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

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1021 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1021

To provide that there shall be no net increase in the acres of certain 
 Federal land under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management, 
the National Park Service, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 
  or the Forest Service unless the Federal budget is balanced for the 
               year in which the land would be purchased.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 6, 2013

 Mr. Stivers introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
  Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on 
Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, 
 in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
                jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide that there shall be no net increase in the acres of certain 
 Federal land under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management, 
the National Park Service, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 
  or the Forest Service unless the Federal budget is balanced for the 
               year in which the land would be purchased.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Land Acquisition to cut National 
Debt Act'' or the ``LAND Act''.

SEC. 2. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR LAND ACQUISITION.

    (a) In General.--The Secretary of the Interior may not use Federal 
funds to purchase land that would result in a net increase of land 
acreage that would be under the jurisdiction of the National Park 
Service, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, or the Bureau of 
Land Management unless the Federal budget is balanced for the year in 
which the land would be purchased.
    (b) Duck Stamp Funds.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to land 
purchased with funds made available through the sale of Federal 
Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamps.
    (c) Easements.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to easements 
acquired by the Secretary of the Interior to facilitate management of 
Federal lands.

SEC. 3. NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM LAND ACQUISITION.

    (a) In General.--The Secretary of Agriculture may not use Federal 
funds to purchase land that would result in a net increase of land 
acreage included in the National Forest System unless the Federal 
budget is balanced for the year in which the land would be purchased.
    (b) Easements.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to easements 
acquired by the Secretary of Agriculture to facilitate management of 
Federal lands.
                                 <all>
```
# C_2018284EN.01000101.xml

| 13.8.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 284/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.8.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 284/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8939 — Liberty House Group/Aluminium Dunkerque)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2018/C 284/01)

On 18 July 2018, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32018M8939. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32018M8939. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
Kenneth Roshaun REID, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-9512

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 07, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
# C_2018260EN.01000202.xml

| 24.7.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 260/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.7.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 260/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8938 — LG Electronics/ZKW Holding/Mommert Gewerbeimmobilien)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2018/C 260/03)

On 18 July 2018, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32018M8938. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32018M8938. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
Lyle R. HARRISON, Petitioner, v. MOULTRIE COUNTY, Illinois, et al.

No. 19-5328

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

PAR PHARMACEUTICAL INC. and ENDO 

PAR INNOVATION COMPANY, LLC,

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

ALKEM LABORATORIES LTD.,

Defendant. 

v. 

MANKIND PHARMA LIMITED,

Defendant. 

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

Civil Action No. 2:23-cv-00400-JRG-RSP

(LEAD CASE)

 

Civil Action No. 2:23-cv-00399-JRG-RSP

(MEMBER CASE)

NOTICE OF COMPLIANCE

Pursuant to the Court’s Discovery Order (Dkt. 62), entered on January 12, 2024, Plaintiff 

files this notice confirming that it has complied with Local Patent Rules 3-1 and 3-2 by serving 

Initial and Additional Disclosures on the defendants on January 26, 2024. 

Case 2:23-cv-00400-JRG-RSP Document 64 Filed 01/26/24 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 1638
2 

Dated January 26, 2024 Respectfully submitted, 

/s/ Marc Belloli by permission Andrea L. Fair

Marc Belloli (pro hac vice) 

California Bar No. 244290 

mbelloli@bdiplaw.com 

M. Elizabeth Day (admitted in Texas) 

California Bar No. 177125 

eday@bdiplaw.com 

Jerry D. Tice II

Texas State Bar No. 24093263 

jtice@bdiplaw.com 

Aaron R. Hand (admitted in Texas) 

California Bar No. 245755 

ahand@bdiplaw.com 

Brenda Entzminder (pro hac vice) 

California Bar No. 226760 

bentzminger@bdiplaw.com 

BUNSOW DE MORY LLP

701 El Camino Real, 

Redwood City, CA 94063 

Tel: (650) 351-7248 

Fax: (415) 426-4744 

Of Counsel: 

Andrea L. Fair

Texas Bar No. 24078488 

andrea@wsfirm.com 

Wesley Hill 

Texas Bar No. 24032294 

wh@wsfirm.com 

WARD, SMITH & HILL, PLLC

1507 Bill Owens Parkway 

Longview, Texas 75604 

Tel: 903-757-6400 

Fax: 903-757-2323 

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Emerging Automotive LLC

Case 2:23-cv-00400-JRG-RSP Document 64 Filed 01/26/24 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 1639
3 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was filed electronically in 

compliance with Local Rule CV-5(a) and served via email on all counsel of record on this 26th day 

of January, 2024. 

/s/ Andrea L. Fair 

Andrea L. Fair

 

Case 2:23-cv-00400-JRG-RSP Document 64 Filed 01/26/24 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 1640
# C_2019062EN.01030801.xml

| 15.2.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 62/308 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.2.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 62/308

