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

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 842 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 842

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 11, 2009

 Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 
                              Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To designate the United States Courthouse to be constructed in Jackson, 
    Mississippi, as the ``R. Jess Brown United States Courthouse''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The United States Courthouse to be constructed at the site bounded 
on the north by Court Street, on the west by West Street, on the south 
by South Street, and on the east by President Street in Jackson, 
Mississippi, shall be known and designated as the ``R. Jess Brown 
United States Courthouse''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the courthouse referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``R. Jess Brown United States 
Courthouse''.

            Passed the House of Representatives March 10, 2009.

            Attest:

                                            LORRAINE C. MILLER,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
#### Leo Heaps v Simon & Schuster Co. et al.

—Motion deemed as one seeking reargument of this court’s order entered on May 2, 1989 (150 AD2d 164) and, upon reargument, the third paragraph thereof amended, as indicated. Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Asch, Milonas, Kassal and Wallach, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 82 (Friday, April 27, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 21189]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-10678]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE BOARD OF GOVERNORS


Sunshine Act Meeting

TIMES AND DATES: 10 a.m., Monday, May 7, 2001; 8:30 a.m., Tuesday, May 
8, 2001; and 9:30 a.m., Tuesday, May 8, 2001.

PLACE: Washington, DC., at U.S. Postal Service Headquarters, 475 
L'Enfant Plaza, SW., in the Benjamin Franklin Room.

STATUS: May 7 (Closed); May 8-8:30 a.m. (Open) 9:30 a.m. (Closed).

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:   
Monday, May 7-10:00 a.m. (Closed).
    1. Financial Performance.
    2. Fiscal Year 2001 EVA Variable Pay Program.
    3. FedEx Alliance.
    4. Postal Rate Commission Opinion and Recommended Decision on 
Further Reconsideration in Docket No. R2000-1, Omnibus Rate Case.
    5. Rate Case Briefing.
    6. Personnel Matters.
    7. Compensation Issues.
Tuesday, May 8-8:30 a.m. (Open)
    1. Minutes of the Previous Meetings, April 2-3, and April 13, 2001.
    2. Remarks of the Postmaster General/Chief Executive Officer.
    3. Audit and Finance Committee Charter.
    4. Fiscal Year 2002 Appropriation Request.
    5. Borrowing Resolution.
    6. Capital Investment.
    a. Letter Recognition Enhancement Program.
    7. Tentative Agenda for the June 4-5, 2001, meeting in Washington, 
DC.
Tuesday, May 8-9:30 a.m. (Closed)
    1. Continuation of Monday's Closed Agenda.
    2. Strategic Planning/Postal Reform.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: David G. Hunter, Secretary of the 
Board, U.S. Postal Service, 475 L'Enfant Plaza, SW., Washington, DC 
20260-1000. Telephone (202) 268-4800.

David G. Hunter,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-10678 Filed 4-25-01; 2:17 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-M
* Pursuant to 5 TH 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 5 TH CIR
. R. 47.5.4. 

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-50638 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee
v. NARCIZO RODRIGUEZ CAMACHO Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:06-CR-2282-ALL Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Appealing theJudgment in a Criminal Case, Narcizo Rodriguez Camacho raises arguments that are foreclosed by Al mendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), whic h held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. U nited States v. Pineda-Arrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir. 2007), petition for cert. filed (Aug. 28, 2007) (No. 07-6202). The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D December 5, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE

November 2, 1999 Session

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. CHRISTOPHER LINDSAY

 Appeal as of Right from the Criminal Court for Anderson County

No. 98CR0137 James B. Scott, Jr.Judge, 

No. E1998-00036-CCA-R3-CD

November 3, 2000

JUDGMENT

Came the Appellant, Christopher Lindsay, by counsel and also came the Attorney General

on behalf of the State, and this case was heard on the record on appeal from the Criminal Court of

Anderson County; and upon consideration thereof, this Court is of the opinion that there is no

reversible error in the judgment of the trial court.

It is, therefore, ordered and adjudged by this Court that the judgment of the trial court is

affirmed, and the case is remanded to the Criminal Court of Anderson County for execution of the

judgment of that Court and for collection of costs accrued below. Appellant may remain on bond,

with a twenty-five percent increase, pending possible appeal to the Supreme Court.

Because it appears to the Court that Appellant, Christopher Lindsay, is indigent, costs will

be paid by the State.

