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

Jeffery S. Hall, Board Member

Farm Credit System 100th Anniversary Resolution

Farm Credit Administration Board Meeting

July 14, 2016

Today I proudly vote for the Board Resolution recognizing and congratulating the Farm Credit 

System’s 100th anniversary. The Farm Credit System, the nation’s oldest government 

sponsored enterprise, has admirably served America’s farmers and rancher through good times 

and bad.

On July 17, 1916 President Woodrow Wilson signed into law the Federal Farm Loan Act which 

established the Farm Credit System. In 1916, credit often was unavailable or unaffordable in 

rural areas. Many lenders avoided farm loans due to the inherent risks of agriculture. The Farm 

Credit System was created to provide a permanent, reliable source of credit to American 

agriculture.

Agriculture production in this country has changed greatly over the years but the need for the 

Farm Credit System has not. Agriculture is still fraught with uncontrollable and often 

unpredictable risks and is not for the faint of heart. It can be argued, however, that agriculture is 

the most important domestic industry highlighting the need for the dependable source of credit 

provided by the Farm Credit System.

Recently the House Committee on Agriculture held a hearing to highlight agriculture’s role in our 

nation’s security. If we couldn’t produce our own food, if we were dependent imports to survive 

this country would not be the strongest country on Earth.

Because of the Farm Credit System and its successful execution of its mission to provide a 

safe, sound and dependable source of credit and related services for all creditworthy and 

eligible persons in agriculture and rural America we aren’t dependent on foreign sources of 

food. Because of the success of the Farm Credit System America feeds the world.

The lifeblood of any farming operation, big, small, urban, commercial or organic, is liquidity. If 

producers can’t get the capital they need to buy land, put crops in the ground or buy incredibly 

expensive equipment they simply would not be able to operate. The expertise the Farm Credit 

System has developed in agriculture lending and the efficiency with which they do it provides 

our farmers, ranchers and rural communities with a dependable and cost effective funding 

source.

Today I am proud to recognize the Farm Credit System for all that it does for our country.

Congratulations on its 100th anniversary.
IN RE: Evelyn S. ADAMS

NO. 2019-OB-0624 NO. 2019-B-0625

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 1, 2019

ORDER

Considering the Joint Petition for Transfer to Active Status and the Joint Petition for Interim Suspension filed by respondent, Evelyn S. Adams, and the Office of Disciplinary Counsel,

IT IS ORDERED that Evelyn S. Adams, also known as Martha Evelyn Shahan Adams, Louisiana Bar Roll number 27169, be and she hereby is reinstated to active status pursuant to Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 22(G), subject to the condition that she must comply with all terms of her May 10, 2018 recovery agreement with the Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program and such other conditions as may be imposed upon her by the Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program. The Office of Disciplinary Counsel shall monitor respondent's compliance with her recovery agreement and notify this court of any violation, which may be grounds for immediately returning respondent to disability inactive status.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion to Seal Exhibits Attached To Joint Petition for Transfer to Active Status be and hereby is granted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondent be and she hereby is suspended from the practice of law on an interim basis pursuant to Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 19.3, pending further orders of this court.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED ANTHONY WILLIAMS ,

Petitioner ,

v. Case No. 5D 1 7

- 969
STATE OF FLORIDA ,

Respondent

. ________________________________/ Opinion filed May 12, 2017 Petition for Belated Appeal A Case of Original Jurisdiction. Anthony Williams , Crestview , pro se.
Pamela Jo Bondi , Attorney General Tallahassee, and, Marjorie Vincent

- Tripp Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM. The petition for belated appeal is granted. A copy of this opinion shall be filed
with the trial court and be treated as the notice of appeal from the December 6, 2016 order denying Petitioner’s pro se amended motion for post conviction relief and the January 5, 2017 order denying Petitioner ’ s motion for rehearing, filed in C ase N o. 2005

- CF

- 31276

- B , in the Circuit Court in and for Brevard County, Florida. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(c)( 6 )(D).
PETITION GRANTED

. COHEN, C.J., WALLIS and LAMBERT , JJ., concur.
Jermaine Leon YOUNG v. STATE

CR-16-1272

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

December 8, 2017

Affirmed.
1

Although Plaintiff has signed his name to pleadings in this case as

“Clerkley,” he has also listed the spelling of his name in a prior lawsuit as

“Clerkly” and records of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice show the

spelling of inmate number 595191 name as “Clerkly.” 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

LEONARD CLERKLEY, §

aka Leonard Clerkly,1 §

(TDCJ # 595191) §

 § 

 § CIVIL ACTION NO.4:05-CV-199-Y VS. 

