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

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1324 Referred in House (RFH)]

  1st Session
                                S. 1324

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            November 5, 1997

     Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To deauthorize a portion of the project for navigation, Biloxi Harbor, 
                              Mississippi.

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

SECTION 1. BILOXI HARBOR, MISSISSIPPI.

    The portion of the project for navigation, Biloxi Harbor, 
Mississippi, authorized by the River and Harbor Act of 1960 (74 Stat. 
481), for the Bernard Bayou Channel beginning near the Air Force Oil 
Terminal at approximately navigation mile 2.6 and extending downstream 
to the North-South \1/2\ of Section 30, Township 7 South, Range 10 
West, Harrison County, Mississippi, just west of Kremer Boat Yards, is 
not authorized after the date of enactment of this Act.

            Passed the Senate November 4, 1997.

            Attest:

                                                    GARY SISCO,

                                                             Secretary.
```
#### In the Matter of Charlotte L. Minch, Respondent, v John J. Minch, Appellant.

—In a proceeding pursuant to the Uniform Support of Dependents Law (Domestic Relations Law art 3-A), the husband appeals from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Auperin, J.), entered August 14, 1984, which, *inter alia,*fixed the amount of arrears of alimony and ordered the immediate resumption of alimony payments.

Order affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Since the Uniform Support of Dependents Law (Domestic Relations Law art 3-A) provides an additional or alternate means of enforcing the petitioner’s right to alimony (Domestic Relations Law § 41 [1]), the Family Court did not err in denying the husband’s motion to dismiss this proceeding on the ground that another action was pending for the same relief *(cf. Nichols v Bardua,*74 AD2d 566; *Clay v Clay,*54 AD2d 647). In addition, the court properly ruled that the denial of visitation would not be a defense to a Uniform Support of Dependents Law proceeding, where, as here, there exists no prior court order specifically fixing the terms of visitation *(see, Griffin v Griffin,*89 AD2d 310). Rather, the proper procedure would be for the husband to move for a determination of visitation rights in Tennessee, which has jurisdiction over the child *(see, Griffin v Griffin, supra; Matter of De Filipo v De Filipo,*45 AD2d 710). Mollen, P. J., Gibbons, Thompson and Brown, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 23.1


                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
Form S-8 (Nos. 333-80065, 333-06563, 333-11451, 333-35651, 333-28929, 333-28927,
333-71913, and 333-80963) and the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (Nos.
333-16767, 333-26293, 333-61585, 333-30766, 333-77715, 333-43100, 333-45918, and
333-54816), respectively, of our report dated January 22, 2001, with respect to
the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Secure Computing
Corporation included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended
December 31, 2000.

                                        /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Minneapolis, Minnesota
March 26, 2001
#### Rose Roth et al., Appellants, v William C. Robbins, Respondent.

—In a malpractice action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated July 17, 1984, which granted the defendant’s motion pursuant to CPLR 3212 for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as time barred by the applicable Statute of Limitations.

Order affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated by Justice Graci in his memorandum decision at Special Term.

In addition, we note that an argument raised by the plaintiff on appeal was not raised before Special Term. Therefore, that argument is not properly before this court *(see, Abacus Real Estate Fin. Co. v P.A.R. Constr. & Maintenance Corp.,*115 AD2d 576; 10 Carmody-Wait 2d, NY Prac § 70:300). Nothing in this record inclines us to make an exception in this case. Lazer, J. P., Thompson, Weinstein and Eiber, JJ., concur.
II

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1252

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the amount of

low-income housing credits which may be allocated in each State, and

to index such amount for inflation.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

OCTOBER 3, 1997

Mr. D’AMATO (for himself and Mr. GRAHAM) introduced the following bill;

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase

the amount of low-income housing credits which may

be allocated in each State, and to index such amount

for inflation.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. INCREASE IN STATE CEILING ON LOW-INCOME

4 HOUSING CREDITS.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 42(h)(3)(C)(i) of the In6 ternal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to State housing

7 credit ceiling) is amended by striking ‘‘$1.25’’ and insert8 ing ‘‘$1.75’’.
2

•S 1252 IS

1 (b) ADJUSTMENT OF STATE CEILING FOR IN2 CREASES IN COST-OF-LIVING.—Section 42(h)(3) of the

3 Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to housing credit

4 dollar amount for agencies) is amended by adding at the

5 end the following new subparagraph:

6 ‘‘(H) COST-OF-LIVING ADJUSTMENT.—

7 ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—In the case of a

8 calendar year after 1998, the dollar

9 amount contained in subparagraph (C)(i)

10 shall be increased by an amount equal to—

11 ‘‘(I) such dollar amount, multi12 plied by

13 ‘‘(II) the cost-of-living adjust14 ment determined under section 1(f)(3)

15 for such calendar year by substituting

16 ‘calendar year 1997’ for ‘calendar

17 year 1992’ in subparagraph (B) there18 of.

19 ‘‘(ii) ROUNDING.—If any increase

20 under clause (i) is not a multiple of $1,

21 such increase shall be rounded to the next

22 lowest multiple of $1.’’

23 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

24 this section shall apply to calendar years after 1997.

