alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5932 

AN ACT 

To establish the Organized Retail Theft Investigation and 

Prosecution Unit in the Department of Justice, and for 

other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 5932 EH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Organized Retail Theft 

3 Investigation and Prosecution Act of 2010’’. 

4 SEC. 2. ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT INVESTIGATION AND 

5 PROSECUTION UNIT. 

6 (a) ESTABLISHMENT.—Not later than 180 days after 

7 the date of enactment of this Act, the Attorney General 

8 shall establish the Organized Retail Theft Investigation 

9 and Prosecution Unit (hereinafter in this Act referred to 

10 as the ‘‘ORTIP Unit’’). 

11 (b) COMPOSITION.—The ORTIP Unit shall include 

12 representatives from the Federal Bureau of Investigation, 

13 United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement, 

14 the United States Secret Service, the United States Postal 

15 Inspection Service, prosecutors, and any other personnel 

16 necessary to carry out the duties of the ORTIP Unit. 

17 (c) DUTIES.—The duties of the ORTIP Unit are as 

18 follows: 

19 (1) To investigate and prosecute those instances 

20 of organized retail theft over which the Department 

21 of Justice has jurisdiction. 

22 (2) To assist State and local law enforcement 

23 agencies in investigating and prosecuting organized 

24 retail theft. 

25 (3) To consult with key stakeholders, including 

26 retailers and online marketplaces, to obtain informa-
3 

•HR 5932 EH

1 tion about instances of and trends in organized re2 tail theft. 

3 SEC. 3. DEFINITION. 

4 In this Act, the term ‘‘organized retail theft’’ 

5 means— 

6 (1) the obtaining of retail merchandise by ille7 gal means for the purpose of reselling or otherwise 

8 placing such merchandise back into the stream of 

9 commerce; or 

10 (2) aiding or abetting the commission of or con11 spiring to commit any of the acts described in para12 graph (1). 

13 SEC. 4. REPORT. 

14 Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment 

15 of this Act, the Attorney General shall submit a report 

16 containing recommendations on how retailers, online busi17 nesses, and law enforcement agencies can help prevent and 

18 combat organized retail theft to the Chairs and Ranking 

19 Members of the Committee on the Judiciary of the House 

20 of Representatives and of the Committee on the Judiciary 

21 of the Senate. The Attorney General shall make the report 

22 available to the public on the web site of the Department 

23 of Justice. 
4 

•HR 5932 EH

1 SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

2 There are authorized to be appropriated to the Attor3 ney General to carry out this Act, $5,000,000 for each 

4 of fiscal years 2011 through 2015. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 28, 

2010. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5932 

AN ACT 

To establish the Organized Retail Theft InvestigaJustice, and for other purposes. tion and Prosecution Unit in the Department of
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Morgan
Stanley Tangible Asset Fund L.P. and is qualified in its entirety
by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                      32,053,183
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  369,735<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              31,530,120<F2>
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                31,530,120<F3>
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           (7,085,551)<F4>
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,781,523
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (8,867,074)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (8,867,074)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (8,867,074)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Receivables include interest receivable of $101,935 and
subscriptions receivable of $267,800.
<F2>In addition to cash and receivables, total assets include
net unrealized loss on open contracts of $(892,798).
<F3>Liabilities include accrued brokerage fees of $88,228, accrued
management fee payable of $60,430, service fee payable of $24,172,
and redemptions payable of $178,553.
<F4>Total revenue includes realized trading revenue of $(7,201,840),
net change in unrealized of $(892,798) and interest income of $1,009,087.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
# ALABAMA COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

July 26, 2024 CR-2023-0473 Ledell Tavari Jackson v. State of Alabama (Appeal from Tuscaloosa Circuit Court: CC-20-338) 

## NOTICE You are hereby notified that on July 26, 2024, the following action was taken in the above-referenced cause by the Court of Criminal Appeals: Application for Rehearing Overruled.

D. Scott Mitchell, Clerk
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 11 (Tuesday, January 18, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 2633]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-991]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. 98N-0237]


Agency Information Collection Activities; Announcement of OMB 
Approval; New Drug and Biological Drug Products; Evidence Needed to 
Demonstrate Efficacy of New Drugs for Use Against Lethal or Permanently 
Disabling Toxic Substances When Efficacy Studies in Humans Ethically 
Cannot Be Conducted

AGENCY:  Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION:  Notice.

