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

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5631 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                       Calendar No. 917
110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5631

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 30, 2008

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 
                        and Governmental Affairs

                             July 30, 2008

              Reported by Mr. Lieberman, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 1155 Seminole Trail in Charlottesville, Virginia, as the ``Corporal 
                Bradley T. Arms Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. CORPORAL BRADLEY T. ARMS POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 1155 Seminole Trail in Charlottesville, Virginia, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Corporal Bradley T. Arms Post Office 
Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Corporal 
Bradley T. Arms Post Office Building''.
                                                       Calendar No. 917

110th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 5631

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 1155 Seminole Trail in Charlottesville, Virginia, as the ``Corporal 
                Bradley T. Arms Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             July 30, 2008

                       Reported without amendment
```
STATE v. Joshua J. GENTRY.

No. 584P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

November 3, 2005.

William P. Hart, Special Deputy Attorney General, Clark Everett, District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 14th day of October 2005 by Defendant for "Petition for Plain Error Review Pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7A-31(B)(1)(2)(3)(4), (C)(1)(2)(3):"

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference this the 3rd day of November 2005."
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED AU GUST 25, 2016

NO. 03

- 14

- 00682

- CR

Peter Ezebunwa, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 427TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, GO ODWIN, AND BOURLAND MODIFIED AND, AS MODIFIED, AFFIRMED

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE GOODWIN

This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the tr i a l court. Having reviewed

the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court ho lds that there was no error in the court’s

judgme nt requiring reversal

. However, there was error in the judgment that requires correction.

Therefore, the Court modifies the trial court’s judgment to reflect that appellant’s “Plea to

Motion to Adjudicate” was “Not True.” The judgm ent, as modified , is affirmed

. Because

appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication of costs is made.
STATE of North Carolina v. Jhalmar Emmanuel MEDINA.

No. 9P06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 2, 2006.

Kathryn L. VandenBerg, Raleigh, for Jhalmar E. Medina.

Christopher G. Browning, Jr., Solicitor General, Peter S. Gilchrist, III, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 9th day of January 2006 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 2nd day of March 2006."
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Richard Judy, Appellant.

[801 NYS2d 68]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (DeRosa, J.), rendered April 28, 2003, convicting him of attempted burglary in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s waiver of his right to appeal precludes review of his challenge to the court’s denial of his motion to change counsel, except to the extent that it may have affected the voluntariness of his plea *(see People v Demosthene,*2 AD3d 874 [2003]; *People v Miller,*306 AD2d 294 [2003]; *People v Herring,*274 AD2d 525 [2000]). On this record, we find that the defendant’s guilty plea was entirely voluntary *(see People v Harris,*61 NY2d 9 [1983]). Moreover, he never moved to vacate the plea nor does he now contend that its voluntariness was in any way affected by the earlier denial of his motion to change *970counsel. Accordingly, his claim that the court improperly denied his request for the assignment of new counsel has been waived. Florio, J.P., Crane, Krausman, Rivera and Fisher, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5343 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5343

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on 2-ethylhexyl (4-chloro-2-
                        methylphenoxy) acetate.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 12, 2008

 Mrs. Biggert introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To extend the temporary suspension of duty on 2-ethylhexyl (4-chloro-2-
                        methylphenoxy) acetate.

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

SECTION 1. 2-ETHYLHEXYL (4-CHLORO-2-METHYLPHENOXY) ACETATE.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.10.54 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to 2-ethylhexyl (4-chloro-2-
methylphenoxy) acetate) is amended by striking the date in the 
effective period column and 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>
```
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

PATRICK ROMEUS
, Appellant,

v.

SANDRA ROMEUS
, Appellee

.

No. 4D 20

- 2409

[ July 1, 2021 ]

Appeal of nonfinal order from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth

Judicial Circuit , Broward County ; Michael I. Rothschild , Judge; L.T. Case

No. FMCE 19

- 012177 (44)(93)

.

Kimberly H. Schultz of Kimberly H. Schultz , P.A.

, Plantation, for appellant.

Natalie Suzanne Kay of Kelley Kronenberg, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

W ARNER
, D AMOORGIAN and G ERBER
, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Nicholas W. Baxter, President and Chief Executive Officer of Eurasia Energy Limited, certify that:



1.

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Eurasia Energy Limited;



2.

Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;



3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4.

The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(d)) for the small business issuer and have:



(a)

designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;



(b)

evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



(c)

disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and



5.

The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



(a)

all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and



(b)

any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting.









May 11, 2006

/s/Nicholas W. Baxter

Date

Nicholas W. Baxter,

President, C.E.O. and Director
In re ADOPTION OF ANDERSON.

No. 448PA04.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 2, 2005.