§

 §

CORRECTIONAL SERVICES § 

CORPORATION, et al. §

FINAL JUDGMENT

Pursuant to an opinion and order of dismissal issued this same

day, and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58: 

It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that plaintiff

Leonard Clerkley’s claims be, and they are hereby, DISMISSED WITH

PREJUDICE pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) and, alternatively,

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and (ii).

 It is further ORDERED that all costs of court are taxed

against the party that incurred them.

SIGNED April 29, 2005.

TERRY R. MEANS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

 Case 4:05-cv-00199-Y Document 6 Filed 04/29/05 Page 1 of 2 PageID 32
Final Judgment -- Page solo

DWK-m:u\k\d\means\King.jdg

 

 Case 4:05-cv-00199-Y Document 6 Filed 04/29/05 Page 2 of 2 PageID 33
# C_2017213EN.01002301.xml

| 3.7.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 213/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.7.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 213/23

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Østre Landsret (Denmark) lodged on 2 May 2017 — Érdem Deha Altiner, Isabel Hanna Ravn v Udlændingestyrelsen (Danish Immigration Service)

(Case C-230/17)

(2017/C 213/30)

Language of the case: Danish

Referring court

Referring court

Østre Landsret

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Érdem Deha Altiner, Isabel Hanna Ravn

Applicant:

Defendant: Udlændingestyrelsen

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

Does Article 21 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, read in conjunction and by analogy with the Free Movement Directive (1) preclude a Member State from refusing to grant a derived right of residence to a third-country national who is a family member of a Union citizen who is a national of that Member State and who has returned to that Member State after having exercised his or her right of free movement, where the family member does not enter the Member State’s territory or submit an application for a right of residence as a natural extension of the Union citizen’s return?

1

---

(1)  Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC (OJ 2004 L 158, p. 77).

1

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

**OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL,**

**Petitioner**

**v. JASON JOSEPH MAZZEI,**  **Respondent :**  **: :**  **: :**  **: :**  **: :**  **No. 2097 Disciplinary Docket No. 3**

**45 DB 2012 Attorney Registration No.**  **83775 (Allegheny County)** 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW **, this 20 th**  **day of November, 2014, upon consideration of the Recommendation of the Three-Member Panel of the Discip**  **linary Board dated September 3, 2014, the Joint Petition in Support of**  **Discipline on Consent is hereby granted pursuant to Rule 215(g), Pa.R.D.E., and it i**  **s ORDERED that Jason Joseph Mazzei is suspended on consent f**  **rom the Bar of this Commonwealth for a period of three years and he**  **shall comply with all the provisions of Rule 217, Pa.R.D.E.**
Document Headings

                    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.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         January 7, 2025.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 23, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 1197 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-995, K2025-994.                

Sean C. Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2025-00023 Filed 1-6-25; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
# Videos

A webpage compiling the various videos pertaining to the stories, press releases, and wanted person information on FBI.gov.
Case 3:00-cv-02273-X Document 11 Filed 03/27/01 Page 1 of 2 PageID 18
Case 3:00-cv-02273-X Document 11 Filed 03/27/01 Page 2 of 2 PageID 19
11 TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND

, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Amer

- Consolidated Roofing, Inc. * From the County Court at Law

d/b/a Top Wall Construction, of Taylor County

Trial Court No. 22,909

.

Vs. No. 11

- 1 7

- 00 255

- C V * August 30, 201 9

Key City Veterinary Clinic, Inc., * Memorandum Opinion by Stretcher, J.