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 as regards the resources for economic, social and territorial cohesion and correcting that Regulation as regards the resources for the investment for growth and jobs goal’

(COM(2018) 498 final — 2018/0265 (COD))

(2019/C 62/50)

| Consultation | European Parliament, 5.7.2018
  Council of the European Union, 19.7.2018 |
| --- | --- |
| Legal basis | Articles 177 and 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union |
| Section responsible | Economic and Monetary Union and Economic and Social Cohesion |
| Adopted at plenary | 17.10.2018 |
| Plenary session No | 538 |
| Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions) | 214/0/2 |

Consultation

European Parliament, 5.7.2018

Council of the European Union, 19.7.2018

Legal basis

Articles 177 and 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Section responsible

Economic and Monetary Union and Economic and Social Cohesion

Adopted at plenary

17.10.2018

Plenary session No

538

Outcome of vote

(for/against/abstentions)

214/0/2

Since the Committee endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 538th plenary session of 17 and 18 October 2018 (meeting of 17 October 2018), by 214 votes with two abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Brussels, 17 October 2018.

The President of European Economic and Social Committee

Luca JAHIER

---
Exhibit 32.1

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

In connection with Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of Huntsman LLC (the "Company") for the period ended
June 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Peter R. Huntsman, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C., Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



| |  |  | /s/PETER R. HUNTSMANPeter R. Huntsman Chief Executive OfficerDecember 8,
2004
| |  |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

This
certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

---



QuickLinks
## In The **Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo** 

________________________ No. 07 - 22 - 00060 - CR

________________________ PAULA JO READ , APPELLANT V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , APPELLEE On Appeal from the 251st District Court Potter C ounty, Texas Trial Court No. 77,317 - C - CR ; Honorable Ana Estevez , Presiding April 19 , 20 2 2 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before QUINN, C.J., and PIRTLE and DOSS, JJ. In 2020, Appellant, Paula Jo Read, was placed on deferred adjudication community supervision for three years for the offense of possession of a controlled substance . 1 By order of January 28, 2022, the trial court modified the terms of Appellant’s community supervision , extending the period by one year and requi ring Appellant to
1 See T EX . H EALTH & S AFETY C ODE A NN . § 481.115(c).2 participate in a substance abuse felony punishment facility program for thirty days . Appellant filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s January 28 order. We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. W e have jurisdiction in a criminal case to consider an appeal from a judgment of guilt or where jurisdiction has been expressly granted by law. See Abbott v. State , 271 S.W.3d 694, 697 - 98 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) . The trial court ’ s order modifying the conditions o f Appellant’s deferred adjudication community supervision is neither a judgment of guilt nor an appealable order. See Basaldua v. State , 558 S.W.2d 2, 5 (Tex. Crim. App. 1977) (holding that t here is no constitutional or statutory authority permitting a direct appeal from an order modifying or refusing to modify conditions of community supervision ); Castaneda v. State , No. 07 - 19 - 00049 - CR, 2019 Tex. App. LEXIS 6994, at *3 (Tex. App. —Amarillo Aug. 9, 2019 , no pet. ) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (dismissing appeal from order modifying conditions of community supervision for want of jurisdiction) . 2 By letter of March 17, 2022, we directed Appellan t’ s counsel to show how we have jurisdiction over the app eal by March 31. Counsel has not filed a response to date. Because Appellant has not presented this court with a judgment of guilt or appealable order , we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. Per Curiam Do not publish.

2 An extension of community supervision or the modification of the terms and conditions there of is reviewable through the habeas corpus process. See T EX . C ODE C RIM . P ROC . A NN . art. 17.072.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 C IR

. R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-31252

Summary Calendar

DAVID L. KING,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

KENNETH S. APFEL,

Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant-Appellee.

---------------------------------------------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 98-CV-595

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

September 27, 2000

Before EMILIO M. GARZA, STEWART and PARKER, Circuit Judges:

PER CURIAM: *

David King appeals the affirmance of the Commissioner’s denial of his application for social security

disabilit y insurance benefits. He argues that the ALJ’s finding that he was not disabled is not based

on substantial evidence. This decision was based on a credibility judgment, which was consistent with

other evidence presented, and is thus entitled to great deference. S ee Newton v. Apfel

, 209 F.3d 448,459 (5th Cir. 2000). King has failed to show that the ALJ’s finding was no t based o n substantial

evidence.

King also argues that the ALJ improperly used the medical vocational guidelines as a “guide”

in making his disability determination. Although the ALJ did consult these guidelines, his decision

was also based on the testimony of a vocational expert. The correct legal standard was thus applied.

See Scott v. Shalala

, 30 F.3d 33, 35 (5th Cir. 1994). King has failed to show that the ALJ’s decision

was not supported by substantial evidence in the record or that the proper legal standards were not

used in evaluating the evidence. Accordingly, the judgment of the dist rict co urt is AFFIRMED.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

REDSTONE LOGICS LLC,

Plaintiff,

v. 

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., 

and SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS 

