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

119TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 776 

To reauthorize the Nutria Eradication and Control Act of 2003. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 28, 2025 

Mr. HARDER of California (for himself, Mr. VALADAO, and Mr. GARAMENDI) 

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

Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To reauthorize the Nutria Eradication and Control Act of 

2003. 

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 ‘‘Nutria Eradication 

5 and Control Reauthorization Act of 2025’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF NUTRIA ERADICATION AND 

7 CONTROL ACT OF 2003. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 3(e) of the Nutria Eradi9 cation and Control Act of 2003 (16 U.S.C. 8102(e)) is 

10 amended by striking ‘‘2025’’ and inserting ‘‘2030’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 776 IH

1 (b) TECHNICAL CORRECTION.—Section 3(a) of the 

2 Nutria Eradication and Control Act of 2003 (16 U.S.C. 

3 8102(a)) is amended by striking ‘‘ ‘Secretary’),’’ and in4 serting ‘‘ ‘Secretary’)’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
----

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

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

|                   |   |                              |
|------------------------|--------|-----------------------------------|
|                   |   |                              |   |
| November      12, 2009 |   | /s/ Thomas      Kreig        |   |
|                   |   | Thomas      Kreig                 |   |
|                   |   | Principal      Accounting Officer |   |
|                   |   |                              |   |
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-1580

MAJOR MIKE WEBB, d/b/a Friends for Mike Webb (C00591537), agent of Major 

Mike Webb for Congress (H8VA08167), a/k/a Major Mike for VA, a/k/a Mike 

Webb for APS Board, agent of Major Mike Webb for APS Board,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

JAMES CHRISTIAN KIMMEL; WUSA9, a/k/a Channel 9; AMERICAN 

BROADCAST COMPANY INC., a/k/a Jimmy Kimmel Live!; WJLA TV, a/k/a 

News Channel 8; ABC LEGAL SERVICES; SINCLAIR BROADCAST GROUP; 

JANE AND JOHN DOES,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at 

Richmond. M. Hannah Lauck, District Judge. (3:22-cv-00392-MHL)

Submitted: October 31, 2023 Decided: November 2, 2023

Before HARRIS and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Mike Webb, Appellant Pro Se. Patrick John Curran, Jr., Nathan Ellis Siegel, DAVIS 

WRIGHT TREMAINE, LLP, Washington, D.C.; Laurin Howard Mills, WERTHER & 

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1580 Doc: 15 Filed: 11/02/2023 Pg: 1 of 3
2

MILLS, LLC, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1580 Doc: 15 Filed: 11/02/2023 Pg: 2 of 3
3

PER CURIAM:

Mike Webb appeals the district court’s order dismissing his second amended 

complaint for failure to comply with the court’s instructions to particularize his claims and 

for failure to state a claim, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), and the court’s order 

denying his request for default judgment. We have reviewed Webb’s second amended 

complaint and conclude that the district court correctly found that Webb failed to provide 

specific factual allegations in support of his claims. Furthermore, while Webb argues on 

appeal that the district court erred in denying his request for default judgment against three 

of the Defendants, the court properly denied Webb’s request on the ground that those 

Defendants were never served. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). Accordingly, we affirm. Webb v. 

Kimmel, No. 3:22-cv-00392-MHL (E.D. Va. May 3, 2023; May 18, 2023). 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.

AFFIRMED

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1580 Doc: 15 Filed: 11/02/2023 Pg: 3 of 3
IV 

119TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 89 

Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Agriculture in 

the One Hundred Nineteenth Congress. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 31, 2025 

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania submitted the following resolution; which was 

referred to the Committee on House Administration 

RESOLUTION 

Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on 

Agriculture in the One Hundred Nineteenth Congress. 

1 Resolved, 

2 SECTION 1. AMOUNTS FOR COMMITTEE EXPENSES. 

3 For the expenses of the Committee on Agriculture 

4 (hereafter in this resolution referred to as the ‘‘Com5 mittee’’), including the expenses of all staff salaries, there 

6 shall be paid, out of the applicable accounts of the House 

7 of Representatives for committee salaries and expenses, 

8 not more than $14,903,700 for the One Hundred Nine9 teenth Congress. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HRES 89 IH 

1 SEC. 2. SESSION LIMITATIONS. 

2 Of the amount specified in section 1— 

3 (1) not more than $7,231,375 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 $7,672,325 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 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
Jeffrey Lynn MCDONALD, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 1D18-2290

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

September 12, 2018

Jeffrey Lynn McDonald, pro se, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.

