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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-6649

WILLIAM HILL,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

CHESAPEAKE CORRECTIONAL CENTER, Records Department,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Anthony J. Trenga, 

District Judge. (1:10-cv-00273-AJT-JFA)

Submitted: December 16, 2010 Decided: December 27, 2010

Before GREGORY, DUNCAN, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William Hill, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

William Hill appeals the district court’s order 

dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915A(b) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no 

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated 

by the district court. Hill v. Chesapeake Corr. Ctr., No. 1:10-

cv-00273-AJT-JFA (E.D. Va. Apr. 19, 2010). We dispense with 

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before the court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ulysses Talford, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a

judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lombardo, J.), rendered September 13, 1984, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf. People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Lazer, J. P., Thompson, Rubin and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.
State of New York

Supreme Court, Appellate Division

Third Judicial Department

Decided and Entered: April 23, 2015 105669 

________________________________

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF 

NEW YORK, 

Respondent, 

v MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

THOMAS HARDIE, Also Known as 

T,

Appellant.

________________________________

Calendar Date: February 24, 2015

Before: Lahtinen, J.P., Egan Jr., Devine and Clark, JJ.

__________

Kevin J. Bauer, Albany, for appellant, and appellant 

pro se.

P. David Soares, District Attorney, Albany, for respondent.

__________

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County

(Herrick, J.), rendered January 3, 2013, convicting defendant

upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal possession of a

weapon in the third degree.

In satisfaction of a three-count superceding indictment and

another pending charge, defendant pleaded guilty to criminal

possession of a weapon in the third degree and waived his right

to appeal. Defendant was sentenced, as a second felony offender,

in accordance with the terms of the plea agreement to a prison

term of 31⁄2 to 7 years. Defense counsel now seeks to be relieved

of his assignment on the ground that there are no nonfrivolous

issues to be raised on appeal. Upon our review of the record,

defense counsel's brief and defendant's pro se submission, we

agree. Therefore, the judgment is affirmed and counsel's request
-2- 105669 

for leave to withdraw is granted (see People v Cruwys, 113 AD2d

979, 980 [1985], lv denied 67 NY2d 650 [1986]; see generally

People v Stokes, 95 NY2d 633 [2001]).

Lahtinen, J.P., Egan Jr., Devine and Clark, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, and application to

be relieved of assignment granted. 

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger

Clerk of the Court
The State of TexasAppellee/s

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

November 18, 2015

No. 04-15-00529-CR

Abelardo Gerardo GONZALEZ,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 49th Judicial District Court, Webb County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2008CRR000657-D1

The Honorable David Peeples, Judge Presiding

ORDER

Appellant’s motion for extension of time to file a motion for rehearing is GRANTED. 

We order appellant’s motion for rehearing due December 12, 2015.

_________________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 18th day of November, 2015.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
EXHIBIT 3.2.1

CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT

TO THE BYLAWS OF

NOTIFY TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION

The undersigned, being the Secretary of Notify
Technology Corporation, a California corporation, hereby certifies that the Board of Directors of the corporation approved an amendment of the second sentence of Article III, Section 3.2 of the Bylaws of the corporation to read as follows, effective
as of the date indicated below:

The exact number of directors shall be seven (7) until changed, within the limits specified above, or
by a bylaw amending this Section 3.2, duly adopted by the board of directors or by the shareholders.

Date: October 5, 2006



/s/ Gerald W RiceGerald W. Rice, Secretary
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Great Basin Rangelands Research: Reno, NV
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Newsletter
                        Volume 1
                                    Volume 2Search small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us






soil water conservation postersheadline bar Research


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
# L_2013188EN.01S00301.xml

| 9.7.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 188/s3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.7.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 188/s3

---

NOTICE TO READERS

Council Regulation (EU) No 216/2013 of 7 March 2013 on the electronic publication of the Official Journal of the European Union

In accordance with Council Regulation (EU) No 216/2013 of 7 March 2013 on the electronic publication of the Official Journal of the European Union (OJ L 69, 13.3.2013, p. 1), as of 1 July 2013, only the electronic edition of the Official Journal shall be considered authentic and shall have legal effect.

Official Journal of the European Union

Where it is not possible to publish the electronic edition of the Official Journal due to unforeseen and exceptional circumstances, the printed edition shall be authentic and shall have legal effect in accordance with the terms and conditions set out in Article 3 of Regulation (EU) No 216/2013.

---
#### HEFFRON, Appellant, v. LACKAWANNA STEEL CO., Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

October 9, 1907.)

Action by Charles F. Heffron ¡against the Lackawanna Steel Company.

No opinion. Motion for reargument denied. Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals granted.
Order entered Ju ne 16 , 2021

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05
- 20
- 00932
- CR
NATHAN HAYWOOD STRONG , Appellant

V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee On Appeal from the Crim i n al District Court No. 2

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F 17
- 55421
- I

O RDER Before the Court is appellant ’ s June 14 , 2021 fourth mo tion for an extension

o f time to file his brief. We GRANT the motion to the extent we ORDER appellant ’ s brief fil ed by Ju ly 9 , 202 1. The failure to file a brief by Ju ly 9 , 2021
will result in t he appeal being abated for a hearing under rule 38.8. See T EX

. R.
A PP

. P. 38.8(b).

