alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
S. 1683

One Hundred Fifth Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,

the twenty-seventh day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-eight

An Act

To transfer administrative jurisdiction over part of the Lake Chelan National Recreation Area from the Secretary of the Interior to the Secretary of Agriculture

for inclusion in the Wenatchee National Forest.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENTS, LAKE CHELAN NATIONAL

RECREATION AREA AND WENATCHEE NATIONAL FOREST, WASHINGTON.

(a) BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENTS.—

(1) LAKE CHELAN NATIONAL RECREATION AREA.—The boundary of the Lake Chelan National Recreation Area, established

by section 202 of Public Law 90–544 (16 U.S.C. 90a–1), is

hereby adjusted to exclude a parcel of land and waters consisting of approximately 88 acres, as depicted on the map entitled

‘‘Proposed Management Units, North Cascades, Washington’’,

numbered NP–CAS–7002A, originally dated October 1967, and

revised July 13, 1994.

(2) WENATCHEE NATIONAL FOREST.—The boundary of the

Wenatchee National Forest is hereby adjusted to include the

parcel of land and waters described in paragraph (1).

(3) AVAILABILITY OF MAP.—The map referred to in paragraph (1) shall be on file and available for public inspection

in the offices of the superintendent of the Lake Chelan National

Recreation Area and the Director of the National Park Service,

Department of the Interior, and in the office of the Chief

of the Forest Service, Department of Agriculture.

(b) TRANSFER OF ADMINISTRATIVE JURISDICTION.—Administrative jurisdiction over Federal land and waters in the parcel covered

by the boundary adjustments in subsection (a) is transferred from

the Secretary of the Interior to the Secretary of Agriculture, and

the transferred land and waters shall be managed by the Secretary

of Agriculture in accordance with the laws and regulations pertaining to the National Forest System.
S. 1683—2

(c) LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND.—For purposes of

section 7 of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965

(16 U.S.C. 460l–9), the boundaries of the Wenatchee National Forest, as adjusted by subsection (a), shall be considered to be the

boundaries of the Wenatchee National Forest as of January 1,

1965.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
POWER OF ATTORNEY




         KNOWN  ALL MEN BY THESE  PRESENTS,  that the  undersigned,  an  officer
and/or  director of COMSOUTH  BANKSHARES,  INC.,  a South  Carolina  corporation
(hereinafter  referred to as the "Company"),  does hereby constitute and appoint
Harry R. Brown and Arthur M. Swanson,  respectively, and each of them severally,
with full power of substitution,  his true and lawful attorneys and agents (each
to execute any and all  instruments  which said  attorneys  and agents or any of
them may deem  necessary  or  advisable to enable the Company to comply with the
Securities  Exchange  Act of  1934,  as  amended  (the  "Act"),  and any  rules,
regulations  and  requirements  of the Securities and Exchange  Commission  (the
"Commission") in respect thereof, in connection with the filing under the Act of
the Company's  Annual  Report on Form 10-K for the  Company's  fiscal year ended
December 31, 1995,  including  all  amendments  thereto (the "Form  10-K"),  and
including  specifically,  but without  limiting the generality of the foregoing,
the power and authority to sign for and on behalf of the undersigned the name of
the undersigned as officer and/or director of the Company to the Form 10-K filed
with the  Commission and to any instrument or document filed as a part of, as an
exhibit  to, or in  connection  with said Form 10-K;  and the  undersigned  does
hereby  ratify and confirm as his own act and deed all that said  attorneys  and
agents, and each of them, shall do or cause to be done by virtue thereof.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has subscribed these presents, this
____ day of March, 1997.


