alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 18

- 1570

_____________________________ J.B., Mother of B.P., M.P., and K.E., Minor Children
, Appellant,

v.

D EPARTMENT OF C HILDREN AND F AMILIES , Appellee.

_____________ ________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Santa Rosa County

. Ross M. Goodman , Judge

. November 8, 2018

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
W OLF , W INOKUR , and J AY , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Randall A. Werre of Werre Law Firm, P.A., Milton, for Appellant.

Sarah J. Rumph, Appellate Counsel, Department of Children and Families, Tallahassee , for Appellee ; Th omasina Moore, Statewide Director, and David P. Krupski, Appellate Counsel, Guardian ad Litem Program, Sanford; and Sara Goldfarb, Appellate Counsel, Guardian ad Litem Program, Tallahassee

.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM i3 MOBILE
INC. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF AND FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2000.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                          21,629
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      350
<ALLOWANCES>                                       170
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                26,414
<PP&E>                                           3,602
<DEPRECIATION>                                     351
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  32,871
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,651
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           58,023
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            77
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    32,871
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   910
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      569
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,281
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    27
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,626)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,626)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
     This  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information  extracted  from
     Electric Lightwave, Inc.'s Consolidated Financial Statements for the period
     ended  September  30, 1998 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to
     such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     US Dollars
       
<S>                                            <C>            
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  9-MOS          
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Dec-31-1998    
<PERIOD-START>                                 Jan-01-1998    
<PERIOD-END>                                   Sep-30-1998    
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1              
<CASH>                                         11,898         
<SECURITIES>                                   0              
<RECEIVABLES>                                  14,554         
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0              
<INVENTORY>                                    0              
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               28,354         
<PP&E>                                         462,844        
<DEPRECIATION>                                 35,905        
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 461,821        
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          68,196         
<BONDS>                                        215,849              
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0              
<PREFERRED>                                    0              
<COMMON>                                       497            
<OTHER-SE>                                     168,313        
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   461,821        
<SALES>                                        0         
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               67,164        
<CGS>                                          0              
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  31,389         
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               19,082         
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0              
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             5,500         
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (54,220)       
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (9,102)        
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (45,118)       
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0              
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0              
<CHANGES>                                      2,817          
<NET-INCOME>                                   (47,935)       
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (.96)          
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.96)          

        

</TABLE>
111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 837 

AN ACT 

To designate the Federal building located at 799 United 

Nations Plaza in New York, New York, as the ‘‘Ronald 

H. Brown United States Mission to the United Nations 

Building’’. 

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

•HR 837 EH

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

2 The Federal building located at 799 United Nations 

3 Plaza in New York, New York, shall be known and des4 ignated as the ‘‘Ronald H. Brown United States Mission 

5 to the United Nations Building’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

7 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

8 paper, or other record of the United States to the Federal 

9 building referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be 

10 a reference to the ‘‘Ronald H. Brown United States Mis11 sion to the United Nations Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives March 10, 

2009. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 837 

AN ACT 

To designate the Federal building located at 799 

to the United Nations Building’’. as the ‘‘Ronald H. Brown United States Mission United Nations Plaza in New York, New York,
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-15-0000688

29-JAN-2016

08:28 AM
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

August 23, 2019

No. 04

- 19

- 00129

- CV

IN THE ESTATE OF JOSE ALFREDO MENDOZA , Deceased

,

From the County Court at Law, Starr County, Texas

Trial Court No. PR

- 16

- 041 Honorable Romero Molina, Jud ge Presiding



### ORDER

The Appellee ’ s Motion for Leave to Amend Certif icate of Compliance and to Exceed Word County Limit is GRANTED.

_________________________________ Liz a A. Rodriguez , Justice

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

court on this 23rd day of August, 2019

.

___________________________________ KEITH E. HOTTLE

, Clerk of Court
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

March 29, 2010 

s0322 

Order 

 

March 29, 2010 

139852 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 139852 

 COA: 291425 

Tuscola CC: 95-006719-FH 

WILLIAM HOSS, JR., 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the September 10, 2009 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
- Home

# Accessibility

## Accessibility Standards

If you experience any issues accessing this website, please contact us so that we can improve this website. If you have any difficulty viewing any page with adaptive technology, please contact us so that we can improve this website. Please be as specific as possible in your description of the issue(s) encountered, as well as the location on the website.

