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

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4800 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 4800

 To extend the duty suspension on S-[(5-Methoxy-2-oxo-1,3,4-thiadiazol-
           3(2H)-yl)methyl]-O,O-dimethyl phosphorodithioate.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           December 18, 2007

  Mr. Coble introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To extend the duty suspension on S-[(5-Methoxy-2-oxo-1,3,4-thiadiazol-
           3(2H)-yl)methyl]-O,O-dimethyl phosphorodithioate.

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

SECTION 1. S-[(5-METHOXY-2-OXO-1,3,4-THIADIAZOL-3(2H)-YL)METHYL]-O,O-
              DIMETHYL PHOSPHORODITHIOATE.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.02.02 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to S-[(5-Methoxy-2-oxo-1,3,4-
thiadiazol-3(2H)-yl)methyl]-O,O-dimethyl phosphorodithioate is amended 
by striking ``12/31/2009'' and by inserting ``12/31/2011''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
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

January 29, 2010 

y0125 

Order 

 

January 29, 2010 

139093 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 139093 

 COA: 288315 

Saginaw CC: 90-004473-FC 

CLARENCE DARRIN MYLES, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 29, 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).
Order entered November 8, 2019

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 19
- 01229
- CV KALEI MERRILL, Appellant

V. MITCHELL CURRY, MELI NDA DEFELICE AND TAM IRA GRIFFIN, EACH

I NDIVIDUALLY AS DEFEN DANTS, Appellee s On Appeal from the 380th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 380
- 01827
- 2019



### O RDER Before the Court is appellant’s emergency motion to continue the briefing deadline and reconsider the C ourt’s November 7, 2019 order denying appellant’s motion to abate

. To the

e xtent appellant requests we vacate the November 7 th order and grant the motion to abate, w e DENY the request. To the extent appellant seeks an extension to file her brief, we GRAN T the request and ORDER appellant’s brief be filed no later than November 21, 2019.

/s/ KEN MOLBERG JUSTICE
13-2653-cv Whyte v. Barclays Bank **UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT** 



## SUMMARY ORDER **Rulings by summary order do not have precedential effect. Citation to a summary order filed on or after January 1, 2007, is permitted and is governed by Federal**  **Rule of Appellate Procedure 32.1 and this court’s Local Rule 32.1.1. When citing a summary order in a document filed with this court, a party must cite either the**  **Federal Appendix or an electronic database (with the notation “summary order”). A party citing a summary order must serve**  **a copy of it on any party not represented by counsel.**  **At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square,**  **in the City of New York, on the 24 th**  **day of March, two thousand sixteen.** PRESENT: Ralph K. Winter, Christopher F. Droney, Circuit Judges, Alvin K. Hellerstein, * District Judge
. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Bettina M. Whyte, as Trustee of the SemGroup Litigation Trust, Plaintiff-Appellant, -v.- 13-2653-cv Barclays Bank PLC, Barclays Capital, Inc., Defendants-Appellees. **

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - **FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT:** Susheel Kirpalani, Quinn Emanuel, Urquhart & Sullivan LLP, New York, NY, Rachel S. Fleishman, William T. Reid IV, & Jeffrey E. Gross, Reid Collins & Tsai LLP, New York, NY

* The Honorable Alvin K. Hellerstein, of the Southern District of New York, sitting by designation.

** We direct the Clerk of Court to amend the caption as noted.**FOR DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES:** Robinson B. Lacy, Jeffrey T. Scott, & Andrew E. Gelfand, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, New York, NY Appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Jed S. Rakoff, Judge ). **UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED**  that the judgment of the District Court is **AFFIRMED** . Plaintiff Bettina M. Whyte, as Trustee of the SemGroup Litigation Trust, appeals from the district court’s June 12, 2013, judgment granting defendants’ motions to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). The district court held that "the [Bankruptcy Code’s] section 546(g) 'safe harbor' impliedly preempts state-law fraudulent conveyance actions seeking to avoid 'swap transactions' as defined by the Code." Whyte v. Barclays Bank PLC , 494 B.R. 196, 201 (S.D.N.Y. 2013). We affirm for substantially the reasons stated in In re: Tribune Company Fraudulent Conveyance Litigation , 13-3992-cv; 13-3875-cv; 13-4178-cv; 13-4196-cv, which was heard in tandem with the present matter. FOR THE COURT, Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe Clerk of Court

2
BROOKS v. CAPSTAR CORPORATION.

No. 110A05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 25, 2005.