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

SUMMARY:  The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a 
collection of information entitled ``New Drug and Biological Drug 
Products; Evidence Needed to Demonstrate Efficacy of New Drugs for Use 
Against lethal or Permanently Disabling Toxic Substances When Efficacy 
Studies in Humans Ethically Cannot Be Conducted'' has been approved by 
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction 
Act of 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  JonnaLynn P. Capezzuto, Office of 
Information Resources Management (HFA-250), Food and Drug 
Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, 301-827-4659.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  In the Federal Register of October 5, 1999 
(64 FR 53960), the agency announced that the proposed information 
collection had been submitted to OMB for review and clearance under 44 
U.S.C. 3507. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not 
required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays 
a currently valid OMB control number. OMB has now approved the 
information collection and has assigned OMB control number 0910-0423. 
The approval expires on December 31, 2002. A copy of the supporting 
statement for this information collection is available on the Internet 
at http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets.

    Dated: January 10, 1999.
William K. Hubbard,
Senior Associate Commissioner for Policy, Planning, and Legislation.
[FR Doc. 00-991 Filed 1-14-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-F
#### In re BREMER.

(Supreme Court, General Term, First Department.

June 15, 1894.)

No opinion. Reference ordered. Section 132, Code Cr. Proc., confers jurisdiction. See 28 N. Y. Supp. 1107, mem.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 22-0664

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

TANYA TWOTEETH,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including September 5, 2023, within which to prepare, 

file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

July 28 2023

07/28/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0664
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS

MISC. NO. 04-17

IN RE: JUDICIAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE

O R D E R

In an effort to improve the administration of justice within the Court's jurisdiction, and as 

head of the Court, pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 7253(d), and with the unanimous consent of the Board 

of Judges, it is hereby

ORDERED, sua sponte, that the Court is assembling a Judicial Advisory Committee. The 

Committee is composed of eleven people who represent a cross section of individuals and entities 

sharing a common interest in improving the Court's operations and enhancing the practice of 

veterans law. It is further,

ORDERED that the Committee will meet periodically and provide leadership and advice 

on issues and concerns confronting the Court as it strives to improve its function of providing 

prompt, full, and fair judicial review of appeals from the Board of Veterans' Appeals. The 

Committees activities may include, but are not limited to the following:

(1) Identifying and prioritizing issues and concerns affecting Court administration and 

recommending solutions; 

(2) Proposing changes to the Court's Rules of Practice and Procedure or Court forms, for 

referral to the Court's Rules Advisory Committee; 

(3) Reviewing legislation and policy, advising the Court on the potential impact of such, 

and recommending alternative proposals; 

(4) Recommending pilot projects and other programs to evaluate new procedures or 

practices; 

(5) Acting on assignments referred by the Court; and 

(6) Making other appropriate recommendations to the Court. 

It is further,

ORDERED that the following persons are appointed to the Court's Judicial Advisory 

Committee:

David J. Barrans

Chief Counsel, Benefits Law Group

VA Office of General Counsel

810 Vermont Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20420
2

Mary A. Flynn

Chief Counsel

VA Office of General Counsel

810 Vermont Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20420

Glenda Herl

President of NOVA

1775 I Street, N.W.

Suite 1150

Washington, D.C. 20006

Megan C. Kral

President CAVC Bar Association

Appellate Attorney, VA Office of General Counsel

P.O. Box 7992

Washington, D.C. 20044

Daniel Nagin

Clinical Professor of Law, 

Vice Dean & Faculty Director

WilmerHale Legal Services Center

Harvard Law School

122 Boylston Street

Jamaica Plain, MA 02130

James D. Ridgeway

Chief Counsel for Strategy, Innovation, & Programs

Board of Veterans' Appeals

425 I Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20001

Len Selfon

General Counsel

Paralyzed Veterans of America

801 18th Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20006

Ron Smith

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP

901 New York Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20001
3

Bart Stichman

Joint Executive Director

NVLSP

1600 K Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20006

Zachary Stolz

Partner, Chisholm, Chisholm, and Kilpatrick

One Turks Head Place

Suite 1100

Providence, R.I. 02903

Greg Block

Clerk of the Court, USCAVC

625 Indiana Avenue, N.W.

Suite 900

Washington, D.C. 20004

DATED: May 19, 2017 BY THE COURT

ROBERT N. DAVIS

Chief Judge
(7 Misc. Rep. 662.)