In order to maximize accessibility, this website has been designed in conformance with:
                  - Information and Communication Technology Standards and Guidelines ( 36 C.F.R. part 1194 ) as promulgated by the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, pursuant to section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 ( 29 U.S.C. § 794d ) as amended.
                  - Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.1 , as promulgated by the World Wide Web Consortium.
                  - HTML5 standard , as promulgated by the Word Wide Web Consortium.

If you need to contact a House office using a TTY (Teletypewriter) device, please use the following number.
                  - U.S. House of Representatives TTY:  202-225-1904

This website may include code and content provided by third parties. The U.S. House of Representatives does not control or guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness, or completeness of this third-party information. While we attempt to ensure the correctness and suitability of information under our control and to correct errors brought to our attention, no representation or guarantee can be made as to the correctness or suitability of that information or any other linked information presented, referenced, or implied. This content is provided for the user’s convenience and is consistent with the stated purpose of this website. Any questions should be directed to the administrators of this or any other specific websites.
OFFICE OFTHE ATTORNEY GENERALOFTEXAS

Ron. Wayne lsfevm County XuQltor Clay County Henrietta, '2~x118

Dear SirI

on tha above stated

all follow8:

21 **Of the**  State UOIlBtitUtiOn

Tha above quoted provisionof the aonatltution hes been construedas not preoarlblne: the duties of the Qlatriat attoruaynor any dutlaa ior aounty attorneys other thaa swh QB are required to be perfcrmod for tha state. Xor doss It gclve the county attorneyauthority to institutea proooaQL% unless he ia given that powerRon. Kayae Lefevre,Page 2

by atatute. The tern *dutlesnaa used In the aonatltutfonal provisionabove set forth has been dealarm to aomprehend the further idea of power or authority;and hsaoe the county attoraey la aaid to have no authority to pexfoxm any aot in respeot to which no duty haB been. made to Qevolve upon **hh** Spencer ~8. Cfilveston County, 56 Tex. 384; 7Cexl%r Ya. State, 241 SW 231; Eunoanvu. State, 67 SIT

903.

T&8 respectiredUti8S of the dlatriot and county attorneys in arimfnal~prr~eQluge ara dealaxwd by~atatute, namely, Article 25-32, Code of Grim. Pm., lnaluslva.

7he chiefpurpose of the constitution,in oreatlng the Ofif& of dlotrlot attorney and county attOn?ey,
was to make it the r&n fuuctlm of these offioers to pronecute orlzlnal oases, es stated by the Suprerne Court In the 0880 of 3rady vs. Brooks, 29 I30 1052. However, the Leglolaturehas irm tLne to tine ooaferr8Qadditloual dutlee upon the county **and** distrlot attorneys,but no authority 1s found in the stehutes that mylkes It the duty of the aouuty attorneyto represent the county in ooudmnation pmoeediags in cases where the oouatp 1s eithr the plaintiff or the dSfendt?lt.

On September11, 1934, th5.a departmentheld.ln effaot in an opinionwritten by Eon. Julius y. Franki,Assistant Attorney General, addressedto Eon. 0. C. Flshar, Couatp Attorney, Zan Angelo, Texas, that the oouaty oanralsaloaem~ court ha8 the impliedButhorltyas generalmnager of county business, to retainprivate oounsel in tho proaeoutlono? civil suits Involvingcounty matters geaerally. And further holding that there are nc statutoryprovlsfanamaklng it the duty of the oounty attorney to represent the couuty in ooademaationprooesdiugaor trespass to try title and in&motion suits, and that the oouuty ommlssloners* oourt wuld haoe the authority t0 epprOprist8Out Of th8 g8118ti funQ o? the county to pay the attorneyshired to represent the County In auoh prooeaQln@.

In the oases of Jones YS. Peltnan, 171 SW 2S7 ahd LattUnorevs. Tarrant County, 124 SW 2011, it was held that the ocmmlesloaers* courtmay lawfully employ the county attorney to representthe interest of their oounty in my oauaewhere such duty Is not enjolneQ upon him by law.