(Panel consists of: Bailey

, C. J.,

Stretcher , J. , and Wright, S.C.J., sitting

by assignment )

(Willson, J., not participating)

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there

is no error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this court ’ s

opinion, the judgment of the trial court is in all things affirmed. The costs

incurre d by reason of this appeal are taxed against Amer

- Consolidated

Roofing, Inc. d/b/a Top Wall Construction.
# C_2019065EN.01001602.xml

| 18.2.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 65/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.2.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65/16

---

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 19 December 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Högsta domstolen — Sweden) — Criminal proceedings against Imran Syed

(Case C-572/17) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Copyright and related rights - Directive 2001/29/EC - Article 4(1) - Distribution right - Infringement - Goods bearing a copyrighted motif intended for sale - Storage for commercial purposes - Storage facility separate from place of sale))

(2019/C 65/20)

Language of the case: Swedish

Referring court

Högsta domstolen

Party in the main proceedings

Imran Syed

Operative part of the judgment

Article 4(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society must be interpreted as meaning that the storage by a retailer of goods bearing a motif protected by copyright on the territory of the Member State where the goods are stored may constitute an infringement of the exclusive distribution right, as defined by that provision, when that retailer offers for sale, without the authorisation of the copyright holder, goods identical to those which he is storing, provided that the stored goods are actually intended for sale on the territory of the Member State in which that motif is protected. The distance between the place of storage and the place of sale cannot, on its own, be a decisive element in determining whether the stored goods are intended for sale on the territory of that Member State.

---

(1)  OJ C 412, 4.12.2017.

---
Case 3:04-cv-00891-P Document 25 Filed 07/06/05 Page 1 of 7 PageID 98
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00891-P Document 25 Filed 07/06/05 Page 2 of 7 PageID 99
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00891-P Document 25 Filed 07/06/05 Page 3 of 7 PageID 100
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00891-P Document 25 Filed 07/06/05 Page 4 of 7 PageID 101
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00891-P Document 25 Filed 07/06/05 Page 5 of 7 PageID 102
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00891-P Document 25 Filed 07/06/05 Page 6 of 7 PageID 103
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00891-P Document 25 Filed 07/06/05 Page 7 of 7 PageID 104
Adrian Dalmore MCDONALD v. STATE

CR-15-0946

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

October 6, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT    11    Computation of per share earnings

                         GARDEN BAY INTERNATIONAL, LTD
                         (A Development Stage Company)
                             Weighted Average Analysis
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

							Cumulative
					Common 	Common 	Days	Weighted
					Shares	Shares		Average

2000
-----
	1-Jan-00					5,187,000	365	5,187,000
	14-Nov-00			250,000	  250,000	 48	   32,877
			---------------------------------------------------

Shares Issued '00			250,000
		 			========
Cumulative Shares '00		 		5,437,000
		 					==========

Weighted Average Number of Common Shares Outstanding		5,219,877
										=========

	Earning (Loss) Available to Common Stockholders		  (10,045)
										==========
										----------
		Basic Earnings (Loss) Per Share			  (0.0019)
										==========



							Cumulative
					Common 	Common 	Days	Weighted
					Shares	Shares		Average

1999
----
	1-Jan-99					5,000,000	365	5,000,000
	25-Mar-99			187,000	  187,000	282	  144,477
 			---------------------------------------------------
Shares Issued '99			187,000
					========

Cumulative Shares '99				5,187,000
							==========

Weighted Average Number of Common Shares Outstanding		5,144,477
										=========

	Earning (Loss) Available to Common Stockholders		(9,392)
										--------

		Basic Earnings (Loss) Per Share			(0.0018)
										========

NOTE :	EARNING PER SHARE = EARNING (LOSS) AVAILABLE TO COMMON
		STOCKHOLDERS / WEIGHTED SHARES OUTSTANDING
IV 

119TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 96 

Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Science, Space, 

and Technology in the One Hundred Nineteenth Congress. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 4, 2025 

Mr. BABIN (for himself and Ms. LOFGREN) submitted the following resolution; 

which was referred to the Committee on House Administration 

RESOLUTION 

Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on 

Science, Space, and Technology in the One Hundred 

Nineteenth Congress. 