/s/ DENNISE GARCIA JUSTICE
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5


<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          8,658,268
<SECURITIES>                                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  23,148,037
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (285,352)
<INVENTORY>                                       576,863
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               38,356,286
<PP&E>                                         80,851,116
<DEPRECIATION>                                (23,203,536)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 96,730,006
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          20,813,335
<BONDS>                                        12,307,761
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                             0
<COMMON>                                           62,865
<OTHER-SE>                                     55,880,982
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   96,730,006
<SALES>                                                 0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              209,143,336
<CGS>                                                   0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 212,988,246
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              1,471,426
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (5,198,542)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,965,049)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,233,493)
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,233,493)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       (0.53)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       (0.53)



</TABLE>
III 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 274 

Expressing the sense of the Senate that funding for the Federal Pell Grant 

program should not be cut in any deficit reduction package. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 22, 2011 

Mr. WHITEHOUSE (for himself, Mr. REED, Mr. FRANKEN, Mr. SANDERS, Mrs. 

GILLIBRAND, Mr. LAUTENBERG, Mr. BLUMENTHAL, and Mr. BROWN of 

Ohio) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the Senate that funding for the 

Federal Pell Grant program should not be cut in any 

deficit reduction package. 

Whereas the Federal Pell Grant program has been the cornerstone of the Federal financial aid system since grants 

were first distributed in the 1970s; 

Whereas during 2010, almost 9,000,000 students in the 

United States received a Federal Pell Grant; 

Whereas the number of students receiving a Federal Pell 

Grant increased by 26 percent between the 2008–2009 

academic year and the 2009–2010 academic year; 

Whereas when Federal Pell Grants were first distributed in 

1976, such grants paid for 72 percent of the average cost 


pwalker on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 274 IS 

of a 4-year public institution of higher education while in 

2011 the maximum Federal Pell Grant covers only 34 

percent of such cost; 

Whereas 61 percent of students who received a Federal Pell 

Grant during the 2008–2009 academic year came from 

households that earned less than $30,000 and 99 percent 

of such students came from households that earned 

$50,000 a year or less; 

Whereas during the 2008–2009 academic year, 68 percent of 

students receiving a Federal Pell Grant were 21 years of 

age or older; 

Whereas the unemployment rate for individuals with a baccalaureate degree is consistently half of the unemployment 

rate for individuals with only a secondary school diploma; 

and 

Whereas education is a vital part of ensuring that the United 

States workforce is prepared for the 21st Century and 

the United States remains the world leader in innovation: 

Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that fund2 ing for the Federal Pell Grant program should not be cut 

3 in any deficit reduction package. 

Æ 


pwalker on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
II

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1055

To amend title 23, United States Code, to extend the Interstate 4R

discretionary program.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 23, 1997

Mr. DURBIN (for himself, Ms. MOSELEY-BRAUN, and Mr. REID of Nevada)

introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the

Committee on Environment and Public Works

A BILL

To amend title 23, United States Code, to extend the

Interstate 4R discretionary program.

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 ‘‘Interstate System Im5 provement Act of 1997’’.

6 SEC. 2. SET ASIDE FOR 4R PROJECTS.

7 Section 118(c)(2)(A) of title 23, United States Code,

8 is amended—

9 (1) in the first sentence—
2

•S 1055 IS

1 (A) by striking ‘‘$54,000,000’’ and all that

2 follows through ‘‘1997’’ and inserting

3 ‘‘$800,000,000 for each fiscal year’’; and

4 (B) by striking ‘‘any highway designated

5 as a part of the Interstate System under section

6 139 and’’;

7 (2) by striking the second sentence; and

8 (3) in the last sentence, by striking ‘‘The re9 mainder of such’’ and inserting ‘‘The’’.