The petition for writ of mandamus is denied. *See**Munn v. Fla. Parole Comm'n* , 807 So.2d 733 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002).

Wolf, Rowe, and Kelsey, JJ., concur.
Arthur L. BERUBE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-674

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed February 27, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
# C_2017374EN.01001901.xml

| 6.11.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 374/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.11.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 374/19

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeidshof Antwerpen (Belgium) lodged on 21 August 2017 — Christa Plessers v Prefaco NV, Belgische Staat

(Case C-509/17)

(2017/C 374/27)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Referring court

Arbeidshof Antwerpen

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Christa Plessers

Applicant:

Defendants: Prefaco NV, Belgische Staat

Defendants:

Question referred

Question referred

Is the right of option for the transferee under Article 61(4) (now Article 61(3)) of the Belgian Law of 31 January 2009 on the continuity of undertakings, as part of Chapter 4 of Title 4 of that law under which the ‘judicial reorganisation by transfer under judicial supervision’ is regulated, in so far as that ‘judicial reorganisation by transfer under judicial supervision’ is applied with a view to maintaining all or part of the transferor or its activities, consistent with Council Directive 2001/23/EC (1) on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees’ rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of undertakings or businesses, in particular with Articles 3 and 5 of that directive?

1

---

(1)  Council Directive 2001/23/EC of 12 March 2001 (OJ 2001 L 82, p. 16).

1

---
STATE of Louisiana v. Trevor EDDEN

NO. 2018-KO-1961

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 15, 2019

Denied.
STATE of Louisiana v. Dylan MAGLUILO

NO. 2018-KO-1684

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 15, 2019

Denied.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

CARL YOUNGBLOOD )

)

V. ) 3-05-CV-1680-K

)

JO ANNE B. BARNHART )

Commissioner of Social Security )

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF 

THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

United States Magistrate Judge William F. Sanderson, Jr., made findings,

conclusions and a recommendation in this case. Plaintiff filed objections, and the

District Court has made a de novo review of those portions of the proposed findings and

recommendation to which objection was made. The objections are overruled, and the

Court accepts the Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the United States

Magistrate Judge.

SO ORDERED.

Signed this 7 day of November, 2006. th

 

ED KINKEADE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

 Case 3:05-cv-01680-K Document 24 Filed 11/07/06 Page 1 of 1 PageID 92
Robert A. WEST, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-786

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed March 19, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUTPUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 10 (Thursday, January 16, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Page 4813]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-00915]

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

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

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 16, 2025.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
January 8, 2025, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 1271 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-1092, K2025-1091.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2025-00915 Filed 1-15-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
Case 3:05-cv-01621-B Document 6 Filed 10/13/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 17
AGREED MOTION TO DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE - Page 1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

DALLAS DIVISION 

ANNA H. FARR, § 

 § 

 PLAINTIFF § 

v. § 3-04CV2476-F 

ALBERTSONS, INC., § ECF 

 § 

 DEFENDANT § 

AGREED MOTION TO DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE

 Plaintiff Anna Farr and Defendant Albertsons, Inc. jointly move the Court to 

dismiss all claims in this case with prejudice to their refiling, and as grounds for this 

Motion show the Court the following: 

1. No further controversy remains between Plaintiff and Defendant requiring 

resolution by the Court. 

2. The parties have agreed that each of them shall bear its own costs. 

ACCORDINGLY, the parties move the Court for an Order dismissing this case 

with prejudice, with each Party to bear its own attorneys’ fees, expenses and costs. 

Respectfully submitted, 

s/ N. Jude Menes 

 N. Jude Menes 

 State Bar No. 24004815 

 MENES LAW FIRM 

 One Empire Building, Suite 234 

 1140 Empire Central Drive 

 Dallas, Texas 75247 

 Phone: (214) 631-2751 

 Fax: (214) 631-2753 

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF 

Case 3:04-cv-02476-P Document 10 Filed 02/07/06 Page 1 of 2 PageID 41
AGREED MOTION TO DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE Page 2 

s/ Walter S. Cowger 

Walter S. Cowger 

State Bar No. 04928900 

LAW OFFICE OF WALTER S. COWGER 

1717 Main Street, Suite 5500 

Dallas, Texas 75201 

(214) 743-4190 – Telephone 

(214) 743-4191 – Facsimile 

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT 

ALBERTSONS, INC. 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on February 7, 2006, I electronically filed the foregoing 

document with the clerk of court for the U.S. District Court, Northern District of Texas, 

using the electronic case filing system of the court. The electronic case filing system sent 

a “Notice of Electronic Filing” to counsel for Plaintiff N. Jude Menes, who has consented 

in writing to accept this Notice as service of this document by electronic means. 

s/ Walter S. Cowger __

Case 3:04-cv-02476-P Document 10 Filed 02/07/06 Page 2 of 2 PageID 42
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 16, 2025.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean 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 January 7, 2025, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 590 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-1078, K2025-1077.                

