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

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4910 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the authority of 

the Internal Revenue Service to require truncated social security numbers 

on Form W–2 wage and tax statements. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 19, 2014 

Mr. MCDERMOTT (for himself, Mr. LEVIN, Mr. BLUMENAUER, Mr. DANNY K. 

DAVIS of Illinois, Ms. NORTON, Mr. LANGEVIN, Ms. SCHWARTZ, Ms. 

WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Mr. BECERRA, Mr. LEWIS, Ms. WILSON of Florida, Mr. REED, Mr. PAULSEN, Mr. GRIFFIN of Arkansas, Mr. GERLACH, 

Ms. LINDA T. SA ́NCHEZ of California, Mr. NUGENT, Mr. TIBERI, Mr. 

ENYART, Mr. LARSON of Connecticut, and Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania) 

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 extend 

the authority of the Internal Revenue Service to require 

truncated social security numbers on Form W–2 wage 

and tax statements. 

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 ‘‘Taxpayer Identity Pro5 tection Act of 2014’’. 


jbell on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4910 IH

1 SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF IRS AUTHORITY TO REQUIRE TRUN2 CATED SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS ON 

3 FORM W–2. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (2) of section 6051(a) 

5 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by strik6 ing ‘‘his social security account number’’ and inserting 

7 ‘‘an identifying number for the employee’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 this section shall take effect on the date of the enactment 

10 of this Act. 

Æ 


jbell on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2792 Filed: 07/01/19 Entered: 07/01/19 07:38:24 Page 1 of

2
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2792 Filed: 07/01/19 Entered: 07/01/19 07:38:24 Page 2 of

2
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 13770 Filed: 05/24/23 Entered: 05/24/23 10:02:04 Page 1

of 1
#### Charles Messinger, Respondent, v. Edward Rhine, Appellant.

Motion to dismiss appeal denied on condition that the appellant pay respondent ten dollars costs, and serve proposed case on appeal within ten days. Otherwise, motion granted, with ten dollars cos(ts.

Present— Jenks, P. J., Thomas, Carr, Woodward and Rich, JJ.
Exhibit 10.2


 





NOTICE OF FINAL AGREEMENT


 





	Borrower: 	Applied Optoelectronics, Inc.	Lender:	East West Bank
	 	13115 Jess Pirtle Blvd.	 	Loan Servicing Department
	 	Sugar Land, TX 77478	 	9300 Flair Drive, 6th Floor
	 	 	 	El Monte, CA 91731







 


THE
WRITTEN LOAN AGREEMENT REPRESENTS THE FINAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES AND MAY NOT BE CONTRADICTED BY EVIDENCE OF PRIOR, CONTEMPORANEOUS,
OR SUBSEQUENT ORAL AGREEMENTS OF THE PARTIES. THERE ARE NO UNWRITTEN ORAL AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE PARTIES.


 


As used in this Notice,
the following terms have the following meanings:


 


Loan.
The term “Loan” means the following described loan: a non-precomputed Variable Rate Nondisclosable Draw Down Line
of Credit Loan to a Corporation for $22,000,000.00 due on January 26, 2022.


 


Loan Agreement. The term "Loan Agreement"
means one or more promises, promissory notes, agreements, undertakings, security agreements, deeds of trust or other documents,
or commitments, or any combination of those actions or documents, relating to the Loan, together with any subsequent written modification
documents for this Loan evidenced by all Notice of Final Agreements executed in regards to the Loan, and including without limitation
the following:


 


LOAN DOCUMENTS


 





	- Change In Terms Agreement	- Modification to the Construction Loan Agreement
	- Notice of Final Agreement	 




 


 


Parties. The term "Parties"
means East West Bank and any and all entities or individuals who are obligated to repay the loan or have pledged property as security
for the Loan, including without limitation the following:


 


	Borrower:	Applied Optoelectronics, Inc.
	Grantor(s):	Applied Optoelectronics, Inc.