Æ
Case: 1:01-cv-05078 Document #: 83 Filed: 10/02/02 Page 1 of 17 PageID #:556

Case: 1:01-cv-05078 Document #: 83 Filed: 10/02/02 Page 2 of 17 PageID #:557

Case: 1:01-cv-05078 Document #: 83 Filed: 10/02/02 Page 3 of 17 PageID #:558

Case: 1:01-cv-05078 Document #: 83 Filed: 10/02/02 Page 4 of 17 PageID #:559

Case: 1:01-cv-05078 Document #: 83 Filed: 10/02/02 Page 5 of 17 PageID #:560

Case: 1:01-cv-05078 Document #: 83 Filed: 10/02/02 Page 6 of 17 PageID #:561

Case: 1:01-cv-05078 Document #: 83 Filed: 10/02/02 Page 7 of 17 PageID #:562

Case: 1:01-cv-05078 Document #: 83 Filed: 10/02/02 Page 8 of 17 PageID #:563

Case: 1:01-cv-05078 Document #: 83 Filed: 10/02/02 Page 9 of 17 PageID #:564

Case: 1:01-cv-05078 Document #: 83 Filed: 10/02/02 Page 10 of 17 PageID #:565

Case: 1:01-cv-05078 Document #: 83 Filed: 10/02/02 Page 11 of 17 PageID #:566

Case: 1:01-cv-05078 Document #: 83 Filed: 10/02/02 Page 12 of 17 PageID #:567

Case: 1:01-cv-05078 Document #: 83 Filed: 10/02/02 Page 13 of 17 PageID #:568

Case: 1:01-cv-05078 Document #: 83 Filed: 10/02/02 Page 14 of 17 PageID #:569

Case: 1:01-cv-05078 Document #: 83 Filed: 10/02/02 Page 15 of 17 PageID #:570

Case: 1:01-cv-05078 Document #: 83 Filed: 10/02/02 Page 16 of 17 PageID #:571

Case: 1:01-cv-05078 Document #: 83 Filed: 10/02/02 Page 17 of 17 PageID #:572
(15 Misc. Rep. 239.)

#### HOLSTEIN v. CLARK.

(Superior Court of Buffalo,

General Term.

December 23, 1895.)

Appeal—Review of Evidence.

A finding as to fraud on conflicting evidence will not be disturbed on appeal.

Appeal from municipal court.

Action by Christopher H. Holstein against William H. Clark. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals.

Affirmed.

Argued before TITUS, C. J., and HATCH and WHITE, JJ.

Alfred B. Osgoodby, for appellant.

Wood & Gibbons, for respondent.

TITUS, C. J.

This action was brought in the municipal court for fraud in the purchase of a bill of groceries from the plaintiff by the defendant. The purchase of the groceries is admitted, but the fraud is denied. Upon that question the court below found in favor of the defendant. While there is evidence which would have justified a finding of this question against the defendant, we think that the court, having all of the witnesses before it, could determine from their appearance upon the stand, and the general character of their conduct and manner of testifying, which were the more entitled to be believed; and the finding upon this question should not be disturbed, in the absence of such a preponderance of evidence as would lead us, as a matter of law, to reverse the judgment. That condition does not exist in this case, and we think the judgment of the court below should be affirmed, with costs. All concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1041 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1041

   To amend section 5314 of title 49, United States Code, to assist 
     compliance with the transit provisions of the Americans with 
                       Disabilities Act of 1990.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 21, 1997

   Mr. Kerry introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
    referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend section 5314 of title 49, United States Code, to assist 
     compliance with the transit provisions of the Americans with 
                       Disabilities Act of 1990.

    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 ``Accessible Transportation Act of 
1997''.

SEC. 2. ASSISTING COMPLIANCE WITH THE TRANSIT PROVISIONS OF THE 
              AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT.

    (a) In General.--Section 5314(a)(2) of title 49, United States 
Code, is amended by striking ``$2,000,000'' and inserting ``$3,000,000 
in each fiscal year''.
    (b) Reauthorization.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
not less than $3,000,000 is authorized to be appropriated from the Mass 
Transit Account of the Highway Trust Fund for each of fiscal years 1998 
through 2002 for the Secretary of Transportation to carry out section 
5314(a) of title 49, United States Code.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<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>                                          17,793
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    9,037
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         806,508
<DEPRECIATION>                                  54,409
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 786,567
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                        442,156
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     311,099
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   786,567
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                89,841
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   29,430
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                22,644
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              23,275
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 21,978
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             21,978
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (1,500)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    20,478
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .83
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .83
        

</TABLE>
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

 

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

ZALZAR FZE,

Appellant

v.

DIRECTOR/CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THE 

ARMY AND AIR FORCE EXCHANGE SERVICE,

Appellee

______________________ 

2020-2256

______________________ 

Appeal from the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals in Nos. 59616, 60053, 60054, Administrative Judge 

J. Reid Prouty, Administrative Judge Alexander Younger, 

Administrative Judge Richard Shackleford.

______________________ 

JUDGMENT

______________________ 

PAUL D. HENDERSON, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, Washington, DC, argued for appellant. Also 

represented by KRISTIN TAHLER, Los Angeles, CA. 

 DANIEL B. VOLK, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil 

Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, argued for appellee. Also represented by BRIAN 

Case: 20-2256 Document: 39 Page: 1 Filed: 07/21/2021
M. BOYNTON, MARTIN F. HOCKEY, JR., ROBERT EDWARD

KIRSCHMAN, JR.

 ______________________ 

THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is 

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 

 PER CURIAM (NEWMAN, PROST, and CHEN, Circuit 

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

July 21, 2021 

 Date

/s/ Jarrett B. Perlow

Jarrett B. Perlow

Chief Deputy Clerk

Case: 20-2256 Document: 39 Page: 2 Filed: 07/21/2021
EXHIBIT 32.1
 CERTIFICATIONS
  1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2)
    
    The information contained the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and result of operations of the Registrant.
 Date: October 31, 2008
    
    /s/ A. LAURENCE JONES

A. Laurence JonesPresident and Chief Executive OfficerDate: October 31, 2008
    
    /s/ DAVID G. DURHAM

David G. DurhamExecutive Vice President, Chief FinancialOfficer and Treasurer