alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4), 552b(c)(6), and 552b(c)(9)(B), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Special Emphasis Panel Review of microRNA applications. (Telephone Conference)                    

*Date:*                         November 13, 2007.                    

*Time:*                         1 p.m. to 2 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, 5635 Fishers Lane, Bethesda, MD 20892.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Beata Buzas, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, National Institutes of Health, 5635 Fishers Lane, Rm 3041, Rockville, MD 20852, 301-443-0800,                         *bbuzas@mail.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.271, Alcohol Research Career Development Awards for Scientists and Clinicians; 93.272, Alcohol National Research  Service Awards for Research Training; 93.273, Alcohol Research Programs; 93.891, Alcohol Research Center Grants, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: October 12, 2007.

Jennifer Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 07-5195 Filed 10-19-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-15-0000344 18-AUG-2015 08:43 AM
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 1:10-cr-00015-MP-AK

THOMAS UNDERWOOD,

Defendant.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 37, Motion to Clarify Judgment by Thomas

Underwood. Defendant seeks clarification as to whether the Court recommends that the Bureau

of Prisons house him as close to Gainesville as possible so that he may be near his children. It

does. Accordingly, it is 

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. Motion to Clarify Judgment, Doc. 37, is GRANTED. 

2. The Clerk is directed to file an Amended Judgment. 

DONE AND ORDERED this 1st day of September, 2010

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge
#### BLANTON v. MANESS

No. 112 PC.

Case below: 32 N.C. App. 577.

Petition by plaintiffs for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 13 June 1977.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-6960
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus SIMON WILLIAMS, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CR-92-34, CA-96-572-AM) Submitted: November 20, 1997 Decided: December 10, 1997 Before MURNAGHAN, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Simon Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Edward Rich, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1994) (current version at 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997)). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Williams , Nos. CR-92-34; CA-96- 572-AM (E.D. Va. Sept. 30, 1996). See Lindh v. Murphy , 521 U.S. ___, 65 U.S.L.W. 4557 (U.S. June 23, 1997) (No. 96-6298). We note that Appellant carried the firearm at issue, as carry is defined by this court in United States v. Mitchell , 104 F.3d 649, 653 (4th Cir. 1997). 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
#### STATE v. POPE

No. 185 PC.

Case below: 24 N.C. App. 217.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 4 February 1975.
Exhibit 10.2


 


FIRST AMENDMENT TO


AMENDED AND RESTATED EXECUTIVE EMPLOYMENT
AGREEMENT


 


WHEREAS, Nabors Industries
Ltd. and Nabors Industries, Inc. (collectively, the “Company”) and William Restrepo (“Executive”), entered
into an Amended and Restated Executive Employment Agreement (the “Agreement”) effective as of January 2, 2020; and


 


WHEREAS, the Executive
and the Company have agreed to certain modifications to the Agreement which they now desire to memorialize effective with this
amendment (this “Amendment”) as follows:


 


1.       Section
3.1(a) of the Agreement is amended by adding after the first sentence: “However, on an interim basis as set forth herein
the amount of base salary due and payable for purposes of biweekly payroll administration only shall be based on a salary, determined
on an annualized basis, as set forth below:


 


(a)       For
the payroll period commencing on March 23, 2020 and ending on April 5, 2020, an amount equal to eighty percent (80%) of Base Salary;


 


(b)       For
the two (2) payroll periods commencing on April 6, 2020 and ending on May 3, 2020, an amount equal to fifty percent (50%) of the
amount calculated in accordance with clause (a) above; and


 


(c)       For
the payroll period commencing on May 4, 2020 and ending at the end of the last payroll period of fiscal 2020, an amount equal to
ninety percent (90%) of the amount calculated in accordance with clause (a) above.


 


Notwithstanding the foregoing, for all
other purposes under this Agreement, the term “Base Salary” or “base salary” shall be construed in accordance
with the first sentence of this Section 3.1(a) as if the preceding section’s modification had not occurred.”


 


2.       Executive
agrees and acknowledges that Section 1.11(d) of the Agreement shall not apply with respect to this Amendment.


