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

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5558 

To extend the authorization of appropriations to the Department of Veterans 

Affairs for purposes of awarding grants to veterans service organizations 

for the transportation of highly rural veterans. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 22, 2016 

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska (for himself and Mr. HINOJOSA) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To extend the authorization of appropriations to the Department of Veterans Affairs for purposes of awarding grants 

to veterans service organizations for the transportation 

of highly rural veterans. 

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 ‘‘Highly Rural Veteran 

5 Transportation Program Extension Act’’. 


emcdonald on DSK9F6TC42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5558 IH

1 SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY TO MAKE GRANTS TO 

2 VETERANS SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS FOR 

3 TRANSPORTATION OF HIGHLY RURAL VET4 ERANS. 

5 Section 307(d) of the Caregivers and Veterans Omni6 bus Health Services Act of 2010 (Public Law 111–163; 

7 124 Stat. 1154; 38 U.S.C. 1710 note) is amended by 

8 striking ‘‘2016’’ and inserting ‘‘2020’’. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK9F6TC42PROD with BILLS
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Arizona

Filters

              - science_education(1)
              - science_science(91)
              - products_data(378)
              - products_maps(425)
              - products_publications(3675)
              - products_web_tools(6)
              - multimedia_audio(20)
              - multimedia_audio-141766(19)
              - multimedia_audio-141767(1)
              - multimedia_before_after(3)
              - multimedia_image(406)
              - multimedia_image-141769(9)
              - multimedia_image-141770(1)
              - multimedia_image-141771(354)
              - multimedia_image-141774(2)
              - multimedia_image-141775(10)
              - multimedia_image-141776(17)
              - multimedia_image-204460(10)
              - multimedia_image-207195(1)
              - multimedia_slideshow(4)
              - multimedia_video(123)
              - multimedia_video-149194(48)
              - multimedia_video-149195(51)
              - multimedia_video-149196(5)
              - multimedia_video-149197(10)
              - multimedia_video-149198(2)
              - documents_file(12)
              - documents_file-149220(1)
              - documents_file-149224(3)
              - news_news-149245(10)
              - news_news-149246(1)
              - news_news-149248(12)
              - news_news-149249(1)
              - news_news-149250(2)
              - news_other_news(23)
              - connect_locations(4)
              - (-)connect_social_media(2)
              - connect_staff_profiles(85)
              - other_basic-37(2)
              - other_basic-42(20)
              - other_basic-43(1)

## By Location

              - arizona(2)

## By Year

              - 2022(1)
              - 2020(1)

social mediaArizona Water Science Center News

social mediaUSGS Science in Arizona
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 98-2133

___________

Duane J. Schumacher; Sheri L. *

Schumacher, *

*

Appellants, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Minnesota.

Patricia Schaal, in her individual * UNPUBLISHED

capacity; D. N. Gunderson, individual *

capacity; Robert Harris, in his *

individual capacity; United States of *

America, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

 Submitted: September 7, 1998

 Filed: September 15, 1998

___________

Before WOLLMAN, HANSEN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Duane J. and Sheri L. Schumacher brought suit against the United States, two

IRS agents, and a bank officer, claiming the IRS had wrongfully assessed taxes and
The Honorable Richard H. Kyle, United States District Judge for the District of 1

Minnesota.

-2-

levied against their bank account. The district court dismissed certain claims and

1

granted summary judgment on the remaining claims.

On appeal, the Schumachers reassert their arguments that the IRS agents acted

beyond their authority in issuing a levy against their account, that the levy was

technically invalid, and that the IRS was required to prepare a substitute return.

After carefully reviewing the record and the parties& briefs, we conclude the

district court&s judgment was correct. The arguments raised by the Schumachers below

and on appeal are contrary to the plain language of most of the cited Internal Revenue

Code provisions, and to decades of case law interpreting those provisions. For this

reason, we also grant the government defendants& motion for sanctions against the

Schumachers in the amount of $ 1,500.00. See Fed. R. App. P. 38, United States v.