Sean Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2025-00869 Filed 1-15-25; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
NUMBER 13-24-00127-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG 

____________________________________________________________

RANDOLPH REED, Appellant,

v.

CHARLIE CLARK AUTO CARE, LLC, Appellee.

____________________________________________________________

ON APPEAL FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 3

OF CAMERON COUNTY, TEXAS

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Benavides and Silva

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Benavides

This matter is before the court on appellant’s failure to file a brief. After granting 

appellant’s first motion for extension of time to file a brief, appellant’s brief was due to be 

filed on or before July 30, 2024. On August 9, 2024, the Clerk of the Court notified 

appellant via email that his brief was past due. Appellant was further notified that if he

failed to reasonably explain the failure to file a brief within ten days from the date of the 
2

notice, the appeal would be dismissed for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P.

42.3(b), (c).

On August 27, 2024, the Clerk of the Court sent appellant notice that his brief was 

past due. Appellant was further notified that if he failed to reasonably explain the failure 

to file a brief within ten days from the date of the notice, the appeal would be dismissed 

for want of prosecution. See id. This notice was entitled final notice and was sent via email 

and certified mail, return receipt requested. On September 10, 2024, the clerk’s final 

notice was returned to sender and marked “return to sender,” “attempted-not known,” and 

“unable to forward.” Copies of each notice were emailed to appellant’s only known email 

address.

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.1(b) requires unrepresented parties to sign 

any document filed and “give the party’s mailing address, telephone number, fax number, 

if any, and email address.” See id. R. 9.1(b). Appellant has not provided updated contact 

information if the information currently on file for him is incorrect.

Furthermore, Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3 permits an appellate court, 

on its own initiative after giving ten days’ notice to all parties, to dismiss the appeal for 

want of prosecution or for failure to comply with a requirement of the appellate rules. See 

id. R. 42.3(b), (c). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See id.

GINA M. BENAVIDES

Justice

Delivered and filed on the

3rd day of October, 2024.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           9,365
<SECURITIES>                                     9,805
<RECEIVABLES>                                   16,211
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                39,922
<PP&E>                                           6,819
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,543
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  72,145
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           18,956
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            75
<OTHER-SE>                                      49,238
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    72,145
<SALES>                                         25,689
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                25,689
<CGS>                                           14,463
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   22,677
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  (87)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 356
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,744
<INCOME-TAX>                                       373
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,371
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (1,140)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,231
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.11
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.10
<FN>
Earnings per share basic (EPS-PRIMARY) and diluted reflects the adjustment for
income taxes as if the company were a C Corporation for the entire period.
</FN>



</TABLE>
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

PABLO ARTEMIO BASOCO,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 14-10197

D.C. No. 3:13-cr-08136-NVW

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

Neil V. Wake, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 21, 2015**

Before: CANBY, GOULD, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges. 

Pablo Artemio Basoco appeals from the district court’s judgment and 

challenges the 12-month sentence imposed upon revocation of supervised release. 

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Basoco contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable in light of the 

 

*

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

JAN 27 2015

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 14-10197

allegedly minor nature of the violation and because this is his first revocation. The 

district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing Basoco’s sentence. See Gall 

v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The sentence is substantively reasonable 

in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e) sentencing factors and the totality of the 

circumstances, including Basoco’s apparent unsuitability for supervised release. 

See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51.

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 32.01

CERTIFICATION OF  CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER  PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the annual report on Form 10-K of FormFactor, Inc., a Delaware corporation, for the period ended December 29,
2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, each of the undersigned officers of FormFactor, Inc. certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his respective knowledge:



|                        |  |                                                            
|----------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------
|Date: February 27, 2008 |  | /s/IGOR Y. KHANDROSIgor Y. Khandros
Chief Executive Officer
|Date: February 27, 2008 |  | /s/RONALD C. FOSTERRonald C. Foster
Chief Financial Officer

---



QuickLinks
EX PARTE Mitchell Bryant OWENS, Sr.

(In re: Cristal Owens v. Mitchell Bryant Owens, Sr.)

2170080

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

October 20, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. denied.