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

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1903 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1903

  To amend the Tariff Act of 1930 to eliminate the consumptive demand 
  exception to prohibition on importation of goods made with convict 
   labor, forced labor, or indentured labor, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 21, 2015

Mr. Kind (for himself, Mr. Levin, Mr. Rangel, and Mr. Lewis) introduced 
  the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and 
                                 Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Tariff Act of 1930 to eliminate the consumptive demand 
  exception to prohibition on importation of goods made with convict 
   labor, forced labor, or indentured labor, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. ELIMINATION OF CONSUMPTIVE DEMAND EXCEPTION TO PROHIBITION 
              ON IMPORTATION OF GOODS MADE WITH CONVICT LABOR, FORCED 
              LABOR, OR INDENTURED LABOR; REPORT.

    (a) Elimination of Consumptive Demand Exception.--
            (1) In general.--Section 307 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 
        U.S.C. 1307) is amended by striking ``The provisions of this 
        section'' and all that follows through ``of the United 
        States.''.
            (2) Effective date.--The amendment made by paragraph (1) 
        shall take effect on the date that is 15 days after the date of 
        the enactment of this Act.
    (b) Report Required.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the Commissioner of 
U.S. Customs and Border Protection shall submit to the Committee on 
Finance of the Senate and the Committee on Ways and Means of the House 
of Representatives a report on compliance with section 307 of the 
Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1307) that includes the following:
            (1) The number of instances in which merchandise was denied 
        entry pursuant to that section during the 1-year period 
        preceding the submission of the report.
            (2) A description of the merchandise denied entry pursuant 
        to that section.
            (3) Such other information as the Commissioner considers 
        appropriate with respect to monitoring and enforcing compliance 
        with that section.
                                 <all>
```
# C_2006107EN.01000601.xml

| 6.5.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 107/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.5.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 107/6

---

COM documents other than legislative proposals adopted by the Commission

(2006/C 107/06)

| Document | Part | Date | Title |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| COM(2004) 415 | | 10.6.2004 | Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: European Action Plan for Organic Food and Farming |
| COM(2004) 438 | | 21.6.2004 | Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: Promoting more environmentally-friendly fishing methods: the role of technical conservation measures |
| COM(2004) 620 | | 30.9.2004 | Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the implementation of Council Recommendation 98/561/EC of 24 September 1998 on European cooperation in quality assurance in higher education |

Document

Part

Date

Title

COM(2004) 415

10.6.2004

Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: European Action Plan for Organic Food and Farming

COM(2004) 438

21.6.2004

Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: Promoting more environmentally-friendly fishing methods: the role of technical conservation measures

COM(2004) 620

30.9.2004

Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the implementation of Council Recommendation 98/561/EC of 24 September 1998 on European cooperation in quality assurance in higher education

These texts are available on EUR-Lex: http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex/

---
# L_2009291EN.01001901.xml

| 7.11.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 291/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.11.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 291/19

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1066/2009

of 5 November 2009

establishing special measures as regards the private storage aid for pigmeat laid down by Regulation (EC) No 1329/2008

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 826/2008 of 20 August 2008 laying down common rules for the granting of private storage aid for certain agricultural products (2), and in particular Article 23(3) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | An examination of the situation has indicated a risk that there will be an excessively large number of applications for the private storage aid scheme for pigmeat introduced by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1329/2008 of 22 December 2008 adopting emergency support measures for the pigmeat market in form of private storage aid in part of the United Kingdom (3). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

An examination of the situation has indicated a risk that there will be an excessively large number of applications for the private storage aid scheme for pigmeat introduced by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1329/2008 of 22 December 2008 adopting emergency support measures for the pigmeat market in form of private storage aid in part of the United Kingdom (3).

| (2) | Therefore, it is necessary to suspend application of the scheme established by Regulation (EC) No 1329/2008 and reject the applications in question. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Therefore, it is necessary to suspend application of the scheme established by Regulation (EC) No 1329/2008 and reject the applications in question.

| (3) | In order to avoid speculation the Regulation should enter into force on the day following its publication, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

In order to avoid speculation the Regulation should enter into force on the day following its publication,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

1.   Application of Regulation (EC) No 1329/2008 is hereby suspended for the period 8 November 2009 to 13 November 2009. Applications to conclude contracts submitted during this period shall not be accepted.

2.   Applications submitted from 3 November 2009, whose acceptance would have been decided during the period referred to in the first paragraph, are hereby rejected.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 5 November 2009.