 


3.       As
amended by paragraphs 1 and 2 above, the Agreement remains in full force and effect. This Amendment may be executed in two or more
counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original but which taken together shall constitute one and the same instrument.


 


[SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS]


 






     


     


    

 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have
executed this Amendment effective as of April 6, 2020.


 


	 	COMPANY:
	 	 
	 	Nabors Industries Ltd.
	 	 
	 	By: 	/s/Mark D. Andrews
	 	 	Its Corporate Secretary
	 	 
	 	Nabors Industries, Inc.
	 	 
	 	By: 	/s/Michael Rasmuson
	 	 	Its Senior Vice President and General Counsel
	 	 
	 	EXECUTIVE:
	 	 
	 	/s/William
    Restrepo
	 	William Restrepo
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

THE BARTRAM, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 1:10-cv-28-SPM-GRJ

LANDMARK AMERICAN INSURANCE 

COMPANY, an Oklahoma corporation,

ROCKHILL INSURANCE COMPANY,

an Arizona corporation, and

WESTCHESTER SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE 

COMPANY, a Georgia corporation

Defendants.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court upon Defendants’ Unopposed Motion For

Enlargement of Time To File Trial Exhibit List (Doc. 157) and Defendants’ Motion For

Leave To File A Reply To Plaintiff’s Response To Defendants’ Notice of Potential Trial

Conflict. (Doc. 159.) 

In their motion for enlargement of time the Defendants request permission to file

their trial exhibit list on or before December 14, 2011. The most recent scheduling

order in this case did not specify a deadline for the parties to exchange their Rule

26(a)(3) exhibit lists. (Doc. 70.) The scheduling order in the related Contractor Action,

however, specified a November 30, 2011 deadline for the parties in the Contractor

Action to exchange their Rule 26(a)(3) exhibit lists. (1:09-cv-254 Doc. 130.) Plaintiff

does not oppose the request. Accordingly, Defendants’ request for an extension of time

to exchange their Rule 26(a)(3) exhibits lists is due to be granted. The deadline to

exchange Rule 26(a)(3) exhibit lists is December 14, 2011 and the deadline to file

Case 1:10-cv-00028-SPM-GRJ Document 161 Filed 12/06/11 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

objections to the opposing party’s Rule 26(a)(3) exhibits is January 6, 2012.

Defendants also request permission to file a reply to Plaintiff’s Response (Doc.

156) to Defendants’ Notice of Potential Trial Conflict and Request For Protection. (Doc.

154.) While Plaintiff objects to Defendants’ request to file a reply, the Court determines

that a reply should be permitted.

Accordingly, upon due consideration, it is ORDERED:

1. Defendants’ Unopposed Motion For Enlargement of Time To File Trial

Exhibit List (Doc. 157) is GRANTED. The parties shall exchange their

Rule 26(a)(3) exhibit lists on or before December 14, 2011. The deadline

to file objections to Rule 26(a)(3) exhibits is January 6, 2012.

2. Defendants’ Motion For Leave To File A Reply To Plaintiff’s Response To

Defendants’ Notice of Potential Trial Conflict (Doc. 159) is GRANTED.

Counsel for Defendants may file a reply to Plaintiff’s response to the

Notice of Trial Conflict and Request for Protection on or before December

13, 2011. 

DONE AND ORDERED this 6th day of December, 2011. 

s/ Gary R. Jones 

GARY R. JONES

United States Magistrate Judge

Case No: 1:10-cv-28-SPM -GRJ

Case 1:10-cv-00028-SPM-GRJ Document 161 Filed 12/06/11 Page 2 of 2
# C_2009130EN.01000101.xml

| 9.6.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 130/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.6.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 130/1

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

8 June 2009

2009/C 130/01

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,3866 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 136,53 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4465 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,87090 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,8925 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,5166 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,9360 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,000 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 287,19 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7060 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,5563 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,2220 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,1594 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,7590 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5548 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,7491 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 2,2337 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,0230 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 731,15 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 11,3459 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 9,4803 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,3164 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 13 973,65 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,8829 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 65,877 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 43,5215 |
| THB | Thai baht | 47,664 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,7388 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 18,5345 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 65,9400 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,3866

