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

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1012 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1012

   To authorize Offices of Inspectors General to continue operations 
       during a lapse in appropriations, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 28, 2023

 Mr. Braun (for himself and Mr. Carper) introduced the following bill; 
which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 
                        and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To authorize Offices of Inspectors General to continue operations 
       during a lapse in appropriations, 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 ``Keep the Watchdogs Running Act''.

SEC. 2. INSPECTOR GENERAL OVERSIGHT DURING LAPSE IN APPROPRIATIONS.

    Section 6(g) of the Inspector General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.) 
is amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(4)(A) In this paragraph, the term `covered lapse in 
appropriations' has the meaning given the term in section 1341(c) of 
title 31, United States Code.
    ``(B) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, and in addition 
to any other authority, during a covered lapse in appropriations, an 
Inspector General may incur obligations in advance of appropriations 
for such amounts as may be necessary, at a rate for operations as 
provided in the most recently enacted appropriations Acts and under the 
authority and conditions provided in such Acts, to perform the duties 
of the Office with respect to programs and operations of the 
establishment that continue during the covered lapse in 
appropriations.''.
                                 <all>
```
Mary T. "Terry" BAKER, in her official capacity as Assessor for Union Parish v. TENNESSEE GAS PIPELINE COMPANY

NO. 2017-C-2072

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 23, 2018

Denied.

HUGHES, J., would grant.
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Small Business Administration [Disaster Declaration #15418 and #15419; LOUISIANA Disaster Number LA-00079]
 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.
 ACTION: Notice.
 SUMMARY: This is a notice of an Administrative declaration of a disaster for the State of Louisiana dated 01/02/2018. *Incident:*
                         Tropical Storm Harvey. *Incident Period:*
                         08/27/2017 through 09/10/2017.
 DATES: Issued on 01/02/2018. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         03/05/2018. *Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         10/02/2018.
 ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of the Administrator's disaster declaration, applications for disaster loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally announced locations. The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster: *Primary Counties:*
                     Calcasieu *Contiguous Counties:* Louisiana: Beauregard, Cameron, Jefferson Davis Texas: Newton, Orange The Interest Rates are: Percent*For Physical Damage:*Homeowners With Credit Available Elsewhere
3.500Homeowners Without Credit Available Elsewhere
1.750Businesses With Credit Available Elsewhere
6.610Businesses Without Credit Available Elsewhere
3.305Non-Profit Organizations With Credit Available Elsewhere
2.500Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere
2.500*For Economic Injury:*Businesses & Small Agricultural Cooperatives Without Credit Available Elsewhere
3.305Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere
2.500
 The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 15418 B and for economic injury is 15419 0. The States which received an EIDL Declaration # are Louisiana, Texas. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008) Dated: January 2, 2018. Linda E. McMahon, Administrator.


[FR Doc. 2018-00383 Filed 1-10-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
1

08-3727-cv

Gupta v. Commissioner of Social Security

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT

SUMMARY ORDER

RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED

ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE

PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A

DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN

ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY ORDER MUST

SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL.

1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals

2 for the Second Circuit, held at the Daniel Patrick Moynihan

3 United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, in the City of

4 New York, on the 14 day of January, two thousand ten. th

5

6 PRESENT: DENNIS JACOBS,

7 Chief Judge,

8 ROBERT D. SACK,

9 PETER W. HALL,

10 Circuit Judges.

11

12 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X

13 VINAY K. GUPTA, 

14

15 Plaintiff-Appellant,

16

17 -v.- 08-3727-cv

18

19 COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, 

20

21 Defendant-Appellee.

22 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X

23

24 APPEARING FOR APPELLANT: VINAY K. GUPTA, pro se,

25 Wappinger Falls, N.Y.

26
2

1 APPEARING FOR APPELLEE: JOHN E. GURA, JR., Assistant

2 United States Attorney (Sarah S.

3 Normand, on the brief,) for LEV

4 L. DASSIN, Acting United States

5 Attorney for the Southern

6 District of New York. 

7

8 Appeal from a judgment of the United States District

9 Court for the Southern District of New York (Francis, M.J.).

10

11 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED

12 AND DECREED that the judgment of the district court be

13 AFFIRMED. 

14

15 Plaintiff-appellant Vinay K. Gupta appeals from a final

16 judgment of the United States District Court for the

17 Southern District of New York (Francis, M.J.), which granted

18 judgment on the pleadings to defendant-appellee Commissioner

19 of Social Security (“Commissioner”). We assume the parties’

20 familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural

21 history, and the issues presented for review. 