 


This Notice of
Final Agreement is given by East West Bank pursuant to Section 26.02 of the Texas Business and Commerce Code. Each Party who signs
below, other than East West Bank, acknowledges, represents, and warrants to East West Bank that it has received, read and understood
this Notice of Final Agreement. This Notice is dated June 14, 2016.


 


BORROWER:


 


 


APPLIED OPTOELECTRONICS,
INC.


 


By: /s/
Chih-Hsiang (Thompson)
Lin                               
 Chih-Hsiang
(Thompson) Lin, CEO of Applied Optoelectronics, Inc.


 


LENDER:


 


 


EAST WEST BANK


 


X_____________________________

Authorized Signer


 






    	 	1
#### Sally M. Jeffers and others, Appellants, v. Robert M. Jeffers, Respondent.

—.Judgment modified as indicated in the opinion, and as modified affirmed, with costs. Judgment to be settled by Barker, J. Opinion by

Barker, J.
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 Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. RM07-10-002]

                    In comments following the March 25, 2010 Technical Conference in the above-referenced proceeding, the Natural Gas Supply Association, Shell Producers,[1]                                          Process Gas Consumers Group, and Independent Petroleum Association of America (Commenters) requested that the Commission extend the deadline for filing the 2009 Form No. 552 for an additional 60 to 90 days from the current deadline of July 1, 2010. The Commenters contend that the additional time will allow filers to prepare the Form No. 552 based on any additional guidance that the Commission will provide in the future.                

Upon consideration, notice is hereby given that all natural gas market participants are granted an extension of time until September 1, 2010 to file their Form No. 552 for calendar year 2009.

Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary.

# Footnotes

1.                             Shell Gulf of Mexico, Shell Offshore Inc., and SWEPI LP.                    
        Back to Citation      

[FR Doc. 2010-12995 Filed 5-28-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
#### Mary Heckel, Respondent, v. Putnam Coal and Ice lant.

Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs^ Present —

Jenks, P. J., Hirschberg, Burr, Woodward and Rich, ,
#### David Levy and another, Respondents, v. Rudolph Moeller, Appellant.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.
#### John S. Clements, plaintiff in error, *vs.*William Painter, defendant in error.

Where a suit was brought to the City Court of Augusta, for $235 96, the jurisdiction of which does not extend to amounts under $100, and the matters in dispute were refered to an arbitrator, and upon the return of the award, which was in favor of the plaintiff, for $68 14, besides interest, a motion was made to dismiss the case for want of jurisdiction, as the plaintiff, by his own admission, only claimed $81 96, it was proper in the Court to sustain the motion. (R.)

Jurisdiction. Award. Practice. Before Judge Gould. City Court of Augusta. May Term, 1872.

For the facts of this case, see the decision.

James S. Hook, for plaintiff in error.

H. Clay Foster, for defendant.

Warner, Chief Justice.

The plaintiff brought an action against the defendant in the City Court of Augusta, for the sum of $235 96. By consent of the parties, the matters in dispute between them were referred to an arbitrator, who made his award that there was due the plaintiff only the sum of $64 14, besides interest. When the award was returned to the City Court, for the purpose of being made the judgment of that Court, a motion was made to dismiss the plaintiff’s case on the ground that the City Court did not have jurisdiction of it, the plaintiff’s claim being less than $100, which motion was sustained and the plaintiff excepted. It appears from the award of the ar*487bitrator, that when the plaintiff came before him, although he had sued the defendant for the sum of $235 96, he did not claim to be due him but the sum of $81 96. If the case had been referred to a jury for trial in the City Court, instead of an arbitrator, to ascertain the amount due, and the plaintiff had admitted before the Court that his claim against the defendant was only for the sum of $81 96, there can be no doubt that the Court would have dismissed the case for want of jurisdiction. The admission of the plaintiff before the arbitrator, to whom the case was referred by the Court, by the consent of the parties as to the amount of his claim, when brought to the attention of the Court by the award of the arbitrator must necessarily produce the same result. The fact that the plaintiff sued the defendant for a larger amount than was actually due him by his own admission, cannot have the effect to give to the City Court jurisdiction. If the plaintiff *bona fide*claimed the amount sued for, and upon the trial it had been reduced, the jurisdiction of the Court would not have been ousted on that account; but that is not the case here, the plaintiff admitted the defendant did not owe him but $81 96, and the arbitrator found that he did not owe him that much.