You are respeotfullyadvised that it Is the opinion oi this departneatthat the statutes lmpcee ao duty upon the oouaty attorney to representthe aounty in oondematlon prOa08di5g.8. You are further advised that the oamlslrlonars*courtmay coatraat tith the oouaty attorney to representthe county la oondeumtlon prooeedlngs And compensatehk as ger oontrsat.

Trusting that the foregoirl(l answer8 your lnqulry,


### we l-Gain
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24
- 6482

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v. LUIS ENRRIQUE ARROYO

- JIMENEZ, Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Greenville

. James C. Dever III , District Judge. ( 4:19

- cr - 00048

- D

- 2 )

Submitted : August 22, 2024 Decided: August 27, 2024

Before WILKINSON, WYNN, and RICHARDSON , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

. Luis Enrrique Arroyo

- Jimenez , Appellant Pro Se. David A. Bragdon, Assistant U nited States Attorney , OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY , Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 24-6482 Doc: 9 Filed: 08/27/2024 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM: Luis Arroyo

- Jimenez appeals the district court’s order denying h is 1 8 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for a sentence reduction based on Amendment 821 to the Sentencing Guidelines. We review the denial of a motion under § 3582(c)(2) for abuse of discretion. United States v. Martin , 916 F.3d 389, 395 (4th Cir. 2019). In considering a motion for a sentence reduction under § 3582(c)(2), the district court must first determine whether the movant is eligible for a reduction and the extent of the reduction authorized. Id . The court must then “consider any applicable [18 U.S.C.] § 3553(a) factors and determine whether, in its discretion, the reduction authorized by reference to the [Guidelines] policies

. . . is warranted in whole or in part under the particular circumstances of the case.” Dillon v. United States , 560 U.S. 817, 827 (2010). Here, the district court found that Arroyo

- Jimenez was eligible for a sentence reduction but declined to exercise its discretion to reduce his sentence based on its assessment of the § 3553(a) factors. We discern no abuse of d iscretion in the d istrict court’s decision. Accordingly, we affirm the district
court ’s order. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED USCA4 Appeal: 24-6482 Doc: 9 Filed: 08/27/2024 Pg: 2 of 2
China Packaging Technologies, Inc. - Exhibit 10.13 - Filed by
   newsfilecorp.com






Exhibit 10.13 

Form of Purchase Agreement 

(English Summary) 

	Parties to Contract 	
      Shengda Color as purchaser, Anhui Shanying Paper Ltd. and
      Ma’anshan Tianfu Paper Products Co., Ltd. as Vendor 

	 	
       

	Name of Products 	
                     
         B-21 

	 	
       

	Brand 	
                     
         Anhui Shanying Paper Ltd. 

	 	 
	Standard of Model 	
                     
         120g . 

	 	
       

	Producer 	
                     
         Anhui Shanying Paper Ltd. 

	 	
       

	Unit 	
                     
         ton 

	 	
       

	Time of Purchase 	
                         The
      Buyer fax the purchase-plan to the Vendor 7 days before the Purchase and
      the request will be proceeded after the Vendor’s acknowledgement. The two
      parties will consult with special situations. 

	 	
       

	Location of Purchase 	
                     
         In the factory of the Buyer 

	 	
       

	Transportation 	
                         By
      vehicle, the Buyer consigns the task to the Vendor and the Vendor will pay
      the piper. 

	 	
       

	Method of Payment 	
                     
         Monthly payment at 45 days 

	 	
       

	Governing Law 	
                     
         Chinese Contract Law 

	 	
       

	Undertaking 	
                         A
      part of the products are provided by Ma’anshan Tianfu including invoices.
      The payment will be made to Shanying. 

	 	
       

	Others 	                   The
      price of products will change with market conditions and any change will
      be approved by the two parties.
Clear All

        27 April 2022    

                    Rear Adm. John Meier visits Naval Air Station Pensacola                 
                PENSACOLA, Fla. – Rear Adm. John Meier, commander of Naval Air Force Atlantic, visited Naval Air Station Pensacola April 25.            

#####  

##### Navy.mil  |  Navy.com  |  Navy FOIA  |  DoD Accessibility/Section 508  |  No Fear Act  |  Open Government  |  Plain Writing Act USA.gov  |  Veterans Crisis Line  |  VA Vet Center  |  FVAP  |   DoD Safe Helpline  |  Navy SAPR  |  NCIS Tips  |  Privacy Policy  |  Site Map  |  Contact US

###### Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command   |   1562 Mitscher Ave., Suite 250   |   Norfolk, Virginia 23551-2487

###### Official U.S. Navy Website
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-125167 and No. 333-127102 on Form S-8 of ourreports dated March 8, 2006, relating to the financial statements of Iowa Telecommunications Services, Inc. and Subsidiaries (the “Company”) and management’s report on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting,appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2005. 