Per Curiam

Smith, Tipton, Woodall
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 16**  **- 6537** 

RICHARD LEE WILLIAMS , Petitioner

- Appellant ,
v. HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director VA Dept. of Corrections , Respondent

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Norfolk
. Raymond A. Jackson , District Judge. ( 2:14

- cv - 00375

- RAJ

- LRL )

Submitted : August 25 , 2016 Decided: August 30, 2016

Before NIEMEYER , DIAZ , and FLOYD , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Richard Lee Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Aaron Jennings Campbell, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding preced ent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Richard Lee Williams seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circui t justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (A) (2012) . A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012)
. When the di strict court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable

c laim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Williams has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately3 presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
<PAGE>

                                                                  Exhibit 10(12)



                 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND
                     RESTATED LONG-TERM STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN


     RESOLVED, that Section 2(1) of the Company's Amended and Restated
Long-Term Stock Incentive Plan be amended to read as follows:

          "(1)   "Fair Market Value" means the fair market value of the
Shares as determined by the Committee in its sole discretion; PROVIDED,
HOWEVER, that (A) if the Shares are listed on a national securities exchange,
or if the Shares are admitted to quotation on the National Association of
Securities Dealers Automated Quotation System ("NASDAQ") or other comparable
quotation system and have been designated as a National Market System "(NMS")
security, Fair Market Value on any date shall be the closing sales price for
the Shares on such date as such price is officially quoted in the composite
tape of transactions on such exchange or as such price is reported on the
Nasdaq National Market, or, if there were no sales on such date, then the
Fair Market Value shall be the closing selling price on the last preceding
date for which such quotation exists; or (B) if the Shares are admitted to
quotation on NASDAQ and have not been designated an NMS security, Fair Market
Value on any date shall be the average of the closing bid and closing asked
prices of the Shares as such amounts are reported on the Nasdaq SmallCap
Market on such date."

     RESOLVED, that the Secretary of the Company is authorized to cause the
Amended and Restated Long-Term Stock Incentive Plan, as amended above, to be
filed among the records of the Company.
V 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 798 

For the relief of Adrian Rodriguez. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 3, 2009 

Mr. FILNER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

For the relief of Adrian Rodriguez. 

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

3 SECTION 1. COMPENSATION OF ADRIAN RODRIGUEZ. 

4 (a) PAYMENT.—The Secretary of the Treasury shall 

5 pay, out of funds not otherwise appropriated, an appro6 priate amount to compensate Adrian Rodriguez for costs 

7 related to and damages arising from his arrest, prosecu8 tion, and incarceration in Mexico in 2003 as described in 

9 Claim No. 05–370C filed in the United States Court of 

10 Federal Claims. 

11 (b) SATISFACTION OF CLAIMS.—The payment under 

12 subsection (a) shall be in full satisfaction of all claims of 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
2 

•HR 798 IH

1 Adrian Rodriguez against the United States in connection 

2 with the matter described in such subsection. 

3 (c) NO INFERENCE OF LIABILITY.—Nothing in this 

4 Act shall be construed as an inference of liability on the 

5 part of the United States. 

6 SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON ATTORNEYS’ AND AGENTS’ FEES. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—It shall be unlawful for an amount 

8 exceeding 10 percent of the amount paid pursuant to sec9 tion 1 to be paid to, or received by, any agent or attorney 

10 for any service rendered in connection with the payment 

11 under this Act. 

12 (b) ENFORCEMENT.—Any person who violates sub13 section (a) shall be guilty of an infraction and shall be 

14 fined under title 18, United States Code. 

Æ 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
**EXHIBIT 23**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

The Board of Directors 

Sybron Dental Specialties, Inc.: 

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No. 333-59228) on Form S-3 and the registration statements (Nos. 333-50154, 333-50156, 333-84628, and 333-105181) on Form S-8 of Sybron Dental Specialties, Inc. ofour reports dated December 13, 2005, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Sybron Dental Specialties, Inc. and subsidiaries as of September 30, 2005 and 2004, and the related consolidated statements of income,stockholders’ equity and comprehensive income, and cash flows and related financial statement schedule for each of the years in the three-year period ended September 30, 2005, management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internalcontrol over financial reporting as of September 30, 2005, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of September 30, 2005, which reports appear in the September 30, 2005 annual report on Form 10-K ofSybron Dental Specialties, Inc. 

 

/s/    KPMG LLP 

 

Costa Mesa, California 

December 14, 2005
Case 1:07-cv-05710-RJH Document 56-8 Filed 08/02/2007 Page 1 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-05710-RJH Document 56-8 Filed 08/02/2007 Page 2 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-05710-RJH Document 56-8 Filed 08/02/2007 Page 3 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-05710-RJH Document 56-8 Filed 08/02/2007 Page 4 of 4
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6411 Engrossed in House (EH)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 6411

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To provide for the approval of the Agreement Between the Government of 
the United States of America and the Government of Australia Concerning 
                    Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy.

