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

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4760 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to improve the ability of veterans 

to receive health care at private medical facilities. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 29, 2014 

Mr. RIBBLE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to improve the 

ability of veterans to receive health care at private medical facilities. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Veterans’ Health Care 

5 Flexibility Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REMOVAL OF BARRIERS TO VETERANS RECEIVING 

7 CARE AT PRIVATE MEDICAL FACILITIES. 

8 Section 1703 of title 38, United States Code, is 

9 amended— 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4760 IH

1 (1) by amending subsection (a) to read as fol2 lows: 

3 ‘‘(a)(1) Upon the election of a veteran enrolled in the 

4 health care system established under section 1705(a), the 

5 Secretary shall furnish to the veteran at a non-Depart6 ment facility hospital care and medical services that the 

7 veteran is eligible to receive under this chapter. 

8 ‘‘(2) The Secretary shall enter into contracts with 

9 non-Department facilities to furnish hospital care and 

10 medical services pursuant to paragraph (1). 

11 ‘‘(3) The Secretary may not require a veteran to 

12 make more than one election under paragraph (1). 

13 ‘‘(4) An election made under paragraph (1) may not 

14 be construed as affecting the ability of a veteran to receive 

15 hospital care and medical services at a medical facility of 

16 the Department.’’; 

17 (2) by striking subsection (b); and 

18 (3) by redesignating subsections (c) and (d) as 

19 subsections (b) and (c), respectively. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
## In t he Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06

- 24

- 00022

- CV

WAYMON SCOTT HARTWELL AND HARTWELL FARMS, LLC , Appellant s
V.
FANNIN BANK , Appellee

On Appeal from the 336th District Court Fannin County, Texas Trial Cour t No. CV

- 15

- 42242

Before Stevens , C.J., van Cleef and Rambin , JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice van Cleef2 

### ME MORANDUM OPINION

A ppellants , Wayman Scott Hartwell an d Hartwell Farms, LLC , filed their notice of appeal in this matter on March 2 1 , 20 24

. Appellants are not indigent and are , thus , responsible for paying or making adequate arrangements to pay the clerk’s fee for preparing the record. See
T EX

. R. A PP

. P

. 37.3(b). The clerk’s record in this appeal w as due to be filed with this Court on

o r before April 22 , 2024

. The district clerk notified this Court that Appellants had not filed a designation of record and had neither paid for nor made adequate arrangements to pay for preparation of the clerk’s record. By letter dated April 23 , 202 4 , the clerk of this Court notified Appellants that the record
was late due t o their failure to pay and gav e them until May 3 , 202 4 , to cure the defect. Further, we warned Appellants that , if we did not receive an adequate response to our letter withi n ten
da y s of the date of the letter, this appeal would be subject to dismissal fo r want of prosecution.
See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 37.3(b) ; 42.3 (b)

. We received no communication from Appellants responsive to our April 23 correspondence, and the record was not f ile d

. Con sequently, this appeal is ripe for dismissal.
Pursuant to Rule s 37. 3 (c) and 42.3(b) , we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution

. 1 See T EX

. R. A PP

. P

. 37.3(b) ; 42.3 (b)

.

Charles van Cleef Justice Date S ubmi tte d : May 8, 2024 Date Decided: May 9, 2024

1 On March 25 , 2024, Appellees filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction

. Base d on our disposition of this matter , we deny that motion as moot.
#### In the Matter of Daniel O’Reilly, an Attorney.

Respondent disbarred. Order to be settled on notice.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4935 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4935

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make improvements to the 
                           child tax credit.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 23, 2014

  Ms. Jenkins (for herself, Mr. Kelly of Pennsylvania, and Mr. Nunes) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                             Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make improvements to the 
                           child tax credit.

    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 ``Child Tax Credit Improvement Act of 
2014''.

SEC. 2. IMPROVEMENTS TO CHILD TAX CREDIT.