                              /s/W. Carlyle Blakeney, Jr. - March 10, 1997
                              /s/R. Lee Burrows, Jr. - March 17, 1997
                              /s/Mason R. Chrisman - March 10, 1997
                              /s/Charles R. Jackson - March 10, 1997
                              /s/J. Michael Kapp - March 10, 1997
                              /s/LaVonne N. Phillips - March 13, 1997
                              /s/John C. B. Smith, Jr. - March 13, 1997
                              /s/Arthur P. Swanson - March 12, 1997





                                       53
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 11**  **- 6304** 

ROBERT LEE WALSH , Petitioner

- Appellant ,
v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; DISTRICT COURT, Clerk of Charleston Division; MILDRED L. RIVERA, Warden FCI Estill , Respondents

- Appellees
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Anderson
. Richard M
. Gergel , District Judge. ( 8:10

- cv - 00085

- RMG )

Submitted : April 6, 2012 Decided: April 13, 2012

Before NIEMEYER and GREGORY , Circuit Judges , and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge
.
Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. Robert Lee Walsh, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Robert Lee Walsh , a federal p riso ner, appeals the district court’ s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing Walsh’s 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241 (West 2006 & Supp. 2011) petition. Walsh has also filed a motion to supplement his informal brief. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant in part and deny in part his motion to supplement his informal brief and affirm the district court ’s judgment
. * Walsh v. United States , No. 8:10

- cv - 00085

- RMG (D.S .C. Oct. 2 8, 20 1 0 ). We disp ense 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

* Absent exceptional circumstances, this court generally does not consider arguments raised for the first time on appeal. Muth v. United States , 1 F.3d 246, 250 (4th Cir. 1993)
.
EXHIBIT 99

                          Independent Auditors' Report



The Board of Directors and Stockholders
InfraCorps Inc.:


           We have audited the consolidated balance sheet of InfraCorps Inc.,
(formerly ETS International, Inc.) and subsidiaries as of March 31, 1998, and
the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity
(deficit) and cash flows for the ten-month period ended March 31, 1998 and year
ended May 31, 1997. These consolidated financial statements are the
responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our audits.

           We conducted our audits in accordance with generally accepted
auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit
to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free
of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence
supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit
also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates
made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement
presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our
opinion.

           In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to
above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of
InfraCorps Inc., (formerly ETS International, Inc.) and subsidiaries as of March
31, 1998, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for the
ten-month period ended March 31, 1998 and year ended May 31, 1997, in conformity
with generally accepted accounting principles.

           The consolidated financial statements have been prepared assuming
that the Company will continue as a going concern. As discussed in note 19 to
the consolidated financial statements, the Company has suffered losses from
operations and has a net capital deficiency that raise substantial doubt about
its ability to continue as a going concern. Management's plans in regard to
these matters are also described in note 19. The consolidated financial
statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of
this uncertainty.


                                                                    KPMG LLP


Roanoke, Virginia
May 8, 1998
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON 

PORTLAND DIVISION 

Timothy Mezentsev, Case No.: 6:14-cv-01988-SI 

Plaintiff, 

V. ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT 

Carolyn Colvin , Commissioner, 

Social Security Administration 

Defendant. 

After considering the Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss it is hereby: 

ORDERED that Plaintiff's complaint be dismissed. 

IT IS SO ORDERED this f day dvr~.f / I 2015. 

Proposed Order submitted: Date: August 4, 2015 

/s/ George J. Wall 

George J. Wall, OSB #93451 

gwall@eastpdxlaw.com 

Phone No.: 503-236-0068 

Fax No.: 503-236-0028 

Attorney for Plaintiff, Timothy Mezentsev 

Page 3 - MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT 

Case 6:14-cv-01988-SI Document 22 Filed 08/04/15 Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON 

DAVID R. WESTMORELAND, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

CAROLYN W. COLVIN, 

Acting Commissioner of the Social Security 

Administration, 

Defendant. 

