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

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2461 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2461

   To designate a portion of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge as 
                              wilderness.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 11, 2019

  Mr. Markey (for himself, Mr. Bennet, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Carper, Mr. 
 Udall, and Mr. Schumer) introduced the following bill; which was read 
  twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To designate a portion of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge as 
                              wilderness.

    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 ``Arctic Refuge Protection Act of 
2019''.

SEC. 2. DESIGNATION OF PORTION OF ARCTIC NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE AS 
              WILDERNESS.

    Section 4 of the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act 
of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd) is amended by adding at the end the 
following:
    ``(p) Designation of Certain Land as Wilderness.--Notwithstanding 
any other provision of this Act, a portion of the Arctic National 
Wildlife Refuge in Alaska comprising approximately 1,559,538 acres, as 
generally depicted on the map entitled `Arctic National Wildlife 
Refuge, Coastal Plain Proposed Wilderness', dated October 20, 2015, 
labeled with Map ID 03-0172, and available for inspection in the 
offices of the Secretary, is designated as a component of the National 
Wilderness Preservation System under the Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1131 
et seq.).''.
                                 <all>
```
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________ No. 96-4287SI

_____________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the Southern v. * District of Iowa. * Rickey Orville Benton, Jr., * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. *

_____________ Submitted: May 22, 1997

Filed: May 30, 1997

_____________ Before McMILLIAN, FAGG, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

_____________ PER CURIAM. Rickey Orville Benton, Jr. appeals his weapons-related conviction and guidelines sentence. We affirm. Benton's contention that the arresting officer improperly conducted a pat-down searc h is without merit. Benton was stopped for a traffic offense. His car wa s unlicensed. He had no driver's license. The stop occurred around midnight in a remote are a. The officer had no backup and was not acquainted with Benton. In thes e circumstances, the officer conducted a p at-down search and found a derringer pistol in Benton's pocket. Having review ed the record, we conclude there was ample evidence-2-

to support the district court's fact-findings and no error of law appears. The officer's limited search was justified, and the search was conducted in a reasonable manner. In challenging his sentence, Benton contends he was improperly sentenced as a career offender because his state convictions for commercial burglaries are not crimes of violence for career offender purposes. Benton's contention is foreclosed by ou r recent decision in United States v. Hascall , 76 F.3d 902, 904-06 (8th Cir. 1996). We thus affirm Benton's conviction and sentence. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-20-00333-CV

Eno Williams and Anthony Welch

v.

JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A.

On Appeal from the

County Court at Law No. 5 of Fort Bend County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 20-CCV-066910

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 appellants.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

March 17, 2022
#### RUTH KESLER v. J. C. STOKES and WORTH T. KESLER.

(Filed 28 April, 1965.)

1. Trial § 48—

The court has the discretionary power to set aside the verdict as against one defendant while refusing to set it aside against the other defendant, and its orders doing so are not subject to review.

2. Appeal and Error § 20—

One defendant is not prejudiced by the order of the court staying execution against the other defendant pending retrial of the issues against the first defendant, and the first defendant has no standing to challenge the stay of execution.

Appeal by defendants from *Clark, S. J.,*November, 1964 Session, RowaN Superior Court.

The plaintiff instituted this civil action to recover damages for personal injury sustained as the result of an automobile collision between a Chevrolet owned and operated by H. C. Stokes and a Plymouth owned and operated by Worth T. Kesler, in which the plaintiff, wife of Kesler, was riding as a passenger. The jury found the defendant Kesler was negligent; that the defendant Stokes was not negligent; and fixed plaintiff’s damages at $2,600.00. The court, in its discretion, set aside the jury’s finding that Stokes was not negligent and ordered a new trial on that issue. Prom a judgment that the plaintiff recover of the defendant Kesler the sum of $2,600.00, but that execution be stayed pending trial on the issue of Stokes’ negligence, both defendants appealed.

*George B. Uzzell, Robert M. Davis, for plaintiff appellee.*

*358*Woodson, Hudson & Busby, by Nelson Woodson, Max Busby, for defendant Kesler, appellant.*

*Kluttz & Hamlin by Lewis P. Hamlin, Jr., for defendant Stokes, appellant.*

Per Cueiam.

The pleadings and the evidence were sufficient to require the submission of a separate issue of negligence against each defendant. The judge, in setting aside the jury’s finding that Stokes was not negligent, and in refusing to set aside the finding that Kesler was negligent, acted within the discretionary power vested in him. The decisions are not subject to review.

Stokes alone assigns as error that part of the judgment which stays the execution until the issue of his negligence is resolved. The plaintiff, the judgment creditor, did not appeal. The appellant Kesler does not assign the stay as error. Stokes, while still a party to the action, is not a party to, nor prejudiced by, the judgment. Hence he is not in a position to challenge the stay of execution.