    (a) Elimination of Marriage Penalty.--Section 24(b)(2) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``means--'' and 
all that follows and inserting ``means $75,000 (twice such amount in 
the case of a joint return).''.
    (b) Inflation Adjustment of Credit Amount and Phaseout 
Thresholds.--Section 24 of such Code is amended by adding at the end 
the following new subsection:
    ``(g) Inflation Adjustment.--
            ``(1) In general.--In the case of any taxable year 
        beginning in a calendar year after 2014, the $1,000 amount in 
        subsection (a) and the $75,000 amount in subsection (b)(2) 
        shall each be increased by an amount equal to--
                    ``(A) such dollar amount, multiplied by
                    ``(B) the cost-of-living adjustment determined 
                under section 1(f)(3) for the calendar year in which 
                the taxable year begins, determined by substituting 
                `calendar year 2013' for `calendar year 1992' in 
                subparagraph (B) thereof.
            ``(2) Rounding.--Any increase determined under paragraph 
        (1) shall be rounded--
                    ``(A) in the case of the $1,000 amount in 
                subsection (a), to the nearest multiple of $50, and
                    ``(B) in the case of the $75,000 amount in 
                subsection (b)(2), to the nearest multiple of 
                $1,000.''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2014.
                                 <all>
```
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

GINA CERISE

, Appellant,

v.

FABIAN MCCULLON

, Appellee.

No. 4D20

- 2360

[ March 17, 2021 ]

A ppeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm

Beach County ; Dina A. Keever

- Agrama , Judge; L.T. Case No.

502020DR007379

.

Gina Cerise, Lake Park, pro se.

Fabian McCullon, Palm Beach Gardens, pro se.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed. Fla. R. App. P. 9.315(a).

D AMOORGIAN

, G ERBER

, and K LINGENSMITH

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
N OTE : This o rder is non precedential.



# United States **Court of Appeals** 
**for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

IN RE CORELOGIC SOLUTIONS, LLC

______________________

2014

- 1489

______________________

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. CBM2012

- 00007.

______________________

ON MOTION

______________________ O R D E R

CoreLogic Solutions, LLC moves without opposition to voluntarily dismiss its appeal. The Deputy Director of the
United States Patent and Trademark Office moves to intervene in this appeal and to modify the official caption.

Upon consideration thereof,

I T I S O RDER ED T HAT :

(1) The motion to dismiss is granted.

(2) Each party shall bear its own costs

. (3) The motion to intervene is granted. The revised official caption is reflected above. Case: 14-1489 Document: 13 Page: 1 Filed: 07/15/2014IN RE C ORELOGIC SOLUTIONS

, LLC 2

F OR THE C OURT

/s/ Daniel E. O’Toole

Daniel E. O’Toole

Clerk of Court

ISSUED AS A MANDATE : July 15, 2014

s30 Case: 14-1489 Document: 13 Page: 2 Filed: 07/15/2014
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-1-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                         6,465
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  17,797
<ALLOWANCES>                                   1,113
<INVENTORY>                                    15,523
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               39,125
<PP&E>                                         22,172
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (3,041)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 58,326
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          23,331
<BONDS>                                        24,046
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    13,500
<COMMON>                                       57
<OTHER-SE>                                     (2,608)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   58,326
<SALES>                                        118,475
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               118,475
<CGS>                                          69,626
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  69,626
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               66,375
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               21
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             2,236
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (19,360)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (19,360)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (19,360)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (3.48)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (3.48)



</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of the Application of The City of New York, Appellant, for a Writ of Certiorari to Richard Mitchell and Others, as Assessors of the Town of Southeast, County of Putnam and State of New York, Respondents (Assessment for 1905).

Judgment affirmed, with costs. No opinion.

Jenks, P. J., Burr, Thomas, Carr and Woodward, JJ., concurred.
Exhibit 10.1


 


FIRST AMENDMENT TO


GRAND PERFECTA, INC.


CONVERTIBLE DEBENTURE


BEARING INTEREST AT
1% PER ANNUM


 


THIS FIRST AMENDMENT (“Amendment”)
to the Debenture in the principal amount of Two Hundred Million Japanese Yen (¥200,000,000) dated March 5, 2015 (the “Debenture”),
is entered into effective as of the 5th day of March 2016 (the “Effective Date”), by and between GRAND
PERFECTA, INC., a Nevada corporations (the “Company”), and EUROPLUS INTERNATIONAL LTD., (“Holder”),
with reference to the following:


 


RECITALS


 


A.On March 5, 2015,
the Company executed and delivered to Holder the Debenture and promised to pay to the order of Holder the principal sum of ¥200,000,000,
together with interest, as set forth in the Debenture.


 