#### WHITE v. BALTA.

(Common Pleas of New York City and County, General Term.

April 2, 1894.)

Appeal—To Coubt op Appeals. An application for leave to appeal to the court of appeals must state the question of law it desires to have reviewed; and that question must be one not only of importance, but which has never been adjudicated by the court of appeals.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

Action by EEza W. White against Jose Balta for rent. A judgment in favor of plaintiff was affirmed on appeal (27 FT. Y. Supp. 902), and defendant moves for leave to appeal to the court of appeals. Denied.

Argued before DALY, C. J., and BISCHOFF and PRYOR, JJ.

Jones & Govin, for the motion.

Olcott & Olcott, opposed.

PRYOR, J.

The motion is reprehensible. It asks the privüege of an appeal to the court of appeals from a judgment of this court affirming the judgment of the district court for a sum less than a hundred dollars. The action was for a month’s rent of a storeroom, and, upon the trial, only issues of fact were in controversy. It is not pretended in the moving papers that the case involves any question of law at aE, much less one “which ought to be reviewed by the court of appeals.” Code, § 191, subd. 3. Does counsel suppose that our highest tribunal is instituted for the purpose of entertaining anew the petty wrangles of the district court? And why *4should we be vexed by such frivolous and futile motions? An application for leave to take a cause to the court of appeals must state the question of law it desires to have reviewed; and that question must be one not only of importance, but which has never been adjudicated by the court of appeals. A proposition which no lawyer will dispute is not a question of law. Motion denied, with $10 costs. All concur.
AMENDMENT


     This agreement (the "Amendment") is made and entered
into on January 27, 2004 by and between Media and
Entertainment.com, Inc. ("M&E") and Winsonic Holdings, Ltd.
("Winsonic").

                     W I T N E S S E T H


     WHEREAS, M&E and Winsonic have entered into an Addendum
dated December 11, 2003 to the Existing Agreement between
M&E and Winsonic;

     WHEREAS, M&E and Winsonic desire to amend the Addendum
conditioned upon the terms and conditions set forth herein.

     NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and the
covenants and agreements hereinafter set forth, the parties
agree as follows:

  1.   The last sentence in paragraph 9 is revised to read as
     follows:  "The new agreement finalizing this binding
     Addendum shall close upon the approval of the Audited
     Financials no later than March 31, 2004.

  2.   Other than as provided herein, the Addendum remains in
     full force and effect.

     IN WITNESS WHEREAS, the parties hereto have executed
this Amendment as of the day and year first above written.



                         MEDIA AND ENTERTAINMENT.COM, INC.


                          By: /s/ Jon J. Jannotta
                              --------------------
                          Jon J. Jannotta, V.P.


                         WINSONICS HOLDING, Ltd.



                         By: /s/ Winston Johnson
                             --------------------
                          Winston Johnson, Chairman
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-27-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-29-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-29-1998
<CASH>                                       4,873,266
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,600,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     40,012
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,931,700
<PP&E>                                       8,569,848
<DEPRECIATION>                               (763,641)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,790,617
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          771,951
<BONDS>                                      1,002,165
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        80,002
<OTHER-SE>                                  11,336,499
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,790,617
<SALES>                                        804,319
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               804,319
<CGS>                                          218,416
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,895,311
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (90,855)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,000,137)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,000,137)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,000,137)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.13)
        

</TABLE>
#### Carmelo S. Armenia et al., Appellants, v LaVerne Luther, Individually and as Supervisor of the Town of Grand Island, et al., Respondents.

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Applying a "balancing of public interests” approach *(see, Matter of County of Monroe [City of Rochester],*72 NY2d 338), we conclude that the Town of Grand Island was immune from its own zoning regulations when it installed floodlights at tennis courts and at a softball diamond situated in a town park. Accordingly, Special Term properly granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiffs’ first and second causes of action. (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Ostrowski, J. — summary judgment.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Balio, Lawton and Davis, JJ.
#### *In re*MILLER, Stephen Lee

(MR 21100)

Lincoln, IL

*704Order of the Court:

The motion by the Administrator of the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission to approve and confirm the report and recommendation of the Hearing Board is allowed, and respondent Stephen Lee Miller is censured.
USDA 