No error.
FLN (Rev. 4/2004) Deficiency Order Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

STATE OF FLORIDA, et al

vs

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

& HUMAN SERVICES, et al

Case No. 3:10cv91/RV/EMT

ORDER

Your document, NOTICE AND DEMAND FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS

(received 6/3/2010), was referred to the undersigned with the following deficiencies:

Paul Andrew Mitchell is not a party to this suit.

Your document is not property captioned for this court. Every paper you file after

the complaint must have the name of this court, the case style, the case number

and the title of your pleading. [Local Rule 5.1(B)(1)(2)]. 

Your document is an improper filing.

For these reasons, IT IS ORDERED that:

The submitted hard copy of the document shall be returned to you by the Clerk

without electronic filing.

DONE and ORDERED this 15th day of June, 2010.

 /s Roger Vinson

ROGER VINSON

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:10-cv-00091-RV-EMT Document 54 Filed 06/15/10 Page 1 of 1
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(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting of the Sleep Disorders Research Advisory Board.

The meeting will be open to the public, with attendance limited to space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting. 

*Name of Committee:*                         Sleep Disorders Research Advisory Board.                    

*Date:*                         December 4, 2007.                    

*Time:*                         8 a.m. to 4 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To discuss sleep research, education priorities, and programs.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, Building 31, 31 Center Drive, 6C Room 6, Bethesda, MD 20892.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Michael J. Twery, PhD, Director, National Center on Sleep Disorders Research, Division of Lung Diseases, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Suite 10038, Bethesda, MD 20892-7952, 301-435-0199,                         *twerym@nhlbi.nih.gov.*

                        Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page:                         *http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/​meetings/​index.htm*, where an agenda and any additional information for the meeting will be posted when available.                    
      ( print page 63916)    
(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.233, National Center for Sleep Disorders Research; 93.837, Heart and Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung Diseases Research; 93.839, Blood Diseases and Resources Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS).

Dated: November 2, 2007.

Jennifer Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 07-5620 Filed 11-9-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
Case 1:10-cv-00049-SPM-GRJ Document 27 Filed 06/21/10 Page 1 of 5
Case 1:10-cv-00049-SPM-GRJ Document 27 Filed 06/21/10 Page 2 of 5
Case 1:10-cv-00049-SPM-GRJ Document 27 Filed 06/21/10 Page 3 of 5
Case 1:10-cv-00049-SPM-GRJ Document 27 Filed 06/21/10 Page 4 of 5
Case 1:10-cv-00049-SPM-GRJ Document 27 Filed 06/21/10 Page 5 of 5
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 207 (Friday, October 26, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 60867]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-5313]



[[Page 60867]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Center for Research Resources; Notice of Closed Meetings

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

    Name of Committee: National Center for Research Resources 
Special Emphasis Panel, Aquatic Health SEP.
    Date: November 19, 2007.
    Time: 10 a.m. to 11 a.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: 6701 Democracy Blvd., 1 Democracy Plaza, 1068, Bethesda, 
MD 20892. (Telephone Conference Call).
    Contact Person: John R. Glowa, PhD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, National Center for Research Resources, or National 
Institutes of Health, 6701 Democracy Blvd., 1 Democracy Plaza, Room 
1078, MSC 4874, Bethesda, MD 20892-4874, (301) 435-0807, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c4a3a8abb3a5ae84a9a5ada8eaaaadaceaa3abb2"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="26414a4951474c664b474f4a08484f4e08414950">[email protected]</span></a>.
    Name of Committee: National Center for Research Resources 
Special Emphasis Panel EHP Contract.
    Date: December 5, 2007.
    Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, One Democracy Plaza, 6701 
Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892.
    Contact Person: Guo Zhang, MPH, PhD, MD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Office of Review, National Center for Research 
Resources, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Democracy Boulevard, 
1 Democracy Plaza, Room 1064, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-0812, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#bcc6d4ddd2dbdbc9fcd1ddd5d092d2d5d492dbd3ca"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="b7cddfd6d9d0d0c2f7dad6dedb99d9dedf99d0d8c1">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, 
Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research; 93.371, Biomedical 
Technology; 93.389, Research Infrastructure, 93.306, 93.333, 
National Institutes of Health, HHS).

    Dated: October 22, 2007.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 07-5313 Filed 10-25-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6653
JOHN D. SIMPSON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus SUPREME COURT JUDGE OF RICHMOND STATE OF VIRGINIA, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CA-01-538-3) Submitted: July 3, 2002 Decided: August 5, 2002 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John D. Simpson, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: John D. Simpson appeals the district court’s orders denying his petition for a writ of mandamus and his motion filed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Simpson v. Supreme Court Judge , No. CA-01-538-3 (E.D. Va. Mar. 19, 2002; Apr. 18, 2002). 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