22

23 “‘On appeal, we conduct a plenary review of the

24 administrative record to determine if there is substantial

25 evidence, considering the record as a whole, to support the

26 Commissioner’s decision and if the correct legal standards

27 have been applied.’” Burgess v. Astrue, 537 F.3d 117, 128

28 (2d Cir. 2008) (quoting Shaw v. Chater, 221 F.3d 126, 131

29 (2d Cir. 2000)). Having reviewed Gupta’s contentions on

30 appeal, the record of the proceedings before Magistrate

31 Judge Francis, and the administrative record, we affirm for

32 substantially the reasons stated in the March 7, 2008 order

33 and incorporated in the April 2, 2008 order. We find no

34 merit in Gupta’s arguments. 

35

36 Accordingly, we hereby AFFIRM the judgment of the

37 district court.

38

39 FOR THE COURT:

40 CATHERINE O’HAGAN WOLFE, CLERK

41

42

43 By:___________________________
AQUAFINZ MANAGEMENT, LLC, et al., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. MOONSTAR 2100, LLC, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-2735

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

July 27, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 63 (Friday, April 3, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 15322]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-7512]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board

[STB Ex Parte No. 290 (Sub-No. 5) (2009-2)]


Quarterly Rail Cost Adjustment Factor

AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board, DOT.

ACTION: Approval of rail cost adjustment factor.

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

SUMMARY: The Board has approved the second quarter 2009 rail cost 
adjustment factor (RCAF) and cost index filed by the Association of 
American Railroads. The second quarter 2009 RCAF (Unadjusted) is 0.850. 
The second quarter 2009 RCAF (Adjusted) is 0.387. The second quarter 
2009 RCAF-5 is 0.367.

DATES: Effective Date: April 1, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pedro Ramirez, (202) 245-0333. 
[Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) for the hearing impaired: 1-
800-877-8339.]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Additional information is contained in the 
Board's decision, which is available on our Web site http://www.stb.dot.gov. Copies of the decision may be purchased by contacting 
the office of Public Assistance, Governmental Affairs, and Compliance 
at (202) 245-0235. Assistance for the hearing impaired is available 
through FIRS at 1-800-877-8339.
    This action will not significantly affect either the quality of the 
human environment or energy conservation.
    Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), we conclude that our action will not 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

    Decided: March 31, 2009.

    By the Board, Chairman Mulvey, and Vice Chairman Nottingham.
Jeffrey Herzig,
Clearance Clerk.
 [FR Doc. E9-7512 Filed 4-2-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915-01-P
EXHIBIT 32.2  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  I, Karen Aalders, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of Mainstream Entertainment, Inc. on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2011, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Mainstream Entertainment, Inc.  Date: January 30, 2012  By:/s/ Karen Aalders Karen Aalders Chief Financial Officer and Principal Financial Officer/Principal Accounting Officer
----

|   | SECTION 2.07  Second Payment.  On or prior to June 9, 2008: |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (a) | the Purchaser shall deliver to the Seller the Second Payment by wire transfer in immediately available funds to an account designated by the Purchaser (see Exhibit B attached hereto); |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (b) | the Seller shall deliver to the Purchaser a receipt for the Second Payment; and |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (c) | for the avoidance of doubt, Purchaser shall have no right to withhold the Second Payment or otherwise offset against the Second Payment with respect to any Purchaser Amounts or Conditional Amounts. |
|--------|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 3. | Except for the provisions of this Amendment, the Original Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 4. | This Amendment shall automatically terminate and be of no further legal force or effect if Celsion Corporation has not received confirmation of receipt of the wire transfer by Boston Scientific Corporation by 5:00 p.m. on June 9, 2008. |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----
Kenneth COPELAND, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D17-1287

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

January 3, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Grafe, Jerome (DEP) 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

EastieGails@aol.com 

Thursday, September 20, 2012 10:25 PM 

Grafe, Jerome (DEP) 

Red Line/Blue Line connector 

Dear Mr. Grafe, 

I would appreciate your incorporating my comments into the record re the above: 

First of all, I didn't think that we needed to defend a mitigation agreement. If something was agreed to in good faith, or 

not, I think it would be interpreted as standing. It's rather sad that we are attempting to lock it in again. 