Gerads, 999 F.2d 1255, 1256 (8th Cir. 1993) (per curiam), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1193

(1994).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended March 31, 2008 (the
Report) of UTEK Corporation (the Registrant), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Carole R. Wright, the Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of my
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 results of operations of
the Registrant.



|                     |  |                 
|-------------------- |  | ----------------
|/s/ Carole R. Wright
|Name:                |  | Carole R. Wright
|Date:                |  | May 7, 2009
CHINA ENTERPRISES, INC., Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. Johan FRAGA, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D17-2172

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

JUNE 14, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Exhibit
32

Section
1350 Certifications

Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section
1350, chapter 63 of Title 18, United Stated Code), each of the undersigned
officers of FNB Bancorp, a California corporation (the Company). Does hereby
certify that:

| |    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                          
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | 1. | The Companys
 Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 (the Form
 10-K) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
 Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| |    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                          
| | 2. | Information
 contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material aspects, The
 financial condition and results of operations of the Company.                                                                     

|                       |  |                             
|---------------------- |  | ----------------------------
|Dated: March
 13, 2009 |  | /s/ Thomas C.
 McGraw       
|                       |  |                             
|                       |  | Thomas C.
 McGraw           
|                       |  | Chief
 Executive Officer    
|                       |  |                             
|Dated: March
 13, 2009 |  | /s/ David A.
 Curtis        
|                       |  |                             
|                       |  | David A.
 Curtis            
|                       |  | Senior Vice
 President      
|                       |  | and Chief
 Financial Officer

A
signed original of this statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
FNB Bancorp and will be retained by FNB Bancorp and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5509 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5509

 To name the Department of Veterans Affairs temporary lodging facility 
   in Indianapolis, Indiana, as the ``Dr. Otis Bowen Veteran House''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 16, 2016

Mrs. Brooks of Indiana (for herself, Mr. Visclosky, Mrs. Walorski, Mr. 
 Stutzman, Mr. Rokita, Mr. Messer, Mr. Carson of Indiana, Mr. Bucshon, 
  and Mr. Young of Indiana) introduced the following bill; which was 
             referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To name the Department of Veterans Affairs temporary lodging facility 
   in Indianapolis, Indiana, as the ``Dr. Otis Bowen Veteran House''.

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

SECTION 1. NAME OF DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS TEMPORARY LODGING 
              FACILITY, INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA.