MCSHANE, Judge: 

Civ. No. 1:15-cv-00241-MC 

ORDER APPROVING 

ATTORNEYS FEES PURSUANT 

TO 28 U.S.C. § 2412 (EAJA) 

After considering Plaintiff's Motion (ECF No. 24) and the Defendant's objections (ECF 

No. 26), this Court hereby GRANTS Plaintiff's First Application for Fees Pursuant to EAJA 

Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C § 2412 (ECF No. 24), and Orders 

that the Commissioner shall pay Plaintiffs attorneys the sum of $6,485.29 ($6,468.64 for 

attorney's fees and $16.65 for costs), upon verification that Plaintiff has no debt to the 

government which qualifies for offset against the awarded fees, pursuant to the reasoning in 

Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 130 S. Ct. 2521, 2527 (2010) (EAJA awards fees subject "to a 

federal administrative offset if the Litigant has outstanding federal debts") for full settlement of 

all claims for fees under EAJ A. 

1-0RDERAPPROVING ATTORNEYS FEES PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 2412 (EAJA) 

Case 1:15-cv-00241-MC Document 28 Filed 12/29/16 Page 1 of 2
If Plaintiff has no such federal debt, payment of $6,485 .29 shall be made to Plaintiffs 

attorney, Drew L. Johnson, PC, and mailed to his office at 1700 Valley River Drive, Eugene, 

OR 97401. If Plaintiff has such debt, the check for any remaining funds after offset shall be 

made out to Plaintiff and mailed to counsel's office at the address noted above. 

IT IS SO ORDERED this ~ ~ day of December, 2016. 

\. __ 

Michael J. Mc Shane 

United States District Judge 

2- ORDER APPROVING ATTORNEYS FEES PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 2412 (EAJA) 

Case 1:15-cv-00241-MC Document 28 Filed 12/29/16 Page 2 of 2
Mary-Anne S. Rayburn, OSB No. 803680 

Email: mrayburn@gordon-polscer.com 

GORDON & POLSCER, L.L.C. 

Suite 650 

9755 S.W. Barnes Road 

Portland, OR 97225 

Telephone: (503) 242-2922 

Facsimile: (503) 242-1264 

Of Attorneys for Defendant Tiffin Motorhomes, Inc. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF OREGON 

PORTLAND DIVISION 

CRAIG LOWENBERG, Case No. 3:15-cv-00211-SI 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

B YOUNG RV, a Oregon company; TIFFIN 

MOTOR HOME, INC.; an Alabama 

corporation; COMMAND ELECTRONICS, 

INC., a Michigan corporation, and RLI 

INSURANCE COMP ANY, an Illinois 

corporation, 

Defendants. 

STIPULATED GENERAL JUDGMENT 

OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE 

Based upon the stipulation of the parties that a general judgment of dismissal with 

prejudice of plaintiffs claims against all Defendants be entered without costs to any party, IT IS 

HEREBY 

Ill 

Ill 

STIPULATED GENERAL JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL WITH 

PREJUDICE 

Page 1 

Case 3:15-cv-00211-SI Document 52 Filed 09/13/16 Page 1 of 2
ORDERED AND DECREED that a General Judgment of Dismissal with Prejudice of 

Plaintiffs claims against all Defendants is hereby entered without costs to any party. 

fs.,. 

DA TED this ~ day of L--; 2016. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED: 

DATED this 9th day of September, 2016 

MALONEY LAUERSDORF REINER, P.C. 

By: Isl Andrew C. Lauersdorf 

Andrew C. Lauersdorf, OSB#980739 

Attorney for Plaintiff Craig Lowenberg 

DATED this 9th day of September, 2016 

COSGRAVE VERGEER KESTER, LLP 

By: Isl Nicole M Nowlin 

Nicole M. Nowlin, OSB#OS 1316 

Attorney for Defendant 

Command Electronics, Inc. 

DATED this 9th day of September, 2016 

BETTS PATTERSON & MINES, PS 

By: Isl Jeffrey S. Tindal 

Jeffrey S. Tindal, WSB#29286 

Pro Hae Vice Attorney for 

Defendant RLI Insurance Company 

DATED this 9th day of September, 2016 

GORDON & POLSCER, LLC 

By: Isl Marv-Anne S. Rayburn 

Mary-Anne S. Rayburn, OSB 803680 

Attorney for Defendant Tiffin Motorhomes, 

Inc. 

