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

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4120 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4120

    To amend the National Law Enforcement Museum Act to extend the 
                           termination date.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 28, 2014

  Mr. Hoyer (for himself and Mr. Wolf) introduced the following bill; 
        which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend the National Law Enforcement Museum Act to extend the 
                           termination date.

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

SECTION 1. NATIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT MUSEUM ACT TERMINATION DATE 
              EXTENDED.

    Section 4(f) of the National Law Enforcement Museum Act (Public Law 
106-492) is amended by striking ``13 years'' and inserting ``16 
years''.

SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The provisions of this Act shall take effect as if this Act were 
enacted on November 8, 2013.
                                 <all>
```
STATE of North Carolina v. Chad Braxton BUMPERS

No. 239P16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 14, 2016.

Mr. Sterling Rozear, Attorney at Law, For Bumpers, Chad Braxton.

Ms. Allison A. Angell, Mr. Joseph L. Hyde, Assistant Attorney Generals, Mr. Michael D. Waters, District Attorney, For State of North Carolina.

***ORDER***

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 23rd of June 2016 by State of NC for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Dissolved by order of the Court in conference, this the 8th of December 2016."

Upon consideration of the petition filed by State of NC on the 23rd of June 2016 for Writ of Supersedeas of the judgment of the 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 8th of December 2016."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 23rd of June 2016 by State of NC 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 8th of December 2016."
STATE of North Carolina v. Jesse C. SANTIFORT

No. 108P17

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 18, 2017

Walter S. Webster, Attorney at Law, Goldsboro, Vernon K. Stewart, Attorney at Law, Dunn, for Santifort, Jesse C.

Derrick Mertz, Assistant Attorney General, Susan I. Doyle, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

***ORDER***

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 6th of April 2017 by State of NC for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 18th of April 2017."

*119Upon consideration of the petition filed by State of NC on the 6th of April 2017 for Writ of Supersedeas of the judgment of the 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 18th of April 2017."

Upon consideration of the petition filed by State of NC on the 6th of April 2017 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:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 18th of April 2017."

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 17th of April 2017 by State of NC to Amend Petition for Writ of Certiorari:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 18th of April 2017."
JOHNSON v. JOHNSON

111P17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 3, 2017

Glenwood F. Johnson, for Johnson, Glenwood F.

Whitney Williams, Attorney at Law, John C. Fitzpatrick, Attorney at Law, Durham, for Johnson, Grace Justice.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 7th of April 2017 by Defendant to Proceed In Forma Pauperis:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 3rd of May 2017."
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

October 31, 2016

No. 04-16-00675-CV

Tom RETZLAFF,

Appellant

v.

Philip R. KLEIN, Klein Investigations & Consulting and James W. Landess,

Appellees

From the 73rd Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014-CI-17145

Honorable Antonia Arteaga, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Appellant’s Third Emergency Motion Requesting Enforcement of the Stay Order and for 

Sanctions or in the Alternative Request for Writ of Mandamus is DENIED. All proceedings in 

the trial court remain STAYED pending disposition of this appeal.

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

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

court on this 31st day of October, 2016.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
**Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 17 January 2008 – Commission v Greece**

**(Case C‐342/07)**

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 2002/91/EC – Energy policy – Energy saving – Failure to transpose within the prescribed period

Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Examination of merits by the Court – Situation to be taken into consideration – Situation on expiry of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 6)

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to adopt, within the prescribed period, the measures necessary to comply with Directive 2002/91/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2002 on the energy performance of buildings (OJ 2003 L 1, p. 65). |

**Operative part**

The Court:

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | | Declares that by not having adopted, within the prescribed period, the legislative, regulatory and administrative measures necessary to comply with Directive 2002/91/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2002 on the energy performance of buildings, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs. |
Order entered M ay 24, 2019

In The



## Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 19

- 00033

- CR

CHARLES WILLIAM BRYA NT, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

, Appellee

On Appeal from the Count y Court at Law

Rockwall County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CR17

- 2311



### O RDER

Before the Court is appellant’s May 24, 2019 first motion for extension of time to file his

brief. We GRANT the motion and ORDER appellant ’s brief due on or before June 25, 2019

.

Counsel is reminded that an attorney of record in an appeal may register on the Court’s

web site at www.txcourts.gov/5thcoa / and access the reporter’s record via the attorney portal.

/s/ BILL PEDERSEN, III

JUSTICE
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 Agriculture

###### Foreign Agricultural Service

# AGENCY:

Foreign Agricultural Service, USDA.

# ACTION:

Request for comment. 

                    The Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) requests comments on a proposed temporary waiver of certain provisions of the Refined Sugar Re-Export Program. Due to Hurricane Katrina, major disruptions to some U.S. sugar refining operations have occurred and seriously impacted sugar trade, including exports. In response, and using the waiver authority under sugar re-export program found at 7 CFR 1530.113 for licensed refiners, FAS proposes to temporarily extend from 90 days to 270 days the period in which licensed refiners must export or transfer an equivalent amount of refined sugar, after entering a quantity of raw can sugar, if such entry results in a positive balance to their license. Comments are welcomed regarding whether the waiver should be made or not, or about details of the terms of such a proposed waiver. Comments to this notice should be submitted within October 5, 2005 to Ron Lord, Deputy Director, Import Policies and Programs Division, Foreign Agricultural Service, USDA, 202-720-2916, by fax to 202-720-0876, or by e-mail to                     *Ronald.lord@usda.gov.*

Dated: September 21, 2005.

W. Kirk Miller,

Acting Administrator, Foreign Agricultural Service.