AMERICA, INC.,

Defendants.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:23-CV-00485-JRG

ORDER

Before the Court is the Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Move, Answer or 

Otherwise Respond to Plaintiff’s Complaint and Waiver of Foreign Service Requirement (the 

“Motion”) filed by Defendants Samsung Electronics Company, Ltd. and Samsung Electronics 

America, Inc. (collectively, “Samsung”). (Dkt. No. 10.) In the Motion, Samsung requests that the 

deadline for it to move, answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff’s complaint be extended up to 

and including February 8, 2024. (Id. at 2.) Samsung Electronics Company, Ltd. also notes that it 

waives service without waiving any other rights or defenses. (Id. at 1.) The Motion is unopposed. 

(Id. at 3.)

Having considered the Motion, and noting its unopposed nature, the Court finds that it 

should be and hereby is GRANTED. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that the deadline for

Samsung to move, answer, or otherwise respond to Plaintiff’s complaint is extended up to and 

including February 8, 2024.

It is further ORDERED that service of process for Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. has been 

waived.

Case 2:23-cv-00485-JRG Document 11 Filed 11/02/23 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 87
So Ordered this

Nov 2, 2023

Case 2:23-cv-00485-JRG Document 11 Filed 11/02/23 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 88
Case 2:23-cv-00485-JRG Document 11 Filed 11/02/23 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 89
<PAGE>

                                POWER OF ATTORNEY


         KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS, that each person whose signature
appears below hereby constitutes and appoints Dr. Ramon Harel, as his
attorney-in-fact, with full power of substitution, for him in any and all
capacities, to sign Form 10-KSB of Scanvec-Amiable, Ltd., and any and all
amendments thereto, and to file the same, with exhibits thereto and other
documents in connection therewith, with the Securities and Exchange Commission,
hereby ratifying and confirming all that said attorney-in-fact, or any
substitute, may do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

         This Power of Attorney has been signed by the following persons in the
capacities and on the dates indicated.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

Signature                                   Title                               Date
---------                                   ------                              -----
<S>                                         <C>                                 <C>
/s/  Benjamin S. Givli                      Director                            April 16, 2001
------------------------------------
Benjamin S. Givli


/s/ Eliza Rotbard                           Director                            April 14, 2001
------------------------------------
Eliza Rotbard


/s/ Yoav Harel                              Director                            April 15, 2001
------------------------------------
Yoav Harel


/s/ Garry Stock                             Director                            April 15, 2001
------------------------------------
Garry Stock
</TABLE>
Miguel Palacios PLATA, Petitioner, v. Lorie DAVIS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

No. 19-7687.

Supreme Court of the United States.

April 20, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Carlos Manuel PEREZ-CRISOSTOMO, Petitioner v. UNITED STATES

No. 19-5738

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, November 15, 2017.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, November 15, 2017

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A18I0059. GLENWOOD VILLAGE APARTMENTS OF MACON, LTD. (L.P.), et al. v. 

DEIDRE ALAVA.

Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of 

this order. The Clerk of State Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record 

transmitted to the Court of Appeals.

LC NUMBERS:

85731
Independent Auditors' Consent



To the Shareholders and Trustees of 
Smith Barney Variable Account Funds:

We consent to the use of our report dated February 12, 1997 with respect 
to 
the Income and Growth, U.S. Government/High Quality Securities and the 
Reserve Account Portfolios of Smith Barney Variable Account Funds 
incorporated herein by reference and to the references to our Firm under 
the 
headings "Financial Highlights" in the Prospectus and "Independent 
Auditors" 
in the Statement of Additional Information.





	
   

	KPMG Peat Marwick LLP		


New York, New York	
April 25, 1997
Iverylee Arashella JOHNSON, Petitioner, v. Mark S. INCH, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, et al.

No. 19-7920.

Supreme Court of the United States.

May 18, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                      16,001,560
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               25,579,785
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                 26,488,916
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,120,674
<PP&E>                                      72,806,210
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             168,929,025
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       27,383,561
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       537,176
<OTHER-SE>                                 137,596,765
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               168,929,025
<SALES>                                     53,295,835
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            53,295,835
<CGS>                                       25,454,262
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               25,454,262
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,834,673
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (282,736)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             14,793,736
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,479,374
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         13,314,362
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                13,314,362
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.22
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.22
        

</TABLE>
Tina DAVIS, Petitioner, v. TEXAS CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL.

No. 19-5594

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 15, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.