DATED this 9th day of September, 2016 

SPOONER & MUCH, PC 

By: Isl Ralph C. Spooner 

Ralph C. Spooner. OSB#73288 

Attorney for Defendant BYRV, Inc. dba 

B. Young RV 

STIPULATED GENERAL JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL WITH 

PREJUDICE 

Page2 

Case 3:15-cv-00211-SI Document 52 Filed 09/13/16 Page 2 of 2
----

----

|   | (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 result of operations of the Company. |

|   | /S/Lawrence A. Gyenes      |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------|
|   | Lawrence A. Gyenes                                  |
|   | Chief Financial Officer                             |
|   | December 28, 2010                                   |

----

----
Petition for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Memorandum Opinion filed May

2, 2024.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-24-00311-CV

IN RE TAYLOR C. MOSS, Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

WRIT OF MANDAMUS

Probate Court No. 1

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 484,673

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On April 30, 2024, relator Taylor C. Moss filed a petition for writ of 

mandamus in this Court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221; see also Tex. R. 

App. P. 52. In the petition, relator asks this Court to compel the Honorable Jerry 

W. Simoneaux, presiding judge of the Probate Court No. 1 of Harris County, to 
2

vacate the trial court’s April 30, 2024 order granting plaintiffs’ motion to compel

oral and video deposition of relator in post judgment enforcement action.

Relator has not established that he is entitled to mandamus relief. 

Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. 

PER CURIAM 

Panel consists of Justices Wise, Hassan, and Poissant.
# C_2005262EN.01000301.xml

| 21.10.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 262/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.10.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 262/3

---

Publication of decisions by Member States to grant or revoke operating licenses pursuant to Article 13(4) of Regulation (EEC) No 2407/92 on licensing of air carriers (1)
   (2)

1

2

(2005/C 262/03)

(Text with EEA relevance)

SPAIN

Operating licences granted

Category A:   Operating licences without the restriction of Article 5(7)(a) of Regulation (EEC) No 2407/92

| Name of air carrier | Address of air carrier | Permitted to carry | Decision effective since |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| TAG AVIATION ESPAÑA, S.L. | c/Miguel Ángel, 6 |
| Bajo-28010 MADRID |

Name of air carrier

Address of air carrier

Permitted to carry

Decision effective since

TAG AVIATION ESPAÑA, S.L.

c/Miguel Ángel, 6

Bajo-28010 MADRID

passengers, mail, cargo

22.9.2005

---

(1)  OJ L 240, 24.8.1992, p. 1.

1

(2)  Communicated to the European Commission before 31.8.2005.

2

---
Case 3:14-cv-01670-AC Document 4 Filed 10/23/14 Page 1 of 14
Case 3:14-cv-01670-AC Document 4 Filed 10/23/14 Page 2 of 14
Case 3:14-cv-01670-AC Document 4 Filed 10/23/14 Page 3 of 14
Case 3:14-cv-01670-AC Document 4 Filed 10/23/14 Page 4 of 14
Case 3:14-cv-01670-AC Document 4 Filed 10/23/14 Page 5 of 14
Case 3:14-cv-01670-AC Document 4 Filed 10/23/14 Page 6 of 14
Case 3:14-cv-01670-AC Document 4 Filed 10/23/14 Page 7 of 14
Case 3:14-cv-01670-AC Document 4 Filed 10/23/14 Page 8 of 14
Case 3:14-cv-01670-AC Document 4 Filed 10/23/14 Page 9 of 14
Case 3:14-cv-01670-AC Document 4 Filed 10/23/14 Page 10 of 14
Case 3:14-cv-01670-AC Document 4 Filed 10/23/14 Page 11 of 14
Case 3:14-cv-01670-AC Document 4 Filed 10/23/14 Page 12 of 14
Case 3:14-cv-01670-AC Document 4 Filed 10/23/14 Page 13 of 14
Case 3:14-cv-01670-AC Document 4 Filed 10/23/14 Page 14 of 14
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Sergio David, Appellant.