For the Commission

Jean-Luc DEMARTY

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 223, 21.8.2008, p. 3.

2

(3)  
  OJ L 345, 23.12.2008, p. 56.

3

---
COLORADO RIVER NEAR GRANBY, COLatitude: 40.121Longitude: -105.901Elevation: 7960

COLORADO RIVER NEAR GRANBY, CO

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Never Summer Site Page...



Never Summer

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Fool Creek Site Page...



Fool Creek

Courtesy NRCS - Go to High Lonesome Site Page...



High Lonesome

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Sawtooth Site Page...



Sawtooth

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Arrow Site Page...



Arrow

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Bear Lake Site Page...



Bear Lake

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Berthoud Summit Site Page...



Berthoud Summit

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Lake Irene Site Page...



Lake Irene

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Phantom Valley Site Page...



Phantom Valley

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Stillwater Creek Site Page...



Stillwater Creek

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Willow Creek Pass Site Page...



Willow Creek Pass

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Jones Pass Site Page...



Jones Pass
#### MANNING, Respondent, v. WEST et al., Appellants.

(City Court of New York, General Term.

November 30, 1896.)

Action by James S. Manning against Charles G. West and others. Cantor & Van. Schaick, for appellants. Henry Pressprich, for respondent.

CONLAN, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment entered upon a verdict of the jury at a trial term against the defendants, and in favor of the plaintiff, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial. The action is brought to recover the purchase price of a gas engine claimed to have been sold by the plaintiff to the defendants, and put up in their buildings on the corner of Martin and Washington streets, in the city of New York, in the year 1894. There is a conflict as to what was the price contracted for. The plaintiff 'contended that he was called upon to, furnish an eight horse power Otto gas engine, with the necessary gas pipes and fittings, in complete running order, ready for the belting, for the sum of $850, workmanship and materials guarantied for one year, with the customary good usage on the user’s part. The defendants contended that they were to be furnished with an engine of the kind described, capable of lifting 8,000 pounds 26 feet in 1 minute, and that the engine delivered did not come up to these requirements. The contract contended for by the plaintiff is in the form of some letters sent to the defendants, and which, it is proper to state, did not make mention of the lifting power or speed of the engine called for. The question as to what was the contract between the parties was one of the questions submitted to the jury under the charge of the trial justice, and we are to assume that the defendants were satisfied with this disposition of the matter, for no exception was taken to the charge in that respect. The only other question in the case was whether the work was done in a workmanlike manner, and there was likewise a conflict of evidence on this question. We are not called upon to say, at least in this case, whether or not there was a preponderance of evidence on the part of either party to the contest, and there was no request made to take the case from the consideration of the jury, and no motion made to dismiss because of the want of sufficient evidence to send the case to the jury, and no exception- taken by the defendants to the very fair charge of the trial judge. We have examined the whole case with care, and are not prepared to say that the exclusion of any evidence upon the plaintiff’s objections was at all prejudicial to the defendants, and with the finding of the jury upon all the questions submitted we are disposed to agree there was a conflict of evidence, and it was the exclusive province of the jury to determine that conflict. They have determined it, and, it appears, adverse to the defendants. With that disposition of the matter we are not disposed to interfere, and the judgment and order appealed from are hereby affirmed, with costs. Judgment and order appealed from affirmed, with costs.