B.The Company and
Holder now desire to amend the Debenture on the terms and conditions set forth below.


 


AGREEMENT


 


NOW, THEREFORE, for
good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged by the parties hereto, the Company
and Holder agree as follows:


 


1.Definitions.
Unless otherwise indicated herein, Company and Holder agree that all capitalized terms used in this Amendment shall have the definitions
assigned to such terms in the Debenture.


 


2.Amendment
to the Debenture. The Company and Holder agree that this Amendment constitutes an amendment to the Debenture. In the event
of any conflict or inconsistency between the terms of this Amendment and the terms of the Debenture, the Company and Holder agree
that the terms of this Amendment shall control.


 


3.Repayment
of Principal. On February 26, 2016, the Company made a payment to Holder in the amount of Thirty Million Japanese Yen (¥30,000,000),
which the parties agree is applied to the payment and reduction of the original principal amount of the Debenture.


 


4.Maturity Date.
The date of maturity of the Debenture stated in Section 2 of the Debenture is amended to extend the date of maturity of the Debenture
to the date that is six months from the Effective Date of this Amendment, subject to prepayment as set forth in paragraph 3 of
the Debenture.


 


5.Ratification.
Except as set forth herein, the Company and Holder agree that all of the terms and conditions contained in the Debenture shall
remain the same and in full force and effect, and the Debenture as amended by this Amendment, is hereby ratified and reaffirmed.


 






    	 	1	 



     

    

 


6.Counterparts.
This Amendment may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original but all of which together shall
constitute one and the same instrument. This Amendment may be delivered and executed by e-mail or facsimile.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
this Amendment was duly executed on the 2nd day of March 2016.


 


 


EUROPLUS INTERNATIONAL LTD.


 


 


By: /s/ Ayako Noda                                


Duly Authorized Officer


Ayako Noda


Represenative Director


 


 


 


GRAND PERFECTA, INC.


 


 


By: /s/ Shuya Watanabe                            


Duly Authorized Officer


Shuya Watanabe


CEO


 


 


 


 


 


 






    	 	2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

BAKER 

&

HOSTETLER LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

LOS 

ANGELES

-11- 

Exhibit C

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2295-3 Filed: 05/31/19 Entered: 05/31/19 10:14:52 Page 1

of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

BAKER 

&

HOSTETLER LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

LOS 

ANGELES

-12- 

EXPENSE SUMMARY

FOR THE PERIOD APRIL 1, 2019 THROUGH APRIL 30, 2019 

EXPENSES AMOUNTS

Airfare $23,444.32

Automated Research $4,162.32

Business Meals $4,481.39

Car Rental $1,256.49

Court Costs $150.00

Delivery Services $707.09

Ground Transportation (Out of Town) $191.91

Lodging $22,433.28

Mileage Reimbursement $318.52

Miscellaneous (Meeting Room Rental/Committee Transportation) $1,811.81

Other Professional Services (on-line software) $879.37

Postage $104.10

Teleconference Charges (Court Call) $635.00

Transcripts $2,345.50

Total Expenses Requested: $62,921.10

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2295-3 Filed: 05/31/19 Entered: 05/31/19 10:14:52 Page 2

of 2
EXHIBIT 32.1



CERTIFICATE 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 on Form 10-Q for the three months ended June 30, 2005, of Commercial Federal Corporation as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that, to my knowledge:



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



| | (ii) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Commercial Federal Corporation.
| | ---- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: August 4, 2005



By:

/s/ William A. FitzgeraldWilliam A. FitzgeraldChairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer/s/ David S. FisherDavid S. FisherExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 21.1        SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

                                        Jurisdiction of         % of Voting
                                       Incorporation or      Securities Held at
Name of Corporation                      Organization         December 31, 1998

Consolidated Subsidiaries
  TioPro, LLC                              Nevada                   80%
  TIMET Capital Trust I                    Delaware                 100%
   TIMET Millbury Corporation              Oregon                   100%
         TIMET Castings Corporation        Delaware                 100%
  TIMET Finance Management Company         Delaware                 100%
  TIMET FSC, Ltd.                          Barbados                 100%
  TIMET UK Ltd.                            United Kingdom           100%
         TIMET UK (Export) Ltd.            United Kingdom           100%
         TIMET Savoie, SA                  France                   70%
         TIMET Germany Holding GmbH        Germany                  100%
            TIMET Germany GmbH             Germany                  100%
            LASAB Laser Applikations-Und
                       Bearbitungs, GmbH   Germany                  100%
 Titanium Hearth Technologies, Inc.        Delaware                 100%
 TMCA International Inc.                   Delaware                 100%
        Loterios SpA                       Italy                    100%
                                                           
Unconsolidated Affiliates
  MZI, LLC                                 Oregon                   33%
  TiComp, Inc.                             Delaware                 40%
  Titanium Memory Systems, Inc.            California               28%
<PAGE>