John Morris, Michelle Sain Langdon, Roberta S. Sperry, Charlotte, for Capstar Corporation, et al.

David Parker, Statesville, for Patricia Brooks.

Bob Bollinger, Charlotte, for NC Academy of Trial Lawyers.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 25th day of April 5005 by NC Academy of Trial Lawyers for leave to file Amicus Curiae Brief:

"Motion Allowed. Unless already submitted, the Amicus Brief shall be submitted to the court within the times allowed and in the manner provided by Appellate Rule 28(*i*). By order of the Court in conference this the 25th day of April 2005."
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

## Filings Instituting Proceedings

*Docket Numbers:*                     RP22-987-000.                

*Applicants:*                     Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America LLC.                

*Description:*                     § 4(d) Rate Filing: Amendments to Negotiated Rate Agreements Filing-Woodriver Energy LLC to be effective 6/17/2022.                

*Filed Date:*                     6/17/22.                

*Accession Number:*                     20220617-5101.                

*Comment Date:*                     5 p.m. ET 6/29/22.                

Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

                    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system (                    *https://elibrary.ferc.gov/​idmws/​search/​fercgensearch.asp*) by querying the docket number.                

                    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at:                     *http://www.ferc.gov/​docs-filing/​efiling/​filing-req.pdf.*                     For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.                

Dated: June 21, 2022.

Debbie-Anne A. Reese,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2022-13647 Filed 6-24-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
Gregory GREEN, Petitioner v. Alan WILSON, Attorney General of South Carolina

No. 19-5175

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
* 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. 98-40089 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus BALDEMAR M. GARZA, JR., Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. L-97-CR-266-1

- - - - - - - - - - Januiary 6, 1999 Before DAVIS, DUHE’, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Baldemar M. Garza appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress following his conviction for possession with intent to distribute marijuana. Garza argues that the reaction of the canine as the tractor-trailer was driving through the checkpoint was insufficient to establish probable cause. Garza did not make this argument in the district court. His argument was fact-based regarding the credibility of Agent Zelmer’s testimony that the dog alerted to Garza’s vehicle. Once the dogNo. 98-40089 -2- positively alerted to the presence of drugs, the agents had probable cause to search the tractor-trailer and any containers in it that might contain drugs. See United States v. Ross , 456 U.S. 798, 824-25 (1982); United States v. Seals , 987 F.2d 1102, 1106-07 (5th Cir. 1993); United States v. Dovali-Avila , 895 F.2d 206, 207 (5th Cir. 1990); and United States v. Hernandez , 976 F.2d 929, 930 (5th Cir. 1992). Garza cites no authority for his argument that the dog's alert alone was insufficient to establish probable cause. The district court did not commit plain error in denying Garza’s motion to suppress and admitting the marijuana seized during the warrantless search of Garza’s truck at the permanent border patrol checkpoint. United States v. Calverley , 37 F.3d 160, 162-64 (5th Cir. 1994) (en banc).
AFFIRMED.
In the Matter of Appeal of Charles H. TAYLOR/Transylvania Tree Farms from the denial of present-use value classification by the Jackson County Board of Equalization and Review for tax year 2000.

No. 638P03.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February 5, 2004.

Robert B. Long, Jr., Asheville, for Charles Taylor and Tree Farms.

W. Paul Holt, Jr., Sylva, Jeffrey P. Gray, Raleigh, for Jackson County.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 9th day of December 2003 by Charles H. Taylor/Transylvania Tree Farms in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant *591to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

> "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th day of February 2004."

Justices ORR and MARTIN recused.
**Exhibit 32.1**

PHARMACOPEIA DRUG DISCOVERY, INC.

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Pharmacopeia DrugDiscovery, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period endedJune 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the “Report”), I, Leslie J. Browne, Ph.D., President and ChiefExecutive Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and

(2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, inall material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.
| By:    |   | /s/ Leslie J. Browne, Ph.D.                     |   |
|--------|--------|-------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |   | Leslie J. Browne, Ph.D.                         |   |
|   |   | President, Chief Executive Officer and Director |   |
|   |   | (Principal Executive Officer)                   |   |
|   |   | August 4, 2006                                  |   |

 

----
James Devon POWELL v. STATE of North Carolina.

No. 620P04.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February 3, 2005.

James Devon Powell, Pro Se.

Joan M. Cunningham, Assistant Attorney General, Howard S. Boney, Jr., District Attorney, for State of NC.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Plaintiff on the 8th day of December 2004 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

> "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 3rd day of February 2005."
STATE of North Carolina v. Johnny A. FOX.