Case 3:16-mj-00004 Document 54 Filed 02/02/16 Page 1 of 2
Case 3:16-mj-00004 Document 54 Filed 02/02/16 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                              OCT-1-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         164,211
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               66,882,989
<ALLOWANCES>                               (2,342,360)
<INVENTORY>                                    564,250
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         343,108
<DEPRECIATION>                                 195,330
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              69,765,618
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       64,028,671
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        39,450
<OTHER-SE>                                   9,602,421
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                69,765,618
<SALES>                                      2,893,208
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,893,208
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,246,163
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               465,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             583,427
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                598,618
<INCOME-TAX>                                   239,432
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            359,186
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   359,186
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.09
        










</TABLE>
GCMRC, Cooperator, and Tribal River Trips and Field Activities 

Occurred or Planned January 1 through Novemeber 2023 

Launch Take 

out Project Number, Agency, and Project Description Location

1-Feb 6-Feb Project H, GCMRC, Lees Ferry Trout Population Monitoring Glen Canyon

15-Feb 3-Mar Project A, GCMRC, Water Quality and Sediment Monitoring Grand Canyon

7-Mar 10-Mar Project H, AGFD, Lees Ferry Fish Population Monitoring Glen Canyon

1-Apr 14-Apr Project I, AGFD, Mainstem Nonnative Fish Monitoring Grand Canyon

5-Apr 10-Apr Project H, GCMRC, Lees Ferry Trout Population Monitoring Glen Canyon

13-Apr 28-Apr Project F, GCMRC, Aquatic Food Base Monitoring Grand Canyon

18-Apr 28-Apr Project G, USFWS, LCR Humpback Chub Monitoring Little Colorado 

River

21-Apr 8-May Project D, GCMRC Cultural Resources Monitoring Grand Canyon

26-Apr 16-May Project H, GCMRC, Juvenile Humpback Chub Monitoring Grand Canyon

3-May 12-May Navajo Nation Cultural Resources Monitoring Grand Canyon

11-May 24-May Project I, AGFD, Mainstem Nonnative Fish Monitoring Grand Canyon

16-May 26-May Project G, USFWS, LCR Humpback Chub Monitoring Little Colorado 

River

20-May 30-May Pueblo of Zuni Cultural Resources Monitoring Grand Canyon

3-Jun 12-Jun Hualapai Nation Cultural Resources Monitoring Grand Canyon

8-Jun 23-Jun Project F, GCMRC, Grand Canyon Youth Partners in Science Grand Canyon

17-Jun 26-Jun Southern Paiute Consortium Cultural Resources Monitoring Grand Canyon

22-Jun 3-Jul Project G, GCMRC, LCR Humpback Chub Monitoring Little Colorado 

River

29-Jun 30-Jun Project G, GCMRC, Juvenile Humpback Chub Monitoring in 

Lees Ferry Glen Canyon

1-Jul 20-Jul Project H, GCMRC, Juvenile Humpback Chub Monitoring Grand Canyon

8-Jul 17-Jul Project F, GCMRC, Grand Canyon Youth Partners in Science Grand Canyon

10-Jul 14-Jul Project H, AGFD, Lees Ferry Fish Population Monitoring Glen Canyon

13-Jul 28-Jul Project F, GCMRC, Grand Canyon Youth Partners in Science Grand Canyon

20-Jul 31-Jul Project G, USFWS Seining trip TBD Grand Canyon

11-Aug 14-Aug Project C, Terrestrial Vegetation Monitoring Glen Canyon

16-Aug 1-Sep Project A, GCMRC, Water Quality and Sediment Monitoring Grand Canyon
19-Aug 28-Aug Hopi Cultural Resources Monitoring Grand Canyon

26-Aug 11-Sept Project C, Ground-based Riparian Vegetation Monitoring Grand Canyon

1-Sep 19-Sep Project G, USFWS, Monitoring HBC Aggregation Abundance 

and Distribution Grand Canyon

7-Sep 22-Sep Geomorphology Study (not amp funded) Grand Canyon

9-Sept 13-Sept Project H, GCMRC, Lees Ferry Trout Population Monitoring Glen Canyon

12-Sept 22-Sept Project G, USFWS, LCR Humpback Chub Monitoring Little Colorado 

River

30-Sept 16-Oct Project B, Campsite Sandbar Monitoring Grand Canyon

4-Oct 24-Oct Project H, GCMRC, Juvenile Humpback Chub Monitoring Grand Canyon

16-Oct 20-Oct Project H, AGFD, Lees Ferry Fish Population Monitoring Glen Canyon

17-Oct 27-Oct Project G, USFWS, LCR Humpback Chub Monitoring Little Colorado 

River

31-Oct 3-Nov AZGFD PF up Western Grand 

Canyon

9-Nov 13-Nov Project H, GCMRC, Lees Ferry Trout Population Monitoring Glen Canyon
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-14-0001252 21-MAY-2015 11:07 AM
## NUMBER 13

- 22

- 00 488

- C V

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

– EDINBURG

IN THE INTEREST OF E.M.N., A CHILD.

On appeal from the 444th District Court

of Cameron C ounty, Texas.



## MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Long oria and Silva

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Longoria

This appeal arises from the trial court’s modification of child support. Appellant

Travis Norris attempted to appeal the trial court’s order; however, his notice of appeal is

premature as the clerk’s record indicates no order has been entered.