1 Resolved, 

2 SECTION 1. AMOUNTS FOR COMMITTEE EXPENSES. 

3 For the expenses of the Committee on Science, Space, 

4 and Technology (hereafter in this resolution referred to 

5 as the ‘‘Committee’’), including the expenses of all staff 

6 salaries, there shall be paid, out of the applicable accounts 

7 of the House of Representatives for committee salaries 

8 and expenses, not more than $18,617,085 for the One 

9 Hundred Nineteenth Congress. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 96 IH 

1 SEC. 2. SESSION LIMITATIONS. 

2 Of the amount specified in section 1— 

3 (1) not more than $9,228,599 shall be available 

4 for expenses incurred during the period beginning at 

5 noon on January 3, 2025, and ending immediately 

6 before noon on January 3, 2026; and 

7 (2) not more than $9,388,486 shall be available 

8 for expenses incurred during the period beginning at 

9 noon on January 3, 2026, and ending immediately 

10 before noon on January 3, 2027. 

11 SEC. 3. VOUCHERS. 

12 Payments under this resolution shall be made on 

13 vouchers authorized by the Committee, signed by the 

14 Chairman of the Committee, and approved in the manner 

15 directed by the Committee on House Administration. 

16 SEC. 4. REGULATIONS. 

17 Amounts made available under this resolution shall 

18 be expended in accordance with regulations prescribed by 

19 the Committee on House Administration. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Kurt A. Johnson, Chief Executive Officer ofFastclick, Inc., certify that:

 

1.               I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Qfor the quarter ended March 31, 2005;

 

2.               Based on my knowledge, this report does notcontain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3.               Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements, and other financial information included in this report, fairlypresent in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;

 

4.               The registrant’s other certifying officer(s)and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e))for the registrant and have:

 

(a)   Designed such disclosure controls and procedures,or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant,including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;

 

(b)   Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

 

(c)   Disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarterin the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and

 

5.               The registrant’s other certifying officer(s)and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controlover financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committeeof registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

 

(a)   All significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

 

(b)   Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.

 
| Date: May 13, 2005 | By:    | /s/ Kurt A. Johnson       |   |
|-------------------------|--------|---------------------------|--------|
|                    |   | Kurt A. Johnson           |
|                    |   | *Chief Executive Officer* |

 

----
Case 3:05-cv-01291-L Document 7 Filed 07/15/05 Page 1 of 3 PageID 30
 

 Case 3:05-cv-01291-L Document 7 Filed 07/15/05 Page 2 of 3 PageID 31
 

 Case 3:05-cv-01291-L Document 7 Filed 07/15/05 Page 3 of 3 PageID 32
*This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata and collateral estoppel. The court

generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order

and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

F I L E D

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

DEC 31 1997

PATRICK FISHER

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

WILLIAM CARPENTER,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

OKLAHOMA DEPARTMENT OF

CORRECTIONS; DR. F. WARREN

BENTON, Director DOC (1976);

GARY MAYNARD, Director DOC

(1987),

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 97-6269

(W. District of Oklahoma)

(D.C. No. CIV-96-1447)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before BALDOCK, EBEL, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this three-judge panel

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not be of material

assistance in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a);
-2-

10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. This court therefore honors the parties’ requests and orders

the cause submitted without oral argument.

William Carpenter, appearing pro se and in forma pauperis, appeals the

district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of numerous individual

employees of the Oklahoma Department of Corrections. Carpenter brought this

civil rights suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, claiming that he is entitled to

damages because the defendants violated his constitutional rights by forcing him

to serve an “excessive” period of incarceration. The district court concluded that

Carpenter’s suit was barred by the two-year statute of limitations and that neither

the discovery rule nor the Oklahoma doctrine of fraudulent concealment served to

toll the statute of limitations because Carpenter was aware of all of the “facts”

necessary to bring this suit when his sentence expired in 1989. The district court

concluded that Carpenter’s ignorance of the legal basis, as opposed to the factual

predicates, underlying his claim could not serve to toll the running of the

limitations period. See United States v. Kubrick, 444 U.S. 111, 119-122 (1979)

Gatewood v. Railroad Retirement Bd., 88 F.3d 886, 890 (10th Cir. 1996).

Upon de novo review of the magistrate’s Report and Recommendation, the

district court Order, the parties’ briefs and contentions, and the entire record on

appeal, this court affirms for substantially the reasons set forth in the Magistrate’s

Report and Recommendation dated May 30, 1997, and the district court Order
-3-

dated July 17, 1997. We further hold that this appeal is frivolous or fails to state

a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(b)(i) or (ii) for purposes of counting “prior

occasions” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

ENTERED FOR THE COURT:

Michael R. Murphy

Circuit Judge