i am a firm believer that we need to make connecting improvements throughout our transportation system whenever 

possible, this being one huge example. 

People rely on these trains because the cost of commuting is very expensive and usually there are not enough parking 

spaces for folks at their workplace. 

• 

Being from an underserved community already, while realizing huge transportation impacts on the local population, I 

believe it is right for the State to continue to fulfill its commitment to connect the Red and Blue Lines. An agreement 

should remain as an agreement, plain and simple. 

Gail Miller 

232 Orient Avenue 

East Boston, MA 02128 

l
# The Attorney General of Texas January 28, 1980 MARK WHITE Attorney General
Honorable Albert Brown, Chairman Committee onConstitutional Amendments House ofRepresentatives Austin, Texas Opinion No. NW-132 Re: Whether the competitive bidding requirements of article 23684 V.T.C.S., apply to housing authorities. Dear Representative Brown: Youaskwhether article 2368a, V.T.C.S., applies to housing authorities. Article 2368a, V.T.C.S., requires cities and counties to let certain contracts on competitive bidsand sets outnotice requirements. Ahousing authority is created in each city by article 1269k, V.T.C.S. It may not exercise its powers unless the governing body of the city declares a need for it to function. Article 1269k, V.T.C.S., does not include sny requirement of competitive bidding. Texas courts have stated that a housing authority is a division of the city within which it exists. Aetna Casualty andSurety Company v. Glidden a, 283 S.W.2d 440 (Tex.x rounds 291S.W.2d315(Tex. 1956); if--- M&s v.HousimzAutho&y .W.2d 487 (Tex. Civ. App. - Daii~~

. 266 S.W.2d 842 (Tex. 1954). Miers v.‘Hx involved the condemnation of land by that article 3268, V.T.C.S., exempting m<nicipal corporations from depositing twice the condemnation award snd making bond, applied to the housing authority. Neither court discussed the following provision of article l269k, V.T.C.S.:

. . . No provisions of law with respect to the

acquisition, operation, or disposition of property by other public bodies shall beapplicable to sn authority unless the Legislature shall specifically sostate. Sec. 8th). This provision was noted in Attorney General Opinion C-760 (1966), which held that the surplus property of a county housing authority

P. 423Honorable Albert Brown - Page Two (NW-132)

must be sold in accordance with the requirements of article 1577,V.T.C.S. The opinion stated ssfollows:

Just as the Housing Authorities mayreceive the benefit ofstatutes applying to cities and counties, so they must comply with the statutes applying to cities and counties where such statutes donot conflict with the powers granted to them inArticle 1269k. Based onthis opinion and the opinions ofthe Texas courts, weconclude that article 2368a, V.T.C.S., applies to housing authorities as divisions of cities. See also Acts 1979,66th Leg., ch 770, at 1901(to be codified as V.T.C.S. art. 2368a.3jBnal competitive bidding requirements for housing authorities). SUMMARY Housing authorities are subject to the competitive bidding requirements ofarticle 2368a, V.T.C.S.

MARK WHITE Attorney General ofTexas JOHN W.FAINTER, JR. First Assistant Attorney General TEDL.HARTLEY Executive Assistant Attorney General Prepared bySusanGarrison Assistant Attorney General APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE C.Robert Heath, Chairman Jim Allison David B.Brooks Walter Davis BobGammage Susan Garrison Rick Gilpin Bruce Youngblood

P. 424
BIO LOGIC, INC., a/a/o Elizabeth Morgan, Appellant, v. ASI PREFERRED INSURANCE CORPORATION, Appellee.