Æ
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

January 16, 2015

No. 04-13-00529-CV

SCHUHARDT CONSULTING PROFIT SHARING PLAN,

Appellant/Cross-Appellee

v.

DOUBLE KNOBS MOUNTAIN RANCH, INC.

Appellee/Cross-Appellant

From the 38th Judicial District Court, Uvalde County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2011-09-28311-CV-B

Honorable Mickey R. Pennington, Judge Presiding

ORDER

On December 17, 2014, this court issued its opinion and judgment. On January 5, 2015, 

Appellant filed an unopposed first motion for extension of time to file a motion for rehearing 

until February 11, 2015. See TEX. R. APP. P. 49.1, 49.8. 

Appellant’s motion for extension of time is GRANTED. Appellant’s motion for 

rehearing is due to be filed with this court by February 11, 2015.

_________________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

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

court on this 16th day of January, 2015.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
<PAGE>   1
                                   EXHIBIT 21
                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT



                                  JURISDICTION                      OWNED
NAME                              OF INCORPORATION                  BY
----                              ----------------                  ----

Anes, Inc.                        Michigan                          Company

Chapman Security                  Michigan                          Company
 Systems, Inc.

Intercept System                  Michigan                          Company

Tessco Group, Inc.                Michigan                          Company

Europe Auto Equipment S.A.        France                            Company

Code Alarm UK Ltd.                United Kingdom                    Code-Alarm
                                                                    Europe Ltd.

Code Alarm Iberia S.L.            Spain                             Europe Auto

Code Alarm Benolux                Belgium                           Europe Auto

Code-Alarm Europe Ltd.            Ireland                           Company






                                     E-7
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion

should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited

circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-51401

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ALEX JAVIER MORALES-ROMERO

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 2:07-CR-374-ALL

Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the Judgmentin a Criminal Case, Alex Javier Morales-Romero

raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States,

523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty

provision and not a separate criminal offense. United States v. PinedaArrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir. 2007), cert. denied, 128 S. Ct. 872 (2008).

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

June 4, 2008

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 07-51401

2

The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the

judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
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
 Sustainable Agricultural Systems Laboratory: Beltsville, MD
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    USDA Civil Rights Policy StatementSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Northeast Area Beltsville, Maryland (BARC) Beltsville Agricultural Research Center Sustainable Agricultural Systems Laboratory People & Locations







Ray  Weil
                        Sustainable Agricultural Systems Laboratory

                        




                        
                        Collaborator
                        Phone: (301) 504-7199
                        
                        
                        Fax: (Employee information on this page comes from the REE Directory. Please contact your front office staff to update the REE Directory.)


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
##### 



EXHIBIT 10.62
 IDM Pharma, Inc.  2000 Stock Plan
 Restricted Stock Bonus Agreement
   1. Vesting .
 2. Number of Shares .
 3. Securities Law Compliance .
 4. Limitations on Transfer .
 5. Right of Reacquisition .
 6. Effect of Certain Corporate Transactions.




---



##### 



7. Restrictive Legends.
 8. Award not a Service Contract .
 9. Withholding Obligations.
 (a)
 (b)
 10. Notices .
 11. Miscellaneous .
 (a)
 (b)
 (c)




---



##### 



12. Governing Plan Document .




---



##### 



IDM Pharma, Inc.  Restricted Stock Bonus Grant Notice  ( 2000 Stock Plan)
  Participant:
    
    Emile Loria, M.D.Date of Grant:
    
    December 30, 2005Vesting Commencement Date:
    
    December 30, 2005Number of Shares Subject to Award:
    
    50,000Consideration:
    
    Participants Past Services
 Vesting Schedule:
    
    100% of the shares will vest immediately.
 Additional Terms/Acknowledgements:
 Other Agreements:
    None
 IDM Pharma, Inc.
    
    Participant:By:
    
    /s/ Robert De Vaere
    
    /s/ Emile LoriaSignature
    
    
    
    SignatureTitle:
    
    CFO
    
    Date:
    
    January 4, 2006Date:
    
    January 4, 2006
 Attachments:
    
    Restricted Stock Bonus Agreement 2000 Stock Plan.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                CERTIFICATION 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 of Wolverine Tube, Inc. on Form 10-K for
the period ending December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Dennis J. Horowitz, Chief
Executive Officer of Wolverine Tube, Inc., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that to the best of my knowledge and belief:

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

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

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

/s/  Dennis J. Horowitz

Dennis J. Horowitz
Chief Executive Officer
March 10, 2004
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information  extracted  from  the
Consolidated  Statement of Financial Condition at September 30, 1998 (Unaudited)
and the Consolidated Statement of Operations for the Nine Months Ended September