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

SECTION 1. APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED 
              STATES OF AMERICA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF AUSTRALIA 
              CONCERNING PEACEFUL USES OF NUCLEAR ENERGY.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding the provisions for congressional 
consideration of a proposed agreement for cooperation in subsection d. 
of section 123 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2153), the 
Agreement Between the Government of the United States of America and 
the Government of Australia Concerning Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy, 
done at New York, May 4, 2010, may become effective on or after October 
8, 2010, as if all the requirements in such section 123 for 
consideration of such agreement had been satisfied, subject to 
subsection (b) of this section.
    (b) Applicability of Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and Other Provisions 
of Law.--Upon coming into effect, the agreement referred to in 
subsection (a) shall be subject to the provisions of the Atomic Energy 
Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.) and any other applicable United 
States law as if such agreement had come into effect in accordance with 
the requirements of section 123 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954.

            Passed the House of Representatives November 30, 2010.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
111th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 6411

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

To provide for the approval of the Agreement Between the Government of 
the United States of America and the Government of Australia Concerning 
                    Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy.
```
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      Exhibit 21

               NATIONWIDE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARIES

                         Subsidiaries of the Registrant

                             As of December 31, 1996



                                                                 State of
          Subsidiary                                           Incorporation
          -----------------------------------------------      -------------

          Nationwide Life and Annuity Insurance Company             Ohio

          Employers Life Insurance Company of Wausau (1)            Wisconsin

          National Casualty Company (1)                             Michigan

          West Coast Life Insurance Company (1)                     California

          Nationwide Advisory Services, Inc.                        Ohio

          Nationwide Investment Services Corporation                Ohio

          NWE, Inc.                                                 Ohio

      ---------------
      (1) On January 1, 1997, Nationwide Life Insurance Company made a dividend
          payment to Nationwide Corporation consisting of the outstanding
          shares of common stock of these subsidiaries.

      All business operations of Nationwide Life Insurance
      Company and all of its subsidiaries are conducted using
      each company's legally registered name.



                                      E-10
### I

## ~ r UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FORTHE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ANTWINE A. TAZEWELL, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, v. Civil ActionNo. BARACK OBAMA, 

### et ai., Defendants. 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION 

# FILED MAY 142010 Clerk, U.S. District& Bankruptc Courts for the District of CO/Umbra 

# 10 

# 0793

This matter comes before the court onreview ofplaintiffs application to proceed 

### in formapauperis and 

### prose civil complaint. The court will grant the application, and dismiss the complaint. The court must dismiss a complaint ifit is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon whichreliefcanbe granted. 28 US.c. 

### § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). In

### Neitzke v. 

### Williams, 490 US. 319 (1989), the Supreme Court states that the trial courthas the authority to dismiss not only claims based on an indisputablymeritless legal theory, but also claims whose factual contentions are clearlybaseless. Claims describing fantastic ordelusional scenarios fall into the category of cases whose factual contentions are clearly baseless. !d. at 328. The trial court has the discretion to decide whether a complaint is frivolous, and such finding is appropriate when the facts alleged are irrational orwholly incredible. 

### Denton v. 

### Hernandez, 504 US. 25, 33 (1992). Plaintiffalleges that the government has implanted devices inhis body, and that these devices control his mind and body functions. 

### See Compl. at 4-6 (page numbers designated by the

1

### Court). These devices allegedly cause plaintiff"'extreme' pain and suffering physically, psychologically, emotionally and financially for their cognitive interrogation." Id. at 5. He demands that the implants be removed immediately, and also demands compensation of$5 billion. Id. at 16. The Court is mindful that complaints filed byprose litigants are held to less stringent standards thanthose applied to formal pleadings draftedby lawyers. SeeHaines v. Kerner, 404 

# u.s. 519,520 (1972). Having reviewed plaintiffs complaint, the court concludes that its factual contentions are baseless and wholly incredible. Forthis reason, the complaint is frivolous and must be dismissed. See 28 U.S.c. 

### § 19l5(e)(2)(B)(i). An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.

United States District Judge DATE:

2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 7
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Nationwide
Life Insurance Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the Year ended December
31, 1997, and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such consolidated
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                            13,204
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                          80
<MORTGAGE>                                       5,182
<REAL-ESTATE>                                      311
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                  19,576
<CASH>                                             176
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                                   0
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                           1,665
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  59,791
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                 18,703
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                                  0
<POLICY-OTHER>                                       0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                                0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             4
<OTHER-SE>                                       2,474
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    59,791
<PREMIUMS>                                         205
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                              1,409
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                                  11
<OTHER-INCOME>                                      47
<BENEFITS>                                       1,195
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                        167
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                               385
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    430
<INCOME-TAX>                                       150
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                280
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       280
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.00
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                       0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                  0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                      0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0


</TABLE>