this Act.
    (b) Identification of Property.--The property referred to in 
subsection (a) consists of the lands described in section 13 of the 
stipulation, including any improvements thereon.
    (c) Terms and Conditions.--Occupancy and use of the property 
identified in subsection (b) shall be subject to the same terms and 
conditions as specified in the stipulation, except that Eric Westhagen 
shall be required annually to pay to the Secretary of the Interior an 
amount equal to one twenty-fifth of the amount specified in section 11 
of the stipulation.
    (d) Construction.--Nothing in this Act shall be construed to permit 
construction of any structure not in existence as of the date of 
enactment of this Act, or to apply to occupancy or use of the property 
described in subsection (b) by any person other than Eric Westhagen.

SEC. 2. STIPULATION DEFINED.

    In this Act, the term ``stipulation'' means the Stipulation for 
Conditions of Rights of Use and Occupancy of Single Family Non-
Commercial Property of Eric Westhagen and Helen Westhagen, entered into 
on November 4, 1983, between the United States and Eric Westhagen in 
the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin.
                                 <all>
```
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5093 

To revise the limitation on Impact Aid special payments. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 5, 2006 

Mrs. KELLY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To revise the limitation on Impact Aid special payments. 

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 ‘‘Impact Aid Update 

5 Act of 2006’’. 

6 SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON IMPACT AID SPECIAL PAYMENTS. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 8002 of the Elementary 

8 and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 77002) 

9 is amended in subsection (i)(1)— 

10 (1) by striking ‘‘1997’’ and inserting ‘‘2003’’; 

11 and 

12 (2) by striking ‘‘1996)’’ and inserting ‘‘2002)’’. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
2 

•HR 5093 IH 

1 (b) SPECIAL RULES FOR FISCAL 2006.— 

2 (1) RETROACTIVE APPLICABILITY.—The 

3 amendments made by this section apply retroactively 

4 to all of fiscal year 2006. 

5 (2) AVAILABILITY OF CERTAIN FISCAL 2005

6 FUNDS.—Notwithstanding any other provision of 

7 law, the Secretary of Education shall make available 

8 a total of $1,800,000 from the funds appropriated 

9 for fiscal year 2005 under the heading ‘‘Vocational 

10 and Adult Education’’ in Public Law 108–447 that 

11 are otherwise available, to increase the payment 

12 made to the local educational agency of Highland 

13 Falls, New York, under subsection (i) of section 

14 8002 of the Elementary and Secondary Education 

15 Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7702) for fiscal year 2006. 

Æ 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with BILLS