30, 1998  (Unaudited)  and is  qualified  in its  entirety by  reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                                          0001033643
<NAME>                       OCWEN ASSET INVESTMENT CORP.
<MULTIPLIER>                                        1,000
<CURRENCY>                                            USD
       
<S>                                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                       9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                  SEP-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                         1
<CASH>                                             18,330
<SECURITIES>                                      395,495
<RECEIVABLES>                                           0
<ALLOWANCES>                                            0
<INVENTORY>                                             0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                        0
<PP&E>                                                  0
<DEPRECIATION>                                          0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    910,398
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              21,408
<BONDS>                                           617,640
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 190
<PREFERRED>                                             0
<COMMON>                                                0
<OTHER-SE>                                        242,791
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      910,398
<SALES>                                                 0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   57,701
<CGS>                                                   0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                           0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   15,697
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                      557
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 21,235
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (12,112)
<INCOME-TAX>                                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (12,112)
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       615
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (11,497)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       (0.61)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       (0.61)
        
<FN>
</FN>

</TABLE>
### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN NO. 03-0 8 -00 450 -CR M ic hae l Wo odr ing , A ppe lla nt

v. The State of Texas, App ellee F ROM THE DISTRICT CO URT OF HAY S COUNTY , 22ND JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. CR-08 -00 16 , HO NORAB LE WI LLIAM HENRY , JUDGE PRESIDI NG

M E MO R

A N D UM O P I N I O N Michae l Woodring seeks to appe al from his convic tion for drivingwhile intox icated. The tri al court certifie d that this is a plea bar g ain ca se and that Woodring has no r ight of appea l beca use he w aived that r ight. This appe al is dismis sed. SeeTex. R. App. P . 25.2(a) (2), ( d).

G. Alan Waldrop, Just ice Be fore J ustices Patterson, Waldrop and H enson Dismissed Filed: Oc tober 10, 2008 Do No t Pu

bli sh
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-16-00614-CV

In re The Commitment of Santos Gomez III

On appeal from the

103rd District Court of Cameron County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 2016-DCL-00365-D

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court be affirmed. The Court orders the 

judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED. Costs of the appeal are adjudged against 

appellant although he is exempt from payment due to his affidavit of inability to pay 

costs.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

December 14, 2017
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the previously filed
Registration Statements (Form S-8 Nos. 333-25537, 333-38302 and 333-38298)
pertaining to the 1995 Stock Option Plan and 1996 Non-employee Director Stock
Option Plan, 2000 Employee Stock Compensation Plan, and Employee Stock Purchase
Plan and (Form S-3 Nos. 333-87721, 333-93219, 333-95353, 333-72396, 333-59954,
and 333-32000 and Form S-3MEF No. 333-91499) of our report dated January 23,
2003, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of ILEX Oncology,
Inc. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31,
2002.

                                                   /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP


San Antonio, Texas
March 12, 2003
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                              62
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     4279
<ALLOWANCES>                                       465
<INVENTORY>                                       2727
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  7056
<PP&E>                                            6941
<DEPRECIATION>                                    5033
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   12351
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             6402
<BONDS>                                          18006
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                       7351
<COMMON>                                         12213
<OTHER-SE>                                     (31621)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     12351
<SALES>                                          41660
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 41660
<CGS>                                            29276
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    42809
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  4863
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                1622
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (6012)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (205)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (5807)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (6514)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.81)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.81)
        

</TABLE>