[942 NYS2d 881] —

Application by the ap*902pellant for a writ of error coram nobis to vacate, on the ground of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, a decision and order of this Court dated September 15, 2009 *(.People v David,*65 AD3d 1163 [2009]), affirming a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered January 31, 2007.

Ordered that the application is denied.

The appellant has failed to establish that he was denied the effective assistance of appellate counsel *(see Jones v Barnes,*463 US 745 [1983]; *People v Stultz,*2 NY3d 277 [2004]). Mastro, A.P.J., Rivera, Eng and Lott, JJ., concur.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Crim. No. 01-30039-HO 

Plaintiff, ORDER 

v. 

JOSE PULIDO-VARGAS, 

Defendant. 

After defendant pleaded guilty to illegal re-entry in 

violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326, the court sentenced defendant on 

January 10, 2002, to a 70-month term of imprisonment. Defendant 

moves to vacate or correct his sentence. 

Discussion 

Defendant argues that the court impermissibly enhanced the 

guideline base offense level by sixteen levels, based on a prior 

aggravated felony conviction not proved to a jury beyond a 
reasonable doubt. The fact of prior conviction may be determined 

by the court at sentencing. United States v. Ouintana-Ouintana, 

383 F.3d 1052 (gth Cir. 2004) . 

Conclusion 

Based on the foregoing, defendant's motion to vacate or 

correct sentence [#54] is denied. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED this of June, 

2 - ORDER
03-14-00215-CR

 APPELLANT’S MOTION TO FILE AMENDED BRIEF

To the Honorable Court:

 COMES NOW counsel for Jonathan Porterie, the Defendant in the above 

styled and numbered cause, and requests leave to file an amended. In support of this 

motion, Defendant shows the following.

I.

The brief in this case was transmitted to the Court on December 22, 2014, with 

a motion for leave to file a late brief and filed by the Court on December 29, 2014. 

II.

On January 8, 2015, counsel conferred with Brian Erskine, counsel for the 

State. Mr. Erskine informed counsel that he believed an important issue had not been 

raised in Appellant’s brief. Upon review, counsel believes that Mr. Erskine was 

correct and appreciates being informed of this important matter. 

JONATHAN PORTERIE § IN THE TEXAS THIRD

§

v. § COURT OF APPEALS

§

STATE OF TEXAS § AUSTIN, TEXAS

ACCEPTED

03-14-00215-CR

3723796

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

1/11/2015 5:43:16 PM

JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERK

 FILED IN 3rd COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 1/12/2015 12:00:00 AM JEFFREY D. KYLE Clerk
III.

Counsel has added one issue to the brief, the issue raised by Mr. Erskine. The 

substantive amendment effects only the conviction in appellate cause 03-14-00214-

CR, trial court cause CR-13-0920. Amendments to the brief concern only the 

addition of the new issue. Counsel has not edited, corrected, or modified any other 

substantive section. Counsel has not even corrected any typographical errors in those 

sections. 

 The modifications include the addition of a new issue (new Issue I), a 

renumbering of the remaining issues, and changes to the table of contents, index of 

authorities, and other ministerial sections of the brief. 

PRAYER

 Therefore, Appellant prays that the Court grant this motion and file the 

amended brief in this case. Counsel requests that the originally filed brief be struck.

 Respectfully submitted,

 

 /s/ James Gerard McDermott, II

 James Gerard McDermott, II, Attorney

 THOMPSON SALINAS RICKERS & MCDERMOTT, LLP

 8140 N. Mopac, Westpark 4, Suite 250

 Austin TX 78759

 512.201.4099

 512.298.1129 (fax)

 james@centraltexaslawyers.com

2
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 This is to certify that on January 11, 2014, a true and correct copy of the 

above and foregoing document was served by electronic service and by email on: 

 Brian Clarke Erskine

 State Bar No. 24074182

 Assistant Hays County District Attorney

 712 South Stagecoach Trail, Suite 2057

 San Marcos TX 78666. 

 

 /s/ James Gerard McDermott, II

James Gerard McDermott, II, Attorney

3