JPY

Japanese yen

136,53

DKK

Danish krone

7,4465

GBP

Pound sterling

0,87090

SEK

Swedish krona

10,8925

CHF

Swiss franc

1,5166

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,9360

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,000

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

287,19

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7060

PLN

Polish zloty

4,5563

RON

Romanian leu

4,2220

TRY

Turkish lira

2,1594

AUD

Australian dollar

1,7590

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5548

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,7491

NZD

New Zealand dollar

2,2337

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,0230

KRW

South Korean won

1 731,15

ZAR

South African rand

11,3459

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

9,4803

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,3164

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

13 973,65

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,8829

PHP

Philippine peso

65,877

RUB

Russian rouble

43,5215

THB

Thai baht

47,664

BRL

Brazilian real

2,7388

MXN

Mexican peso

18,5345

INR

Indian rupee

65,9400

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
The Football Association Premier League Limited et al v. Youtube, Inc. et al Doc. 131

Dockets.Justia.com
Case 1:07-cv-03560-LAK     Document 25      Filed 09/06/2007     Page 1 of 1
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 203 (Monday, October 22, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 59558]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-5225]


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

NEIGHBORHOOD REINVESTMENT CORPORATION


Neighborworks[supreg] America Regular Board of Directors Meeting; 
Sunshine Act

Time and Date: 2 p.m., Wednesday, October 24, 2007.

Place: 1325 G Street, NW., Suite 800, Boardroom, Washington, DC 20005.

Status: Open.

Contact Person for More Information: Erica Hall, Assistant Corporate 
Secretary, (202) 220-2376; <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#caafa2aba6a68aa4bde4a5b8ad"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="36535e575a5a76584118594451">[email protected]</span></a>.

Agenda: 
I. Call to Order.
II. Approval of the Minutes.
III. Summary Report of the Finance, Budget and Program Committee.
IV. Summary Report of the Audit Committee.
V. Summary Report of the Audit Committee.
VI. Summary Report of the Corporate Administration Committee.
VII. Financial Report.
VIII. Corporate Scorecard.
IX. Chief Executive Officer's Quarterly Management Report.
X. Field Operations Presentation.
Adjournment.

Erica L. Hall
Assistant Corporate Secretary.
[FR Doc. 07-5225 Filed 10-18-07; 2:12 pm]
BILLING CODE 7570-02-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
# C_2009022EN.01S00301.xml

| 28.1.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 22/s3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.1.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 22/s3

---

NOTE TO THE READERThe institutions have decided to no longer quote in their texts the last amendment to cited acts.Unless otherwise indicated, references to acts in the texts published here are to the version of those acts currently in force.

NOTE TO THE READER

---
### IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 10

- 00013

- CR

ALICIA LEWIS

, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

, Appellee

From the County Court at Law

Ellis County, Texas

Trial Court No. 0911956 CR

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Alicia Lewis was found to be in contem pt of court and sentenced to 180 days in

jail. She appealed. The Clerk of this Court warned Lewis that the appeal was subject to

dismissal because there is no right of appeal from an order of contempt. See Ex parte

Eureste , 725 S.W.2d, 214, 216 (Tex. Cr im. App. 1986); Ex parte Moorehouse , 614 S.W.2d

450, 451 (Tex. Crim. App. 1981); Hubbard v. State , 265 S.W.3d 434, 435 (Tex. App.

—

Houston [1st Dist.] 2007, no pet.). The Clerk also warned Lewis that unless a response

was filed showing grounds for continui ng the appeal, the appeal would be dismissed.Lewis v. State Page 2

Counsel for Lewis responded that Lewis was pursuing a writ of habeas corpus

and that a family member or friend had filed the notice of appeal.

Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed.

TOM GRAY

Ch ief Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Reyna, and

Justice Davis

Appeal dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed February 10 , 2010

Do not publish

[ CR25 ]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

DANFOSS TURBOCOR

COMPRESSORS B.V.,et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v. Case No. 4:10-cv-145-RH-WCS

JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.,

Defendant.