Case No. 2D16-3798

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed October 20, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION OFCHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICEROF TRM CORPORATIONAS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002, 18 U.S.C.SECTION 1350**

 

 

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Kenneth L. Tepper, Chief ExecutiveOfficer of TRM Corporation (the “Company”), hereby certify that theaccompanying Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for thequarterly period ended June 30, 2003 (the “Report”), fully complies withthe requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

 

 
| Dated:  August 14, 2003 | /s/ Kenneth Lewis Tepper |   |
|------------------------------|--------------------------|--------|
|                         | Kenneth Lewis Tepper     |
|                         | Chief Executive Officer  |

 

----
IV 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 961 

Providing for the consideration of the bill (H.R. 5863) to provide tax relief 

with respect to certain Federal disasters. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 11, 2024 

Mr. STEUBE submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Rules 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for the consideration of the bill (H.R. 5863) to 

provide tax relief with respect to certain Federal disasters. 

1 Resolved, That immediately upon adoption of this res2 olution, the House shall proceed to the consideration in 

3 the House of the bill (H.R. 5863) to provide tax relief 

4 with respect to certain Federal disasters. All points of 

5 order against consideration of the bill are waived. The bill 

6 shall be considered as read. All points of order against 

7 provisions in the bill are waived. No amendment to the 

8 bill shall be in order. The previous question shall be con9 sidered as ordered on the bill to final passage without in10 tervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally 

2 

•HRES 961 IH 

1 divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 

2 member of the Committee on Ways and Means or their 

3 respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit. 

4 SEC. 2. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to 

5 the consideration of H.R. 5863. 

Æ
Korey COLE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

CASE NO. 1D16-5739

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Opinion filed November 29, 2017.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
II 

Calendar No. 297 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1059 

[Report No. 118–145] 

To adjust the boundary of Big Bend National Park in the State of Texas, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 29, 2023 

Mr. CORNYN (for himself and Mr. LUJA ́N) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources 

DECEMBER 20, 2023 

Reported by Mr. MANCHIN, without amendment 

A BILL 

To adjust the boundary of Big Bend National Park in the 

State of Texas, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Big Bend National 

5 Park Boundary Adjustment Act’’. 

2 

•S 1059 RS

1 SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

2 In this Act: 

3 (1) MAP.—The term ‘‘map’’ means the map en4 titled ‘‘Big Bend National Park, Proposed Boundary 

5 Adjustment’’, numbered 155/167,296, and dated 

6 November 2022. 

7 (2) PARK.—The term ‘‘Park’’ means the Big 

8 Bend National Park established under the Act of 

9 June 20, 1935 (49 Stat. 393, chapter 283; 16 

10 U.S.C. 156). 

11 (3) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means 

12 the Secretary of the Interior. 

13 SEC. 3. BIG BEND NATIONAL PARK BOUNDARY ADJUST14 MENT. 

15 (a) LAND ACQUISITION.—The Secretary may acquire 

16 approximately 6,100 acres of land or interests in land gen17 erally depicted on the map as ‘‘Tracts to Include in 

18 Boundary’’ by donation, purchase from willing sellers, or 

19 exchange. 

20 (b) AVAILABILITY OF MAP.—The map shall be on file 

21 and available for public inspection in the appropriate of22 fices of the National Park Service. 

23 (c) BOUNDARY REVISION AND ADMINISTRATION.— 

24 On acquisition of any land or interests in land under sub25 section (a), the Secretary shall— 

3 

•S 1059 RS

1 (1) revise the boundary of the Park to include 

2 the acquired land or interests in land; and 

3 (2) administer the acquired land or interests in 

4 land as part of the Park in accordance with applica5 ble laws (including regulations). 

6 (d) EMINENT DOMAIN OR CONDEMNATION.—In car7 rying out this Act, the Secretary may not use eminent do8 main or condemnation. 

Calendar No. 297 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1059 

[Report No. 118–145] 

A BILL 

To adjust the boundary of Big Bend National Park 

in the State of Texas, and for other purposes. 

DECEMBER 20, 2023 

Reported without amendment
G.M.I., a child, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D17-0115

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[February 8, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Jeffrey Owen ROSS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-1037

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed January 16, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.