 

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP 

 

Des Moines, Iowa 

March 8, 2006
#### HARMON, Respondent, v. NEW YORK CENT. & H. R. R. CO., Appellant.

(Supreme Court, General Term, Fifth Department.

June 20, 1894.)

Action by Alice Harmon by guardian, etc., against the New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Company.

No opinion. Judgment and order appealed from reversed, and new trial granted, costs to abide the event, unless within 20 days the respondent stipulates to reduce the recovery of damages to $4,000, in which case the judgment be so modified, and as modified affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party. See 28 N. Y. Supp. 1128, mem.
Clear All

        11 August 2022    

                    USS Indiana returns from deployment                 
                GROTON, Conn. - The Virginia-class fast attack submarine USS Indiana (SSN 789) returned to its homeport of Naval Submarine Base New London on Wednesday, Aug. 10, 2022, after a deployment of more than six months.            

        11 August 2022    

                    USS Indiana Sailor proposes on the pier after deployment                 
                GROTON, Conn. - Petty Officer 2nd Class Andrew Frable was away from his beloved for more than six months while deployed aboard USS Indiana (SSN 789). When he returned to her Wednesday, he asked her for a lifetime together.            

        17 March 2022    

                    U.S. Navy Concludes ICEX 2022                 
                U.S. NAVY ICE CAMP QUEENFISH – The U.S. Navy is concluding its Ice Exercise (ICEX) 2022 this week, wrapping up nearly three weeks of research and training on, above and below Arctic Ocean ice.            

        17 March 2022    

                    Navy Supports Scientific Research at ICEX 2022                 
                U.S. NAVY ICE CAMP QUEENFISH – The ice chunks drifting on Arctic waters are inhospitable and, for most people, inaccessible. As a result, gathering accurate information about the environment in this harsh – but important – region of the world is challenging for researchers.            

        08 March 2022    

                    International community works together at U.S. Navy’s ICEX 2022                 
                Joining U.S. military forces at Ice Exercise (ICEX) 2022 are personnel from the Royal Canadian Air Force and Navy, as well as the United Kingdom Royal Navy.“Our ICEX 2022 team includes key contributors from the British and Canadian armed forces,” said Rear Adm. Richard Seif, commander of the U.S.            

        06 March 2022    

                    Navy launches Ice Exercise 2022 in the Arctic Ocean                 
                U.S. NAVY ICE CAMP QUEENFISH – Commander, Submarine Forces (COMSUBFOR) officially kicked off Ice Exercise (ICEX) 2022 in the Arctic Ocean on Friday, March 4, after the building of Ice Camp Queenfish and arrival of two U.S. Navy fast attack submarines.            

#####  

##### Navy.mil  |  Navy.com  |  Navy FOIA  |  DoD Accessibility/Section 508  |  No Fear Act  |  Open Government  |  Plain Writing Act USA.gov  |  Veterans Crisis Line  |  VA Vet Center  |  FVAP  |   DoD Safe Helpline  |  Navy SAPR  |  NCIS Tips  |  Privacy Policy  |  Site Map  |  Contact US

###### Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command   |   1562 Mitscher Ave., Suite 250   |   Norfolk, Virginia 23551-2487

###### Official U.S. Navy Website
Case 1:07-cv-01546-AKH     Document 16      Filed 09/06/2007     Page 1 of 2

Case 1:07-cv-01546-AKH     Document 16      Filed 09/06/2007     Page 2 of 2
#### RIPLEY v. JAUSSEN.

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

August 1, 1894.)

Action by Anna J. Ripley against Virginia Jaussen. J. F. Higgins, for appellant. W. W. Foster, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Error, merely, does not suffice to support an appeal. To authorize a reversal, the error must have operated prejudicially to the appellant. No possible prejudice here resulted from the judgment rendered, for it merely accomplished what appellant was concededly willing to have occur at the time of the trial. The order must be affirmed, with costs.