The record indicates that an order regarding child support was entered on August

4, 2022, and appellant filed a request for a de novo hearing in the trial court on August 8,

2022. The record also indicates that the trial court n oticed a de novo hearing to be held2 September 13, 2022, and according to appellant’s October 13, 2022 notice of appeal, an

order modifying child support was rendered.

Upon review of the documents before the Court, it appears there is no final,

appealable o rder. On January 3, 2023, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant of this

defect so that steps could be taken to correct the defect, if it could be done. See T EX

. R.

A PP

. P. 42.3. Appellant was advised that, if the defect was not corrected within ten days

from the date of receipt of the notice, his appeal would be dismissed for want of

jurisdiction. Appellant failed to respond to the Court’s notice.

The Court, having consider ed the documents on file and appellant’s failure to

correct the defect in this matter, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for

want of jurisdiction. See id. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

See id. 42.3(a), ( c).

Following rendition of a final judgment or order, any appealing party must file a

new notice of appeal. 1

NORA L. LONGORIA

Justice

Delivered and filed on the

26th d ay of January, 202 3

.

1 Any pending motions are denied as moot.
NRCS 1010 - CRAZYMAN FLATLatitude: 42.638Longitude: -120.949Elevation: None

NRCS 1010 - Crazyman Flat

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Crazyman Flat Site Page...



Crazyman Flat

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Summer Rim Site Page...



Summer Rim
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 21-40006

Summary Calendar

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Everardo Lerma, 

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:16-CR-820-1

Before Davis, Jones, and Elrod, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Everardo Lerma, federal prisoner # 33342-179, appeals the district 

court’s denial of his motion for sentence reduction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 

§ 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). On appeal, he argues that: (1) the district court’s ruling 

does not allow for meaningful appellate review, (2) the district court abused 

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 8, 2021

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 21-40006 Document: 00516122622 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/08/2021
No. 21-40006

2

its discretion in treating U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13 as binding, and (3) it abused its 

discretion in finding that Lerma’s prior recovery from COVID-19 weighed 

against a grant of compassionate release.

We review a district court’s decision to deny a prisoner’s 

§ 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) motion for compassionate release for abuse of discretion. 

See United States v. Chambliss, 948 F.3d 691, 693 (5th Cir. 2020). A district 

court may modify a defendant’s term of imprisonment, after considering the 

applicable 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, if the court finds that “extraordinary 

and compelling reasons warrant such a reduction.” § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i).

Here, the district court sufficiently articulated reasons for denying 

Lerma’s motion. See Chavez-Meza v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 1959, 1965

(2018). The district court denied Lerma’s motion based on an independent 

assessment of the § 3553(a) factors, and nothing suggests the court 

considered itself bound by § 1B1.13. See United States v. Shkambi, 993 F.3d 

388, 393 (5th Cir. 2021); Chambliss, 948 F.3d at 693–94. The district court 

erred to the extent it concluded that Lerma’s prior recovery from COVID-19 

also weighed heavily against his release. See United States v. Newton, 996 F.3d 

485, 490 (7th Cir. 2021) (explaining that in the context of “compassionate 

release motions involving a novel virus,” courts “must base factual 

conclusions on record evidence”). Yet, because the district court 

appropriately denied Lerma’s motion under § 3553(a), any other error the 

court may have made is not grounds for reversal.

The district court’s order is AFFIRMED.

Case: 21-40006 Document: 00516122622 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/08/2021
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

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

         I, the chief financial officer of L Q Corporation, Inc. (the
"Company"), certify that (i) the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2005 (the "10-K") of the Company fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and (ii) the information contained in the 10-K fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


Date:    March 31, 2006                   /s/ Melvyn Brunt
                                          ---------------------------------
                                          Melvyn Brunt
                                          Chief Financial Officer






A signed original copy of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

WILLIAM A. JENTSCH, JR.,

Appellant,

v.

LAKE ROAD WELDING CO.,

Appellee. §

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 12

- 00287

- CV

Appeal from the

97 th District Court

of Archer County, Texas

(TC#2011

- 0090A

- CV)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was error in the

judgment. We therefore reverse the judgment of the court below and remand the cause for

further proceedings, in accordance with this Court’s opinion. We further order that Appellant

recover from Appellee all costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue. This decision shall

be certified below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2014.

YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rivera, and Rodriguez, JJ.

Rivera, J., not participating