[FR Doc. 05-19577 Filed 9-29-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-10-M
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 182 (Wednesday, September 21, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 55429]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-18799]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards


Meeting of the Subcommittee on Plant License Renewal; Notice of 
Meeting

    The ACRS Subcommittee on Plant License Renewal will hold a meeting 
on October 5, 2005, Room T-2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 
Maryland.
    The entire meeting will be open to public attendance.
    The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows:

Wednesday, October 5, 2005--12:30 p.m. until 5 p.m.

    The purpose of this meeting is to discuss the License Renewal 
Application and associated Safety Evaluation Report (SER) with Open 
Items related to the License Renewal of the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, 
Units 1, 2, and 3. The Subcommittee will hear presentations by and hold 
discussions with representatives of the NRC staff, the Tennessee Valley 
Authority, and other interested persons regarding this matter. The 
Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and 
facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, 
for deliberation by the full Committee.
    Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or 
written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official, Mr. 
Cayetano Santos (telephone 301/415-7270) five days prior to the 
meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. 
Electronic recordings will be permitted.
    Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by 
contacting the Designated Federal Official between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 
p.m. (e.t.). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to 
contact the above named individual at least two working days prior to 
the meeting to be advised of any potential changes to the agenda.

    Dated: September 14, 2005.
Michael L. Scott,
Branch Chief, ACRS/ACNW.
[FR Doc. 05-18799 Filed 9-20-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-10061

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MARIA MAGNOLIA MEJIA

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:07-CR-117-ALL

Before SMITH, STEWART, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

TheFederal Public Defender appointed to represent Maria Magnolia Mejia

has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders

v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Mejia has not filed a response. Our

independent review of the record and counsel’s brief discloses no nonfrivolous

issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is

GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the

APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

October 27, 2008

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
State of North Carolina v. Jaahkii Quran Harris

No. 166P16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 18, 2016

John L. Wait, Attorney at Law, High Point, for Harris, Jaahkii Quran.

Rory Agan, Associate Attorney General, Joseph L. Hyde, Assistant Attorney General, R. Andrew Murray, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

***ORDER***

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 9th of May 2016 by State of NC for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Dissolved by order of the Court in conference, this the 18th of August 2016."

Upon consideration of the petition filed by State of NC on the 9th of May 20 16 for Writ of Supersedeas of the judgment of the 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 18th of August 2016."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 9th of May 2016 by State of NC 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 18th of August 2016."
**Exhibit 31.2**I, Richard Pyle, Chief Financial Officer of Town Sports International Holdings, Inc., certify that:     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Town Sports International Holdings,Inc.;     2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements and other financial information included inthis report fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:     (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;     (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, 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 registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):     (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’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 havea significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;         By:                          /s/ Richard Pyle    Richard Pyle    Chief Financial Officer   Date: August 2, 2007
26
State of North Carolina v. Linda Beth Chekanow and Robert David Bishop

No. COA15-1294

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: October 4, 2016

REVERSED AND REMANDED.
**IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS**

((((((((((((((((

No. 08-0521

((((((((((((((((

In Re  Guardianship Of Kathryn Houseworth Gibbs, An Incapacitated Person

((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus

((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

**ORDER**

1.The motion to abate, filed on September 4, 2008, is granted, and this case is **ABATED** to allow the parties to proceed with settlement negotiations.

2.This case is removed from the Court's active docket until **October 15, 2008**, by which time the parties must file either a status report or a motion to dismiss.  The parties shall immediately notify this Court about any changes in status in the settlement proceedings.

Done at the City of Austin, this 12th day of September, 2008.

Blake A. Hawthorne, Clerk

Supreme Court of Texas

By Claudia Jenks, Chief Deputy Clerk
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4017 Reported in House (RH)]

                                                 House Calendar No. 117
113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4017

                          [Report No. 113-505]

       To designate a peak located in Nevada as ``Mount Reagan''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 6, 2014

Mr. Heck of Nevada introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
                   the Committee on Natural Resources

                             June 30, 2014

  Additional sponsors: Mr. Nugent, Mr. Griffith of Virginia, and Mr. 
                                 Daines

                             June 30, 2014

        Referred to the House Calender and ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
       To designate a peak located in Nevada as ``Mount Reagan''.

 

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF MOUNT REAGAN.

    (a) Designation.--The peak in the State of Nevada located at N 
36.18804 W 114.99815 shall be designated as ``Mount Reagan''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the peak referred to in 
subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to Mount Reagan.
                                                 House Calendar No. 117

113th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 4017

                          [Report No. 113-505]

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

       To designate a peak located in Nevada as ``Mount Reagan''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             June 30, 2014

        Referred to the House Calender and ordered to be printed
```
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4154 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4154