    The Department of Veterans Affairs temporary lodging facility in 
Indianapolis, Indiana, shall after the date of the enactment of this 
Act be known and designated as the ``Dr. Otis Bowen Veteran House''. 
Any reference to such temporary lodging facility in any law, 
regulation, map, document, record, or other paper of the United States 
shall be considered to be a reference to the Dr. Otis Bowen Veteran 
House.
                                 <all>
```
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

NORRIS CLEMONS

, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

, Appellee

.

No. 4D 17

- 3656

[ February 22, 2018 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for

the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; Michael A. Usan

, Judge; L.T. Case No. 12000042CF10A

.

Norris Clemons, Orlando, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

G ERBER

, C.J., L EVINE and K UNTZ

, JJ., concur

.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
# C_2020428EN.01000401.xml

| 11.12.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 428/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.12.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 428/4

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.9835 — Bertelsmann/Schweizerische Post/Cinfoni)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2020/C 428/04)

On 11 November 2020, 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 German language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | 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 32020M9835. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32020M9835. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---

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

---
FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTH CI RCUI T J UL Y 12, 2010 J OHN L EY CL ERK [ D O N O T P U B L I S H ]

I N T H E U N I T E D S T A T E S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S
F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C I R C U I T

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ N o
. 0 9

- 1 6 0 9 8 N o n - A r g u m e n t C a l e n d a r

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ D

. C

. D o c k e t N o
. 0 9

- 0 0 0 2 6

- C R

- 0 0 2

- C A R

- 3
U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A ,

P l a i n t i f f

- A p p e l l e e ,

v e r s u s
J O S E M A T A

- C A M A C H O , a
. k

. a
. R a m i r o S u s e l o H e r n a n d e z , a
. k

. a
. A u d e n e s C a m a c h o - C a t a l a n , a
. k

. a
. H e c t o r L u i s R o d r i g u e z , a
. k

. a
. D a v i d J a s o n O r t e g a , D e f e n d a n t

- A p p e l l a n t

.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A p p e a l f r o m t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s D i s t r i c t C o u r t f o r t h e M i d d l e D i s t r i c t o f G e o r g i a

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( J u l y 1 2 , 2 0 1 0 )
B e f o r e E D M O N D S O N , M A R T I N a n d F A Y , C i r c u i t J u d g e s
.P E R C U R I A M :

J o h n F r a n c i s c o , a p p o i n t e d c o u n s e l f o r J o s e M a t a - C a m a c h o i n t h i s d i r e c t

c r i m i n a l a p p e a l , h a s m o v e d t o w i t h d r a w f r o m f u r t h e r r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e

a p p e l l a n t a n d f

i l e d a b r i e f p u r s u a n t t o A n d e r s v
. C a l i f o r n i a , 3 8 6 U

. S

. 7 3 8 , 8 7 S

. C t

. 1 3 9 6 , 1 8 L

. E d

. 2 d 4 9 3 ( 1 9 6 7 )

. O u r i n d e p e n d e n t r e v i e w o f t h e e n t i r e r e c o r d r e v e a l s

t h a t c o u n s e l ’ s a s s e s s m e n t o f t h e r e l a t i v e m e r i t o f t h e a p p e a l i s c o r r e c t

. B e c a u s e
i n d e p e n d e n t e x a m i n a t i o n o f t h e e n t i r e r e c o r d r e v e a l s n o a r g u a b l e i s s u e s o f m e r i t ,

c o u n s e l ’ s m o t i o n t o w i t h d r a w i s G R A N T E D , a n d M a t a - C a m a c h o ’ s c o n v i c t i o n a n d

s e n t e n c e a r e A F F I R M E D

.

2
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA AF 06 - 0090

_________________ IN THE MATTER OF THE APPOINTMENT OF A MEMBER TO THE COMMISSION ON PRACTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA O R D E R

_________________ Rule 2 of the Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement provides that appointments to the Commission on Practice shall be made by the Supreme Court from a list of three licensed and practicing attorneys submitted to the Court who have received the highest number of votes in an election by the Area resident members of the State Bar of Montana. Rule 2 further provides that this Court shall, by order, designate the time, place , and method for the election of members for appointment to the Commission on Practice. The term of the current attorney member for Area D expire s June 20 , 2024 . Area D is now comprised of the Eighth and Ninth Judicial Districts. THEREFORE, IT IS NOW ORDERED: 1. An election shall be had in Area D for nomination of three resident bar members whose names shall be submitted to this Court, and this Court shall then appoint one of the three to membership on the Commission on Practice. 2. The election in Area D shall be the responsibility of District Judge John W. Parker .3. The election shall be conducted in the following manner: (a) At the discretion of Judge Parker, the election may be conducted either by e -mail or regular mail. Whether by e - mail or regular mail, the ballots shall be in the following form: 06/03/2024

Case Number: AF 06-00902 AREA D Eighth and Ninth Judicial Districts B ALLOT FOR MEMBERS OF COMMISSION ON PRACTICE

(Vote for Three) 1.