Bobby D. Mills, Raleigh, for Unidentified Adoptive Parents.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 1st day of August 2005 by Respondent for Extension of Time to File Brief:

"Motion Allowed. Respondent (Michael Avery) shall have up to and including the 7th day of September 2005 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court. By order of the Court in conference this the 2nd day of August 2005."
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 Health and Human Services [Document Identifier: OS-0990-0002]
 AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HHS.
 ACTION: Notice.
 SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirement of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Office of the Secretary (OS), Department of Health and Human Services, is publishing the following summary of a proposed collection for public comment.
 DATES: Comments on the ICR must be received on or before September 12, 2022.
 ADDRESSES: Submit your comments to 
                        *Sherrette.Funn@hhs.gov*
                         or by calling (202) 264-0041.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: When submitting comments or requesting information, please include the document identifier 0945-0002-60D and project title for reference, to Sherrette A. Funn, email: 
                        *Sherrette.Funn@hhs.gov,*
                         or call (202) 264-0041 the Reports Clearance Officer.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Interested persons are invited to send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including any of the following subjects: (1) The necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden. *Title of the Collection:*
                     Civil Rights and Conscience Complaint and Health Information Privacy & Security Complaint *Type of Collection:*
                     Office of Civil Rights (OCR)—Extension *OMB No.*
                     0945-0002 *Abstract:* Estimated Annualized Burden Table
Written forms/electronic forms
Type of respondent
Number of
                             respondents
Number of
                             responses per respondent
Average
                             burden hours per response
Total burden hoursCivil Rights/Conscience Discrimination Complaint
Individuals or households, Not-for-profit institutions
15,446
1
45/60
11,585Health Information Privacy Complaint
Individuals or households, Not-for-profit institutions
30,392
1
45/60
22,794Total

45,838

45/60
34,379
 Sherrette A. Funn, Paperwork Reduction Act Reports Clearance Officer, Office of the Secretary.


[FR Doc. 2022-14869 Filed 7-12-22; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4153-01-P
Exhibit 10.5


 





 


2019
Frank Lubin Bonus Compensation Plan


 


On-target
bonus compensation for 2019 shall be 35% of salary. 75% of the on-target bonus will be a cash component based upon the percentage
of 2019 budgeted EBITDA achieved. 25% of the on-target bonus will be a discretionary award of Restricted Stock Units (RSUs) from
the 2015 Omnibus Incentive Plan, as amended, based on the percentage completion of the targets listed
in Appendix A.


 


For the avoidance
of doubt, if the on-target bonus were $75,000, and all targets are achieved, then:


 


	 	●	$56,250 would be the cash component
	 	●	$18,750 would be the value of the RSUs awarded


 


The percentage
payout for the cash component will be based on the percentage of EBITDA target achieved in the following table:


 


	
         

        Budgeted

        EBITDA
        Loss
	
         

        Percentage
        of

        EBITDA
        Target
	
        Minimum

        Additional

        EBITDA
	
        Percentage
        of

        On-Target

        Bonus
        Paid

	 	Less than 90%	 	0%
	 	90% - 94.99%	$ {229,889.00}	25%
	 	95% - 99.99%	$ {114,944.50}	90%
	${2,298,890}	100% - 104.99%	$-	100%
	 	105% - 109.99%	$114,944.50	105%
	 	110% - 114.99%	$229,889.00	110%
	 	115% - 119.99%	$344,833.50	115%
	 	120% - 124.99%	$459,778.00	125%
	 	125% - 129.99%	$574,722.50	150%
	 	130% and Greater	$689,667.00	175%
	 	 	 	 
	 	On-Target	 	 
	 	Indicates EBITDA Positive in Q4 2019	 


 


All EBITDA
targets are net of the bonus expense.





 


	 	●	The EBITDA will be determined by Management as part of the 2019 year-end
                                    close with final determination to be made by the Board




	 	●	The bonus amount will be confirmed by the board no later than the March 2020 Board meeting, payable on the next payroll date.
	 	●	The executive team member must be an active employee on the date of payment in order to receive the bonus


 


	Signature	/s/ Frank P. Lubin	 	Date May 1, 2019


 


Intellicheck, Inc – Company Confidential


 



    	 



    	 



     





Appendix A


Frank Lubin


 


	 	1.	Break Retail ID online, Retail ID Web and Retail ID Photo Upload into 3 application verticals to increase throughput, isolate by application to increase stability and capacity by 09/01/19
	 	2.	Deploy build systems to the cloud to automate builds to perform static code analysis by 10/1/19
	 	3.	Define build and release pipelines for IDCheck Web Service, Retail ID On-line and Retail ID Web to implement continuous integration 10/01/19


 


Intellicheck, Inc – Company
Confidential
HOWES v. HOCKNEY.