To deny visas and entry to the United States to officials and employees 
of the Government of the Russian Federation due to the Russian military 
            intervention in Ukraine, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 5, 2014

 Mr. Poe of Texas introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
                     the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To deny visas and entry to the United States to officials and employees 
of the Government of the Russian Federation due to the Russian military 
            intervention in Ukraine, and for other purposes.

    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 ``Russia Visa Sanctions Act''.

SEC. 2. DENIAL OF VISAS AND ENTRY TO THE UNITED STATES TO OFFICIALS AND 
              EMPLOYEES OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION DUE 
              TO THE RUSSIAN MILITARY INTERVENTION INTO UKRAINE.

    (a) In General.--Except as necessary to meet United States 
obligations under the Agreement between the United Nations and the 
United States of America regarding the Headquarters of the United 
Nations, signed June 26, 1947, and entered into force November 21, 
1947, and other applicable international treaty obligations, the 
Secretary of State shall deny a visa to, and the Secretary of Homeland 
Security shall deny admission into the United States to, all officials 
and employees of the Government of the Russian Federation until such 
time as the Secretary of State certifies to Congress that--
            (1) the military intervention into Ukraine by the Russian 
        Federation has ceased; and
            (2) the Russian Federation respects the sovereignty, 
        independence, and territorial integrity of Ukraine in 
        accordance with the 1994 Budapest Memorandum on Security 
        Assurances.
    (b) Exception for Certain Military Bases.--The certification 
requirement specified in paragraph (2) of subsection (a) shall not 
apply to military bases of the Russian Federation in Ukraine's Crimean 
peninsula operating in accordance with its 1997 agreement on the Status 
and Conditions of the Black Sea Fleet Stationing on the Territory of 
Ukraine.
                                 <all>
```
STATE of North Carolina v. Gregory Anthony GARDNER, Defendant.

No. COA17-511

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: November 21, 2017

NO ERROR.
**Exhibit
      32.1**







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





I,
      Linda
      Putback-Bean, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report
      of
      Pediatric Prosthetics, Inc. on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly period ended
      September 30, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
      15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained
      in
      such Form 10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial
      condition and results of operations of Pediatric Prosthetics, Inc.





*By:/s/
      Linda Putback-Bean*


Linda
      Putback-Bean


Chief
      Executive Officer





November
      19, 2007