Let the judgment of the Court below be affirmed.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

MARIE MARTHA BALTAZAR, ETC.,

Appellant,

v.

BALTIMORE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY and MATHEL W. 

CUNNINGHAM,

Appellees.

No. 4D21-180

[April 29, 2021]

Appeal from the County Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm 

Beach County; August A. Bonavita, Judge; L.T. Case Nos. 

502013CC013297XXXXMB and 502019AP000135CAXXMB.

Jane Kreusler-Walsh, Rebecca Mercier Vargas, and Stephanie L. 

Serafin of Kreusler-Walsh, Vargas & Serafin, P.A., West Palm Beach, for 

appellant.

Cheryl J. Lister of Bradley Arant Boult Cummings, LLP, Tampa and 

Jason A. Walters of Bradley Arant Boult Cummings, LLP, Alabama, Pro 

hac vice, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

LEVINE, C.J., MAY and CIKLIN, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

DEAN ZEHNTER,

Appellant,

v.

DYANKI, INC., f/k/a MORSE ZEHNTER ASSOCIATES and

MORSE ZEHNTER LLC,

Appellees.

No. 4D18-450

[May 16, 2019]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm 

Beach County; Richard Oftedal, Judge; L.T. Case No. 2014CA006842AA.

Alan P. Dagen of The Law Offices of Alan Dagen, P.A., Weston, for 

appellant.

John D. Boykin of Ciklin Lubitz, West Palm Beach, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

GERBER, C.J., MAY and CONNER, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
101st Congress, 2d Session House Document 101-246

VETO OF THE HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION 660

MESSAGE

FROM

THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

TRANSMITTING

HIS VETO OF HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION 660, MAKING FURTHER

CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1991,

AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

October 6, 1990—Message and accompanying bill referred to the

Committee on Appropriations and ordered to be printed

49-011

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 1990
To the House of Representatives:

I am returning herewith without my approval H.J. Res. 660—a resolution making continuing appropriations—which would extend funding for the Federal Government through October 12, 1990. In providing for such funding, H.J. Res. 660 would also suspend the sequester that is required by the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings law. The sequester would be suspended even though the Congress has failed repeatedly to act in any meaningful way to reduce the Feder­ al deficit. Under these circumstances, I simply cannot approve H.J. Res. 660. When the Budget Summit Agreement was announced by the Bi­ partisan Leadership on September 30th, I indicated that I would not sign a continuing resolution until a satisfactory budget resolu­ tion was passed. The Congress failed to pass such a budget resolu­ tion during the past week. I have made the difficult political deci­ sions that are required to achieve a meaningful reduction in the Federal deficit. Responsible congressional action to reduce the defi­ cit can be delayed no longer. It is time for the Congress to act re­ sponsibly on a budget resolution—not time for business as usual. I urge the Congress to concentrate its energies on passing a satis­ factory budget resolution to clear the way for approval of another short-term continuing resolution, and the enactment of meaningful deficit reduction legislation no later than October 19th. I note that H.J. Res. 660 would also increase the Federal debt limit until October 12th. If it becomes clear that the Congress cannot pass a satisfactory budget resolution by October 9th, I urge that it enact a clean bill extending the debt limit so that the U.S. Government will not default on its obligations on October 11th. The latest date by which action on a debt limit extension is needed to avoid default is October 9th, so that the Treasury can auction securities on October 10th and settle them on October 11th.

George Bush.

The White House, October 6\ 1990.

(li
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5095 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5095

To mandate all Members, Delegates, and the Resident Commissioner of the 
 House of Representatives to complete annual ethics training conducted 
                      by the Committee on Ethics.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 14, 2014

  Mr. Cicilline (for himself and Mr. Rigell) introduced the following 
   bill; which was referred to the Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To mandate all Members, Delegates, and the Resident Commissioner of the 
 House of Representatives to complete annual ethics training conducted 
                      by the Committee on Ethics.