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. CASE NO. 1:10cr10/MCR

EDDIE LEE LATSON

JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL ON JURY VERDICT

Based on the jury’s verdict of not guilty as to this defendant on Count Three

following a trial on September 14, 2010, the defendant EDDIE LEE LATSON is hereby

ADJUDGED NOT GUILTY of the charge in Count Three and this charge is hereby

DISMISSED. 

DONE and ORDERED at Pensacola, Florida, this 21 day of September, 2010. 

st

 

 s/ M. Casey Rodgers

M. CASEY RODGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Exhibit 10.19


 





THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


 


This Third Amendment
to the Employment Agreement (the “3rd Amendment”) is entered into by and between QS Energy, Inc. a Nevada corporation
(“Employer”) and Michael McMullen (“Employee”) (collectively, the “Parties”), effective as
of February 15, 2020 (the “Effective Date”).


 


RECITALS


 


		A.	Effective as of April 1, 2017, the Employer and Employee entered into an Employment Agreement (the
“Employment Agreement”), expiring on March 31, 2019;



 


		B.	Effective as of April 1, 2019, in the First Amendment to the Employment Agreement, the Employer
and Employee agreed to an extension of the Employment Agreement for an additional three months, extending the term of the Employment
Agreement until June 1, 2019;



 


		C.	From June 1, 2019, Employer and Employee operated consistent with the terms of the Employment Agreement,
as amended, on a month-to-month basis;



 


		D.	Effective as of November 15, 2019, in the Second Amendment to the Employment Agreement, the Employer
and Employee agreed to an extension of the Employment Agreement for an additional three months, extending the term of the Employment
Agreement until February 15, 2020;



 


		E.	It is now the desire of Employer and Employee to further amend the Employment Agreement.



 


NOW, THEREFORE, in
consideration of the promises and the mutual covenants hereinafter set forth, the Parties agree as follows:


 


		I.	Section 4 of the Employment Agreement is hereby amended and restated as follows:



 


Term of Employment.
Subject to earlier termination as provided in the Employment Agreement, as amended, or as may be mutually agreed upon by the Parties,
Employee hereby agrees to continue to be employed by Employer on a month-to-month basis, and Employer hereby agrees to employ Employee
on a month-to-month basis.


 


II.             
If there are any inconsistencies between the Employment Agreement, as amended, and this 3rd Amendment, the terms and conditions
of this 3rd Amendment shall control.


 


III.           
Except for the changes set forth in this 3rd Amendment, all terms and conditions in the Employment Agreement, as amended, shall
remain unchanged and in full force and effect.


 


[Intentionally Left Blank]


 


 


 






    	 	1	 



     


    

 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
the Parties have executed this Second Amendment to the Employment Agreement as of the Effective Date.


 


	 	“EMPLOYER”
	 	 
	 	QS ENERGY, INC.
	 	 
	 	
         

         

	By: 	/s/ Jason Lane
	Date: 	Jason Lane, CEO
	 	
         

         

	 	“EMPLOYEE”
	 	 
	 	
         

         

	Date: 	/s/ Michael McMullen
	 	Michael McMullen


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 






    	 	2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           7,118
<SECURITIES>                                     9,861
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,887
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (3,828)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  18,504
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        20,149
<OTHER-SE>                                   (164,514)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    18,504
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   338
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (427)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,018)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (89)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,018)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.05)
        

</TABLE>
# C_2009064EN.01003701.xml

| 19.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 64/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 64/37

---

The EFTA Surveillance Authority has decided not to raise objections against the notified measure

(2009/C 64/10)

EFTA Surveillance Authority Decision regarding alleged state aid granted by the Municipality of Tromsø to Sommarøy Arctic Hotel AS in connection with the planned sale of the property known as ‘Hillesøyfyllinga’ [property number 189/196].

The EFTA Surveillance Authority considers that no state aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement has been granted to Sommarøy Arctic Hotel A/S in connection with the planned sale of the property.

| Date of adoption: | 1 October 2008 |
| --- | --- |
| EFTA State: | Norway |
| Case No: | 62527 |
| Title: | Sale of property in Tromsø |
| Objective: | n.a. |
| Legal basis: | n.a. |
| Duration: | n.a. |

Date of adoption:

1 October 2008

EFTA State:

Norway

Case No:

62527

Title:

Sale of property in Tromsø

Objective:

n.a.

Legal basis:

n.a.

Duration:

n.a.

The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://www.eftasurv.int/fieldsofwork/fieldstateaid/stateaidregistry/

---
Exhibit 32.1  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  In connection with the Quarterly Report of Quadra Projects Inc. a Nevada corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended May 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Claude Diedrick, President, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Director of the Company, certifies to the best of his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  (1)

   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(2)

   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
   /s/ Claude DiedrickClaude DiedrickPresident, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and DirectorDate: July 13, 2011


---