No. 353P05-4.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

January 26, 2006.

Grady L. Balentine, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, for C. Preston Cornelius.

Clarence Preston Cornelius, Pro Se.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 12th day of August 2005 by Plaintiff for "Appeal In Forma Pauperis to Dismiss With Prejudice Order of 11th Day of July 2005 & All of Judge Griffin Orders for Constructive Fraud and Disallow Attorney Fees:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference this the 26th day of January 2006."

Justice EDMUNDS recused.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5557 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5557

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a full deduction 
         for meals and lodging in connection with medical care.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 6, 2008

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a full deduction 
         for meals and lodging in connection with medical care.

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

SECTION 1. FULL DEDUCTION FOR MEALS AND LODGING IN CONNECTION WITH 
              MEDICAL CARE.

    (a) In General.--Paragraph (2) of section 213(d) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to amounts paid for certain lodging away 
from home treated as paid for medical care) is amended--
            (1) by inserting ``meals and'' before ``lodging'' in the 
        heading,
            (2) by inserting ``meals and'' before ``lodging'' in the 
        text, and
            (3) by striking the last sentence.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6684
ISAAC EUGENE SLAPPY, Plaintiff - Appellant, and JEFFERY RAY ADDY; MANSA MUSA BANSHEE, Plaintiffs, versus J. BRYANT DIEHL; TOP REPUBLIC TOBACCO, Defendants - Appellees.

No. 01-6795
JEFFERY RAY ADDY, Plaintiff - Appellant, and ISAAC EUGENE SLAPPY; MANSA MUSA BANSHEE, Plaintiffs,2 versus J. BRYANT DIEHL; TOP REPUBLIC TOBACCO, Defendants - Appellees. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. David C. Norton, District Judge. (CA-99-3125-3-18BC) Submitted: July 12, 2001 Decided: July 20, 2001 Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Isaac Eugene Slappy, Jeffery Ray Addy, Appellants Pro Se. Terry B. Millar, TERRY B. MILLAR, L.L.C., Rock Hill, South Carolina; Thomas Frank Dougall, BOWERS, ORR & DOUGALL, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).3 PER CURIAM: Isaac Eugene Slappy and Jeffery Ray Addy appeal the district court’s orders denying relief on their motions for relief from judgment. We have reviewed the records and the district court’s opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Addy v. Diehl, No. CA-99- 3125-3-18BC (D.S.C. filed Mar. 22, 2001; entered Mar. 23, 2001; filed and entered Mar. 26, 2001). We deny Addy’s motion for appointment of counsel on appeal. We dispense with 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.

AFFIRMED
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

DAVID M. SHIPP,

Petitioner,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN 

SERVICES,

Respondent.

______________________ 

2014-3019

______________________ 

Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection 

Board in No. SF0432070279-C-2.

______________________ 

ON MOTION

______________________ 

O R D E R

David M. Shipp moves for leave to proceed in forma 

pauperis and requests the case be held in abeyance.

Upon consideration thereof, 

 IT IS ORDERED THAT: 

(1) The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis 

is granted. 

Case: 14-3019 Document: 6 Page: 1 Filed: 01/08/2014
2 SHIPP v. HHS

(2) The request to hold the case in abeyance is denied. The petitioner’s brief (form enclosed) is due within 

30 days. 

 FOR THE COURT

 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole 

Daniel E. O’Toole 

Clerk of Court

s24

Case: 14-3019 Document: 6 Page: 2 Filed: 01/08/2014
STATE v. Joel McCULLOUGH.

No. 204P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

January 26, 2006.

Leonard G. Green, Assistant Attorney General, Peter S. Gilchrist, III, District Attorney.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 14th day of April 2005 by Defendant for Amended Appropriate Relief:

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference this the 26th day of January 2006."
Gary Ray SCHENK, Sr., v. HNA HOLDINGS, INC., also known as Trevira, Inc. formerly Hoechst Celanese, Inc. and Fiber Industries, Inc. Donald Lee Bell v. HNA Holdings, Inc., also known as Trevira, Inc. formerly Hoechst Celanese, Inc. and Fiber Industries, Inc.

No. 365P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 1, 2005.

Mona Lisa Wallace, Salisbury, Cathy A. Williams, John Korzen, for Donald Lee Bell.

Michael E. Hutchins, Atlanta, GA, Josephine H. Hicks, Charlotte, for HNA Holdings, Inc.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 12th day of July 2005 by Plaintiff (Donald Lee Bell) in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina *650Court 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 1st day of December 2005."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 12th day of July 2005 by Plaintiff (Gary Ray Schenk, Sr.) 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 1st day of December 2005."