No. 125P04-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 6, 2004.

Johnny A. Fox, Pro Se.

David G. Heeter, Assistant Attorney General, Jeff Hunt, District Attorney, for State.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 19th day of April 2004 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

> "Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 6th day of May 2004."
1... See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.

COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 2-08-489-CV

IN RE ALLEN SAMUELS ENTERPRISES, INC., ET AL. RELATORS

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

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

The court has considered relators’ petition for writ of mandamus and is

of the opinion that relief should be denied. Accordingly, relators’ petition for

writ of mandamus is denied.

Relators shall pay all costs of this original proceeding, for which let

execution issue.

TERRIE LIVINGSTON

JUSTICE

PANEL: LIVINGSTON and MCCOY, JJ.

DELIVERED: January 6, 2009
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE NEW YORK
HEALTH CARE, INC. CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER
31, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                         192,675
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                5,890,406
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (168,000)  
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,433,380
<PP&E>                                         760,147  
<DEPRECIATION>                                (275,480)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               9,988,447
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,097,179  
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      4,800 
<COMMON>                                        37,500
<OTHER-SE>                                   5,120,006
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 9,988,447  
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            20,223,674
<CGS>                                       13,794,969   
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               13,794,969  
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             5,236,740
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               150,000  
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             320,980
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                597,152
<INCOME-TAX>                                   256,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   341,152
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .09  
        


</TABLE>
STATE v. DOE.

No. COA04-1250.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed June 21, 2005.

Certification Date July 11, 2005.

Appeal from the Forsyth (03CRS31229, 03CRS60578).

Case without published opinion. No error.
**Exhibit 23.2**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

 

To the Board of Directors

    of QuadraMed Corporation 

 

We hereby consent to the inclusion in this Form 10-K/A of QuadraMed Corporation for the year ended December 31, 2003 of ourreport dated March 28, 2003 and May 15, 2003 relating to the consolidated financial statements and related financial statement schedule of QuadraMed Corporation for the year ended December 31, 2001, which report appears in the December 31, 2003annual report on Form 10-K/A of QuadraMed Corporation. 

 

 

Petaluma, California 

November 10, 2004
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7042

RICHARD A. VANDEGRIFT, SR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus EARL BESHEARS, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Chief District Judge. (CA-96-1476-JFM) Submitted: July 2, 1998 Decided: July 17, 1998 Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Richard A. Vandegrift, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Ann Norman Bosse, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Richard A. Vandegrift, Sr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversibleerror. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Vandegrift v. Beshears , No. CA-96-1476-JFM (D. Md. June 30, 1997). We dispensewith oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
STATE v. Terrence Rodricus ELLIOTT.

No. 184A04.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 9, 2005.

William N. Farrell, Senior Deputy Attorney General, Garland N. Yates, District Attorney, for State.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 9th day of March 2005 by Defendant for Extension of Time for Court to Prepare Trial Transcript:

"Motion Allowed. Court reporter shall have up to and including the 7th day of April 2005 to prepare and deliver transcript to counsel. By order of the Court in conference this the 9th day of March 2005."
EXHIBIT  32.2


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

In  connection  with  the  annual  report  of  New  York  Health Care, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  (the "Report"), I, Jacob Rosenberg, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company during the period covered by this Form 10-K and
until  February  24,  2005,  hereby  certify  as  of the date hereof, solely for
purposes  of  Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that
to  the  best  of  my  knowledge:

          (1)  the  Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
          or  15(d),  as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and

          (2)  the  information  contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
          material  respects,  the financial condition and results of operations
          of  the  Company  at  the  dates  and  for  the  periods  indicated.


Date:  April  14,  2005          By:  /s/  Jacob  Rosenberg
                                      --------------------------
                                      Jacob Rosenberg
                                      Chief Financial Officer
                                      (Principal Financial Officer) during the
                                      period covered by this Form 10-K and until
                                      February 24, 2005.
STATE of North Carolina v. Nicholas Tyrone COLEMAN.

No. 44P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 3, 2005.

Marilyn G. Ozer, Chapel Hill, for Nicholas Tyrone Coleman.

Sarah Y. Meachum, R. Stuart Alright, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the notice of appeal from the North Carolina Court of Appeals, filed by the Defendant on the 20th day of January 2005 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-30, and the motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question filed by the Attorney General, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the motion to dismiss the appeal is

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 3rd day of March 2005."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 20th day of January 2005 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 3rd day of March 2005."