  ValTimet SAS                             France                   46%


<PAGE>
#### In the Matter of Robert Kuehnert, an Attorney.

Motion granted. Order to be settled on notice.
### 443

OFFICE OFTHE **AYTORNEY** GENERAL OFTEXAS **AUSTIN 4sc.**  Honorable **Cborge** B. Sheppard Qoqptro~l~r OSFublfo Aoooonts **Aurtin,** Texas **Dear** 81rr -rietion, for the **Parka** Board. nlpt of your Letter d **t0** the requ888 

## fmdt88e 88 Parke ‘Board, anaweree request that this department h suoh opinion, whether rooa r the efnount or 8xp8neitur88 Tsllng expanse appt-oprl~tlon atlon ior the State Z’arksBoer&.

It follow8 that in suoh an inetaL?oe, where ths traveling oxpenae appropriation has been ohargesbwlth thlr expenditure, such approprletlon has been &hsr~ed with t‘b* paymdt of an ftsn of expense fat whioh it in mot evailable. It is our opfnlon that-in suoh an Instance the COmptrOll8r not only may, but muat, oorreat this error by char&l6 theHonorable ikwrm B. 8heppar4, Page 8 pro rulP et appropriation out of whloh the expenditure i8 lawy to be paickwlth the item, end ellminet&ng the charge made, improperly, af;ainst the appro~riatlon not evellable for the partfoular expenditure. YOurIvsry truQ AT’IQRWBI - WTXXAS

R-NBlRS ENCLOSURE
VEDSEP 13, 1940

ATTORNEYGENERALOF TEXAS

r

. -
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1



               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

   We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 No. 333-11759, No. 333-32785, No. 333-58999 and No. 333-86383)
pertaining to the 1993 Amended Incentive Stock Plan, the 1996 Employee Stock
Purchase Plan, and the 1996 Director Option Plan of Microcide Pharmaceuticals,
Inc. of our report dated February 2, 2001 with respect to the financial
statements of Microcide Pharmaceuticals, Inc. included in the Annual Report
(Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2000.


                                                       /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Palo Alto, California
February 26, 2001
----

**EXHIBIT        21 SUBSIDIARIES**

| Name                  of Entity                                |   | State                  or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization |
|----------------------------------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                           |   |                                                                          |
| 99¢                  Only Stores Texas                    |   | Delaware                                                                      |
| 99cent                  Only Stores, Inc.                      |   | Nevada                                                                        |
| 8966                  Reseda Associates, LLC (50% owned)       |   | California                                                                    |
| REA                  Associates La Quinta, LLC (65% owned)     |   | California                                                                    |
| Wilshire                  Alvarado Associates, LLC (50% owned) |   | California                                                                    |

----
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Criminal No. 06cr200-01 (CKK)

(Civil Action No. 14-948)

MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER

(August 24, 2015) 

Presently before the Court is Defendant Adam Hamilton’s [57] Motion Under 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence. Mr. Hamilton, who was originally proceeding 

pro se, requests that the Court reconsider and reduce his sentence on the basis that he was 

improperly designated as an armed career criminal under the Armed Career Criminal Act 

(“ACCA”). On June 8, 2015, the Court entered an [74] Order appointing Steven R. Kiersh, Esq., 

to represent Mr. Hamilton with respect to his § 2255 motion and ordering additional briefing on 

the sole claim for relief in his motion. 

On August 24, 2015, the government filed a [80] response to Mr. Hamilton’s 

supplemental brief indicating that in light of the Supreme Court of the United States’ holding in 

Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), and based on the particular facts of this case, 

“the United States no longer will argue that defendant was properly sentenced to a 15-year prison 

term pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1).” Govt.’s Resp. to Supp. to § 2255 Mot. at 3. As such, 

the brief indicates that “the Court should vacate defendant’s 15-year prison sentence and set this 

matter down for a hearing to impose a prison sentence of not more than ten years, as authorized 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff,

 v. 

ADAM K. HAMILTON,

 Defendant. 
2 

by 18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(2).” Id. at 1. Furthermore, the brief indicates that Mr. Hamilton’s counsel 

“favors setting an early status date and a further date of a re-sentencing,” as requested by the 

government. For the reasons described above, the Court GRANTS Adam Hamilton’s [57] 

Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence, as conceded by the 

Government, and DENIES AS MOOT Adam Hamilton’s [77] Motion to Treat Argument 

Pertaining to the Residual Clause as Conceded. The Court shall by separate order set a status 

hearing date. At the status hearing, the Court shall set a re-sentencing date for Mr. Hamilton. 

Accordingly, it is this 24th day of August, 2015, hereby 

ORDERED that Adam Hamilton’s [57] Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set 

Aside, or Correct Sentence is GRANTED as conceded by the government; and it is further 

ORDERED that Adam Hamilton’s [77] Motion to Treat Argument Pertaining to the 

Residual Clause as Conceded is DENIED AS MOOT.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 This is a final appealable order. 

 /s/ 

COLLEEN KOLLAR-KOTELLY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE