alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

Z.O., Appellant

and

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD,

CHICAGO REGIONAL OFFICE, Chicago, IL,

Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 23-0320

Issued: February 1, 2023

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Before:

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Chief Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

JAMES D. McGINLEY, Alternate Judge

On December 30, 2022 appellant filed an appeal from a June 30, 2022 nonmerit decision

of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). The Clerk of the Appellate Boards

assigned Docket No. 23-0320.

The Board has duly considered the matter and notes that the Board has jurisdiction to 

review final adverse decisions of OWCP issued under the Federal Employees’ Compensation 

Act.1 For final adverse decisions of OWCP issued on or after November 19, 2008, the Board’s 

review authority is limited to appeals which are filed within 180 days from the date of issuance 

of OWCP’s decision.2

The 180th day following the June 30, 2022 decision was December 27, 2022. As 

appellant did not file an appeal with the Board until December 30, 2022, more than 180 days 

after the June 30, 2022 OWCP decision, the Board finds that the appeal docketed as No. 23-0320

is untimely filed. The Board is without jurisdiction to review the appeal. Appellant has not 

1 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.; 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3(a).

2 20 C.F.R. § 501.3(e).
2

explained her failure to timely file an appeal with supporting documentation sufficient to 

establish compelling circumstances. Because there is no final adverse decision issued by OWCP 

within 180 days of the filing of the instant appeal, the Board concludes that the appeal docketed 

as No. 23-0320, must be dismissed.3 Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the appeal docketed as No. 23-0320 is dismissed.

Issued: February 1, 2023

Washington, DC

Alec J. Koromilas, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

James D. McGinley, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

3 The Board’s decisions and orders are “final upon the expiration of 30 days from the date of their issuance.” Id.

at § 501.6(d).
J.

to his extreme detriment. See id. Therefore, we conclude that the district court did not err in denying appellant's motion. Accordingly, we

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 2

Hardesty 

## '°1 7 1 7 9/1 Douglas J.

cc: Hon. Patrick Flanagan, District Judge Frank J. Matylinsky, Jr. Attorney General/Carson City Washoe County District Attorney Washoe District Court Clerk



## 2 We have reviewed all documents that appellant has submitted in proper person to the clerk of this court in this matter, and we conclude that no relief based upon those submissions is warranted. To the extent that appellant has attempted to present claims or facts in those submissions which were not previously presented in the proceedings below, we have declined to consider them in the first instance.

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A en
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

SHAUN C. WARRICK,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 130 EAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

SHAUN C. WARRICK,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 131 EAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 27th day of September, 2023, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

          <ARTICLE>     5
          <MULTIPLIER>     1,000

          <S>                                <C>
          <FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                    DEC-31-1999
          <PERIOD-START>                                       JAN-01-1999
          <PERIOD-END>                                         SEP-30-1999
          <PERIOD-TYPE>                      9-MOS
          <CASH>                                                    10,025
          <SECURITIES>                                                   0
          <RECEIVABLES>                                            388,123
          <ALLOWANCES>                                              21,522
          <INVENTORY>                                              283,980
          <CURRENT-ASSETS>                                         693,111
          <PP&E>                                                   533,424
          <DEPRECIATION>                                           239,825
          <TOTAL-ASSETS>                                         1,309,153
          <CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                    183,210
          <BONDS>                                                  539,600
          <PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                          0
          <PREFERRED>                                                    0
          <COMMON>                                                  52,277
          <OTHER-SE>                                               121,351
          <TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                           1,309,153
          <SALES>                                                1,566,943
          <TOTAL-REVENUES>                                       1,566,943
          <CGS>                                                  1,121,736
          <TOTAL-COSTS>                                          1,121,736
          <OTHER-EXPENSES>                                               0
          <LOSS-PROVISION>                                           3,091
          <INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                        28,356
          <INCOME-PRETAX>                                          131,234
          <INCOME-TAX>                                              48,475
          <INCOME-CONTINUING>                                       82,759
          <DISCONTINUED>                                                 0
          <EXTRAORDINARY>                                                0
          <CHANGES>                                                      0
          <NET-INCOME>                                              82,759
          <EPS-BASIC>                                               1.61
          <EPS-DILUTED>                                               1.56


</TABLE>
# C_2007186EN.01000101.xml

| 9.8.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 186/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.8.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 186/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4639 — Gabetti Property Solutions/Marcegaglia/Pirelli Real Estate/Italia Turismo)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2007/C 186/01)

On 31 July 2007, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in Italian and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

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

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/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 under document number 32007M4639. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu) |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32007M4639. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu)

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-6015

In Re: JIMMY O’NEAL BROWN,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

(CR-98-189, CA-01-410)

Submitted: April 18, 2002 Decided: April 30, 2002

Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jimmy O’Neal Brown, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

On January 7, 2002, Jimmy O. Brown filed this petition for a

writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the district court to

rule on his motion to retest drug-related evidence. Although

Brown’s retest motion was initially filed on October 6, 2000, Brown

has since filed a 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2001) motion

reiterating this claim and raising several others. The magistrate

judge entered a report and recommendation on July 24, 2001, and

following several more filings by Brown (including a pro se motion

to compel judgment on his motion for a retest), the case was again

referred to the magistrate judge on January 14, 2002. Because the

district court has recently acted in the case, we find no

unreasonable delay. Accordingly, we grant Brown’s motion to

supplement his petition and deny the petition for a writ of

mandamus. 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.

PETITION DENIED
```

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 210 (Tuesday, November 1, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 65890]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-21701]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD

Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board

AGENCY: Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the membership of the Defense Nuclear 
Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) Senior Executive Service (SES) 
Performance Review Board. It also announces the DNFSB senior executives 
who are available to serve on the SES performance review boards of 
other small, independent Federal commissions, committees, and boards.

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 24, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Send comments concerning this notice to: Defense Nuclear 
Facilities Safety Board, 625 Indiana Avenue, NW., Suite 700, 
Washington, DC 20004-2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deborah Biscieglia by telephone at 
(202) 694-7041 or by e-mail at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(1) through (5) requires 
each agency to establish, in accordance with regulations prescribed by 
the Office of Personnel Management, one or more performance review 
boards. The board shall review and evaluate the initial summary rating 
of the senior executive's performance, the executive's response, and 
the higher-level official's comments on the initial summary rating. The 
DNFSB is a small, independent Federal agency; therefore, the members of 
the DNFSB SES Performance Review Board listed in this notice are drawn 
from the SES ranks of other agencies.
    The following persons comprise a standing roster to serve as 
members of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board SES Performance 
Review Board:

Lawrence W. Roffee, Executive Director, United States Access Board
Gerald J. Smith, President, Barry M. Goldwater Scholarship & Excellence 
in Education Foundation
Christopher W. Warner, General Counsel, U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard 
Investigation Board
Leon A. Wilson, Jr., Executive Director, Committee for Purchase from 
People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled

    The following DNFSB SES members comprise a standing roster to serve 
on the performance review boards of other small, independent Federal 
commissions, committees and boards:

Richard A. Azzaro, General Counsel
Timothy J. Dwyer, Deputy Technical Director
J. Kenton Fortenberry, Technical Director
Kenneth M. Pusateri, General Manager
Joel R. Schapira, Deputy General Counsel

    Dated: October 24, 2005.
Kenneth M. Pusateri,
Chairman, Executive Resources Board.
[FR Doc. 05-21701 Filed 10-31-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3670-01-P
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-6730

JOSEPH LOUIS MCCOY,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

MICHELLE MITCHELL, Sheriff; LIEUTENANT

WILKINS, Medical Supervisor; DEPUTY FORD,

Nurse; DEPUTY SMITH, Nurse; DOCTOR CHANG, MD;

DEPUTY ANDERSON, Nurse,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, District

Judge. (1:06-cv-00126-TSE)

Submitted: August 18, 2006 Decided: August 29, 2006

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joseph Louis McCoy, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Joseph Louis McCoy appeals the district court’s order

dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) action, alleging deliberate

indifference to medical needs, for failure to state a claim

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2000). We have reviewed the

record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for

the reasons stated by the district court. See McCoy v. Mitchell,

No. 1:06-cv-00126-TSE (E.D. Va. filed Apr. 3, 2006 & entered Apr.

4, 2006). 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
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-20-00261-CV

Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's of London Subscribing to Policy No. NAJL05000016-

H87, as Subrogee of Momentum Hospitality, Inc. & 75 and Sunny Hospitality d/b/a 

Fairfield Inn & Suites

v.

Mayse & Associates, Inc.

On Appeal from the

343rd District Court of Aransas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. A-19-0236-CV-C

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED. Costs of the appeal are adjudged 

against appellant.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

September 23, 2021
# L_2010032EN.01001101.xml

| 4.2.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 32/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.2.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 32/11

---

Corrigendum to Commission Decision 2007/509/EC of 20 December 2006 on State aid No C 3/2005 (ex N 592/2004 (ex PL 51/2004)) which Poland is planning to implement for Fabryka Samochodow Osobowych SA (formerly DAEWOO — FSO Motor SA)

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 187 of 19 July 2007
  )

On page 43, recital 81, in the last sentence:

for:

‘... its market share is small.’,

read:

‘... its market share is limited.’;

on page 44, recital 88:

for:

‘... and its small market share.’,

read:

‘... and its limited market share.’.

---
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. AP-76,028

EX PARTE JOEL COOPER, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 909324 IN THE 209TH DISTRICT COURT

FROM HARRIS COUNTY

Per curiam.

O P I N I O N

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of aggravated sexual

assault of a child and sentenced to life imprisonment. The First Court of Appeals affirmed his

conviction. Cooper v. State, No. 01-03-01092-CR (Tex. App. – Houston October 14, 2004, no pet.).

Applicant contends that his appellate counsel rendered ineffective assistance because

Applicant wanted to file a petition for discretionary review and relied on appellate counsel’s

representation that she would file a petition for discretionary review on his behalf, but counsel did
not file a petition for discretionary review or notify Applicant that she would not be filing a petition

for discretionary review until after the filing deadline.

Appellate counsel filed an affidavit with the trial court. Based on that affidavit, the trial court

has entered findings of fact that appellate counsel notified Applicant that she would continue to

pursue his appeal until she heard otherwise from Applicant, but after the filing deadline counsel

informed Applicant that the petition for discretionary review was past due and that she would not

be filing a petition on Applicant’s behalf. Thus, Applicant was denied the opportunity to file a

petition for discretionary review. Ex parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997). We

find, therefore, that Applicant is entitled to the opportunity to file an out-of-time petition for

discretionary review of the judgment of the First Court of Appeals in Cause No. 01-03-01092-CR

that affirmed his conviction in Case No. 909324 from the 209th District Court of Harris County,

Texas. Applicant shall file his petition for discretionary review with the First Court of Appeals

within 30 days of the date on which this Court’s mandate issues.

Filed: November 5, 2008

Do not publish
# C_2007196EN.01000901.xml

| 24.8.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 196/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.8.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 196/9

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4769 — Sumitomo/Itochu/Toyo/AK&N)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2007/C 196/04)

On 20 August 2007, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. 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:

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

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/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 under document number 32007M4769. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu) |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32007M4769. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu)

---
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5216 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5216

       To repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 5, 2010

   Mr. Akin introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on 
  Appropriations, Ways and Means, Education and Labor, the Judiciary, 
Natural Resources, House Administration, and Rules, 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 repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

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

SECTION 1. REPEAL OF PPACA.

    Effective as of the enactment of the Patient Protection and 
Affordable Care Act, such Act is repealed, and the provisions of law 
amended or repealed by such Act are restored or revived as if such Act 
had not been enacted.
                                 <all>
```
# C_2007214EN.01000501.xml

| 13.9.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 214/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.9.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 214/5

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4677 — Thornwood/Federal Mogul)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2007/C 214/03)

On 10 August 2007, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. 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:

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

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/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 under document number 32007M4677. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu) |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32007M4677. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu)

---
# C_2007265EN.01000101.xml

| 7.11.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 265/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.11.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 265/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4879 — Jabil Circuit, Inc/Nokia Siemens Networks S.p.A.)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2007/C 265/01)

On 17 October 2007, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. 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:

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

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/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 under document number 32007M4879. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu). |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32007M4879. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).

---