____________________________________________________ 2.

____________________________________________________ 3.

____________________________________________________ The election will close June 21 , 2024 . Your ballot must be returned so as to reach its destination on or before that date. The names of the three attorneys receiving the highest number of votes will be sent to the Montana Supreme Court, which then will appoint one of them to the Commi ssion. ******************** (b) Judge Parker shall prepare and distribute the ballots on or before June 10 , 2024 . (c) Voted ballots must be returned to Judge Parker or before June 1 8 , 2024 . (d) The ballots are to be opened and counted by Judge Parker . Judge Parker shall then certify to this Court the names of the three attorneys in Area D receiving the highest number of votes on or before June 24 , 2024 . The Clerk is directed to mail a copy of this Order to Honorable John W. Parker, to each member of the Commission on Practice, and to Shelly Smith, Office Administrator for the Commission on Practice.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 3 2024
# C_2020205EN.01002101.xml

| 19.6.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 205/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.6.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 205/21

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.9779 – Alstom/Bombardier Transportation)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2020/C 205/10)

1.

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| — | Alstom S.A. (France), |
| --- | --- |

—

Alstom S.A. (France),

| — | Bombardier Transportation (Investment) UK Ltd (UK). |
| --- | --- |

—

Bombardier Transportation (Investment) UK Ltd (UK).

Alstom acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of Bombardier Transportation.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

2.

| — | for Alstom: rail transport industry, including transport solutions (from high-speed and mainline trains to metros, trams and e-buses), personalised services (maintenance and modernisation) offerings dedicated to passengers and infrastructure, digital mobility and signalling solutions, |
| --- | --- |

—

for Alstom: rail transport industry, including transport solutions (from high-speed and mainline trains to metros, trams and e-buses), personalised services (maintenance and modernisation) offerings dedicated to passengers and infrastructure, digital mobility and signalling solutions,

| — | for Bombardier Transportation: rail solutions, including trains, sub-systems, signalling, complete turnkey transport systems and services. |
| --- | --- |

—

for Bombardier Transportation: rail solutions, including trains, sub-systems, signalling, complete turnkey transport systems and services.

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

4.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.9779 – Alstom/Bombardier Transportation

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Fax +32 22964301

| Postal address: |
| --- |
| European Commission |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

Postal address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

1

---
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: BOU

Filters

              - (-)science_science(1)
              - products_data(1)
              - products_publications(16)
              - multimedia_image(5)
              - multimedia_image-141771(5)

## By Location

## By Year

Research        July 20, 2018        Boulder (BOU)
Carla DUGLIN, Appellant, v. Laurence DUGLIN, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-1109

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed April 18, 2018.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________

JULIO C. CASAS,

Petitioner

v.

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,

Respondent

______________________

2023-1660

______________________

Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection 

Board in No. DA-0752-17-0182-I-1.

______________________ 

Before LOURIE, HUGHES, and CUNNINGHAM, Circuit 

Judges.

PER CURIAM.

O R D E R

On March 22, 2023, this court received Julio C. Casas’s 

petition for review from the January 19, 2023, final decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board. Having considered the parties’ responses to this court’s show cause 

order, the court dismisses the petition as untimely. 

Under 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(1)(A), a petition to review a 

final decision by the Board must be filed “within 60 days 

after the Board issues notice of the final . . . decision.” This 

Case: 23-1660 Document: 12 Page: 1 Filed: 07/10/2023
2 CASAS v. DHS

statutory filing deadline is jurisdictional and not subject to 

equitable exceptions. Fedora v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 848 

F.3d 1013, 1016 (Fed. Cir. 2017). Thus, although Mr. 

Casas contends that his failure to timely file is excusable 

due to a purported miscalculation of the filing deadline, 

this court may only consider whether his petition was 

timely and cannot toll based on his personal circumstances. 

Because the petition was filed outside the 60-day deadline, 

this court lacks jurisdiction and must dismiss. 

Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) The petition for review is dismissed.

(2) Each side shall bear its own costs.

 July 10, 2023 

 Date

FOR THE COURT

 /s/ Jarrett B. Perlow

 Jarrett B. Perlow

Clerk of Court

Case: 23-1660 Document: 12 Page: 2 Filed: 07/10/2023
-80 -79 -78 -77 -76 -75

 37

 38

 39

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★

▲

▲ ▲

▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 1000

18 12 06 00

05/30

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 30 May 07

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.77 N 77.11 W Meters AGL
Justin MURDOCK, a/k/a Justin David Murdock, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-1745

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed August 29, 2018.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.