Organization Chart

Secretary

Deputy Secretary

Assistant 

Secretary for 

Civil Rights

Assistant Secretary for

Congressional Relations

Assistant Secretary 

for Administration

Inspector 

General

General 

Counsel

Office of the 

Chief Financial 

Officer

Office of the 

Chief 

Economist

Office of the 

Executive 

Secretariat

Office of 

Budget and 

Program Analysis

Office of 

Communications

Office of 

Tribal Relations

Office of 

Partnerships and 

Public Engagement

• Higher Education

• Strategic Initiatives

• 2501 Grants

Office of 

Hearings and 

Appeals

Office of the Chief 

Information Officer

Under Secretary for 

Farm Production 

and Conservation

• FPAC Business 

Center

• Farm Service Agency

• Risk Management

Agency

• Natural Resources

Conservation Service

Under Secretary for 

Food, Nutrition and 

Consumer Services

• Food and Nutrition Service

Under Secretary 

for Food Safety

• Food Safety and

Inspection Service

Under Secretary 

for Marketing and 

Regulatory Programs

• Agricultural Marketing

Service

• Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service

Under Secretary for 

Natural Resources 

and Environment

• Forest Service

Under Secretary for 

Rural Development

• Rural Housing Service

• Rural Utility Service

• Rural Business

Cooperative Service

Under Secretary for 

Research, Education 

and Economics

• Office of the Chief

Scientist

• Agricultural Research

Service

• National Agricultural 

Statistical Service

• National Institute of Food

and Agriculture

• Economic Research

Service

Under Secretary for 

Trade and Foreign 

Agricultural Affairs

• Foreign 

Agricultural Service

• U.S. Codex Office

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

UPDATED 10/19/21 This organization chart displays the names of USDA offices, agencies, and mission areas. Each office, agency, and mission area is placed within a cell connected by lines to show the structure and hierarchy (Under Secretary, Deputy Secretary, 

or Secretary) for which they fall under. An HTML version that lists USDA Agencies and Offices and USDA Mission Areas is also available on usda.gov. The Secretary’s Memorandum 1076-031 was signed August 12, 2019 effectuating a change to Rural Development.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 81 (Thursday, April 26, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21014-21015]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-10400]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service


Cape Cod National Seashore Advisory Commission; Two Hundred 
Thirty Fourth Meeting; Notice of Meeting

    Notice is hereby given in accordance with the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770, 5 U.S.C. App 1, section 
10), that a meeting of the Cape Cod National Seashore Advisory 
Commission will be held on Friday, June 8, 2001.
    The Commission was reestablished pursuant to Public Law 87-126 as 
amended by Public Law 105-280. The purpose of the Commission is to 
consult with the Secretary of the Interior, or his designee, with 
respect to matters relating to the development of Cape Cod National 
Seashore, and with respect to carrying out the provisions of sections 4 
and 5 of the Act establishing the Seashore.
    The Commission members will meet at 1 p.m. at Headquarters, Marconi 
Station, Wellfleet, Massachusetts for the regular business meeting to 
discuss the following:

1. Adoption of Agenda
2. Approval of minutes of previous meeting (April 6, 2001)
3. Reports of Officers
4. Reports of Subcommittees
    --Dune Shacks
    --Nickerson Fellowship
5. Superintendent's Report
    --Highlands Center (Radome Report)
    --Summer Shuttle Update
    --PWC Issue
    --Zoning Standards
    --40th Anniversary
    --News from Washington
6. Old Business
    --Advisory Commission Handbook
7. New Business
8. Date and agenda for next meeting
9. Public comments and
10. Adjournment

    The meeting is open to the public. It is expected that 15 persons 
will be able to attend the meeting in addition to Commission members.
    Interested persons may make oral/written presentations to the 
Commission during the business meeting or file written statements. Such 
requests should be made to the park superintendent at least seven days 
prior to the meeting. Further information concerning the meeting may be 
obtained from the Superintendent, Cape Cod National Seashore, 99 
Marconi Site Road, Wellfleet, MA 02667.

[[Page 21015]]


    Dated: April 16, 2001.
Maria Burks,
Superintendent.
[FR Doc. 01-10400 Filed 4-25-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-76-M
#### In the Matter of Jeffrey R. Korman, Appellant, v Gertrude S. Strohm et al., Respondents. In the Matter of Stanley B. Green, Respondent, v Board of Elections of the City of New York, Respondent, and Jeffrey R. Korman, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lewis R. *540Friedman, J.), entered on August 17, 1989, unanimously affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. No opinion. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach and Smith, JJ.