______________________________________

ORDER

This case has been referred to the undersigned to conduct a mediation

conference. (Doc. 61.) Accordingly, a mediation conference is hereby scheduled

before the undersigned on Wednesday, April 20, 2011 at 10:00 a.m. at the United

States Courthouse, 401 S.E. First Avenue, Third Floor Courtroom, Gainesville, Florida. 

As general guidance to the parties the parties should be aware that the

mediation will be conducted in such a manner as not to prejudice any party in the event

settlement is not reached. To that end, all matters communicated to the undersigned in

confidence will be kept confidential, pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 408, and will not be 1

disclosed to any other party, or to the district judge. 

At least two (2) days prior to the settlement conference, each party shall provide

the undersigned, in confidence, a concise statement of the evidence supporting the

Rule 408 provides, in pertinent part, that evidence “of (1) furnishing or offering or promising to

1

furnish, or (2) accepting or offering or promising to accept, a valuable consideration or attempting to

compromise a claim which was disputed as to either validity or amount, is not admissible to prove liability

for or invalidity of the claim or its amount. Evidence of conduct or statements made in compromise

negotiations is likewise not admissible.”
position of the party, the relevant positions of the parties concerning factual issues,

issues of law, damages, and the settlement negotiation history of the case, including a

recitation of any specific demands and offers that have been conveyed. The mediation

statement shall not exceed seven (7) pages in length and will not be made a part of the

case file.

At the mediation, the parties, by counsel, shall give a brief (five -ten minute)

presentation, outlining the factual and legal highlights of their case. Subsequently,

separate confidential caucuses will be held with each party and the party’s

representative(s). Tentatively the Court has allotted five hours for the mediation. In the

event there are any scheduling problems counsel should contact Adelita Tinaya-Miller,

courtroom deputy to the undersigned, at (352) 380-2402.

 DONE AND ORDERED in Gainesville, Florida, on March 18, 2011.

2
```

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 205 (Wednesday, October 24, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 60322]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-5248]

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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

Membership of the Defense Information Systems Agency Senior 
Executive Service Performance Review Board

AGENCY: DoD; Defense Information Systems Agency.

ACTION: Notice of Membership of the Defense Information Systems Agency 
Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the appointment of members to the 
Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) Performance Review Board. The 
Performance Review Board provides a fair and impartial review of Senior 
Executive Service (SES) Performance appraisals and makes 
recommendations to the Director, Defense Information Systems Agency, 
regarding final performance ratings and performance awards for DISA SES 
members.

DATES: Effective Date: Upon publication of this notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Beth Shelley, SES Program Manager, 
Defense Information Systems Agency, P.O. Box 4502, Arlington, Virginia 
22204-4502, (703) 607-4411.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 4214(c)(4), the 
following are the names and titles of DISA career executives appointed 
to serve as members of the DISA Performance Review Board. Appointees 
will serve one-year terms, effective upon publication of this notice.
    MG Marilyn A. Quagliotti, USA, Vice Director, DISA, Chairperson.
    Ms. Diann L. McCoy, Component Acquisition Executive, DISA, Member.
    Mr. John J. Garing, Director for Strategic Planning and 
Information/Chief Information Officer, DISA, Member.
    Mr. John J. Penkoske, Jr., Director for Manpower, Personnel, and 
Security, DISA, Member.

    October 17, 2007.
L.M. Bynum,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, DoD.
[FR Doc. 07-5248 Filed 10-23-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-M
```
Opinion issued June 9, 2016

In The 

## Court of Appeals

For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01

- 16

- 00379

- CR

——————————— IN RE BILLY RAY RISL EY , Appellant

O riginal Proceeding on Petition f o r Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator, Billy R ay Risley , incarcerated and proceeding pro se , has filed a

petition for a writ of mandamus, challenging an order denying relator’s “Writ for

Subpoena Duces Tecum.” 1

1 R elator’s petition identifies the underlying case as The State of Texas v. Billy Ray Risley

, Cause No. 966167 , in the 232nd District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Mary Lou Keel presiding.2

We d eny the petition.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Jennings and Lloyd. Do not publish. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47.2( b).