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

SECTION 1. MANDATORY ANNUAL ETHICS TRAINING FOR MEMBERS.

    Title V of the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007 is 
amended by redesignating sections 555 and 556 as sections 556 and 557 
and by inserting after section 554 the following new section:

``SEC. 555. MANDATORY ANNUAL ETHICS TRAINING FOR MEMBERS.

    ``(a) Training Program.--The Committee on Ethics of the House of 
Representatives shall conduct ongoing ethics training and awareness 
programs for Members, Delegates, and the Resident Commissioner of the 
House of Representatives.
    ``(b) Requirements.--The ethics training program conducted by the 
Committee on Ethics shall be completed by--
            ``(1) new Members, Delegates, and the Resident Commissioner 
        not later than 60 days after commencing service; and
            ``(2) Members, Delegates, and the Resident Commissioner 
        serving on or after noon, January 3, 2015, during each session 
        of a Congress, beginning with the 1st session of the 114th 
        Congress.
    ``(c) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect on noon, 
January 3, 2015.''.

SEC. 2. CONFORMING AMENDMENT.

    The table of contents for title V of the Honest Leadership and Open 
Government Act of 2007 is amended by redesignating the items relating 
to sections 555 and 556 as 556 and 557 and by inserting after the item 
relating to section 554 the following:

``Sec. 555. Mandatory annual ethics training for Members.''.
                                 <all>
```
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

__________________________________________________________________________________________

PATRICIA A. SAVAGE (SBN 236235)

SAVAGE & LAMB, PC

1550 Humboldt Road, Suite 4

Chico, CA 95928

Telephone: (530) 809-1851

Fax: (530) 592-3865

Email: psavesq@gmail.com 

Attorneys for Movants,

MATTHEW RICCA, DIANNE S. GINGERICH

NIELS BRINGSJORD, KENDRA BRINGSJORD

AND LOGAN BRINGSJORD

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

In re

PG&E Corporation,

and 

PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC 

COMPANY, 

Debtors.

[x] Affects both Debtors

*All paper shall be filed in the Lead 

Case, No. 19-30088-DM

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 19-30088-DM

Chapter 11

Lead Case, Jointly Administered

NOTICE OF HEARING PURSUANT TO 

FED. R. BANKR. PROC. 7015 AND 7017 

TO ENLARGE TIME TO FILE PROOF 

OF CLAIM PURSUANT TO FED. R. 

BANKR. PROC. 9006(b)(1)

Date: May 9, 2023

Time: 10:00 a.m. (Pacific Time)

Place: Telephonic/Video Appearances Only

 United States Bankruptcy Court

 Courtroom 17,

 450 Golden Gate Ave., 16th Floor

 San Francisco, CA

Judge: Hon. Dennis Montali

Objection Date: April 24, 2023

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Bankruptcy Court will hear and consider the 

Motion Pursuant to Fed. R. Bankr. Proc. 7015 and 7017 to Enlarge Time to File Proof of 

Claim Pursuant to Fed. R. Bankr. Proc. 9006(b)(1)(“Motion”), on May 9, 2023 (Pacific 

Time) via video conferencing or telephone. 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 13659 Filed: 04/07/23 Entered: 04/07/23 12:18:03 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

__________________________________________________________________________________________

All interested parties should consult the Bankruptcy Court’s website at 

swww.canb.uscourts.gov for information about court operations during the COVID-19 

pandemic. The Bankruptcy Court’s website provides information regarding how to arrange a 

telephonic or video appearance. If you have any questions regarding how to appear at a court 

hearing, you may contact the Bankruptcy Court by calling 888-821-7606 or by using the Live 

Chat feature on the Bankruptcy Court’s website. 

PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that the deadline to object to the Motion is

April 24, 2023. 

PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that copies of Motion can be viewed and 

obtained: (1) by accessing the Court’s website at http://www.canb.uscourts.gov, (2) by 

contacting the Office of the Clerk at 450 Golden Gate Ave, San Francisco, CA 94102, or (3) 

from the Debtor’s notice and claims agent, Prime Clerk LLC, at http://restructuring 

.primeclerk.com/pge or by calling (844)339-4217 (toll free) for U.S. based parties; or 1 (929) 

333-8977 for international parties or by email at: pginfo@primeclerk.com . Note that a 

PACER password is needed to access documents on the Bankruptcy Court’s website. 

Date: April ____, 2023 ____________________

Patricia A. Savage

Attorney for Claimants

7

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 13659 Filed: 04/07/23 Entered: 04/07/23 12:18:03 Page 2

of 2
%!-%7%01.-#+!),

.5!-02%,.&&%7%01.-

.0/.0!2).-!-$!#)&)#!1!-$+%#20)#.,/!-7

!1%	

5)-,!##.,

. (.,)2,!7#.-#%0-

!,(%0%2.!1*&.07.30#.-1)$%0!2).-&.0,71%+&!-$,71.-2.&)+%!

+!2%#+!),2(0.3'(2(%!-*03/2#7.302

 %!-$,!-7.2(%01*-.5(!4%.30.5-(!00.5)-'%6/%0)%-#%.&

2(%-)'(2!-$5%%*1!&2%02(%3""1)0%++.&.-.,!.3-275!1

!-%4!#3!2).-8.-%5)++-%4%0&.0'%22(%&%%+)-'.&&%!0!-$5.007)-'

&.0,7&!,)+7!-$&0)%-$1.#!++!5%-&.0#%,%-2$)$-.2')4%31,3#(

$)0%#2).-.-%4!#3!2).-.2(%02(!-5%(!$2.+%!4%.30(.,%!-$-.2

+..*"!#*

(!4%"%%-!0%1)$%-2.&.-.,!.3-27&.0,.0%2(!-	7%!01!-$

(!4%-%4%0(!$2.%6/%0)%-#%5(!25%(!4%"%%-2(0.3'($30)-'2(%


	
&)0%1!-$!&2%03013,,%015)++&.0%4%0"%#(!-'%$%!1.-1

)-.-.,!.3-27(!4%"%#.,%5)-2%01/0)-'13,,%0&)0%1%!1.-

!-$&!++ %5)++#.-2)-3%2.#!007.30&)0%!-6)%27!-$&%!05)2(31

%4%077%!0()1)1!-%5!-6)%272(!25!1#!31%$"71%4%0%-%'+%#2

!-$.,/!-7(!4%"%%-&.3-$0%1/.-1)"+%&.02(%#!31%.&

2(%
	
3""1)0%!-$!,!4)#2),.&)21.32#.,%1

(!-*7.3&.07.302),%

)-#%0%+7%!-%7%01.-

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 13028 Filed: 09/30/22 Entered: 09/30/22 16:26:10 Page 1

of 1
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 13000 Filed: 09/26/22 Entered: 09/26/22 11:42:57 Page 1

of 4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 13000 Filed: 09/26/22 Entered: 09/26/22 11:42:57 Page 2

of 4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 13000 Filed: 09/26/22 Entered: 09/26/22 11:42:57 Page 3

of 4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 13000 Filed: 09/26/22 Entered: 09/26/22 11:42:57 Page 4

of 4
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

CLEAR WITH COMPUTERS, LLC,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

DICK'S SPORTING GOODS, INC., FORTY NINERS 

FOOTBALL COMPANY, LLC, HELLY HANSON 

(U.S.) INC., LEVI STRAUSS & CO., NFL 

ENTERPRISES LLC, SPANX, INC., AND MLB 

ADVANCED MEDIA, L.P.,

Defendants-Appellees,

AND

THE FINISH LINE, INC.,

Defendant-Appellee.

______________________ 

2014-1336, -1338, -1341, -1342, -1343, -1344, -1345, -1346

______________________ 

Appeals from the United States District Court for the 

Eastern District of Texas in Nos. 6:12-cv-00674-LED, 

6:12-cv-00675-LED, 6:12-cv-00945-LED, 6:12-cv-00947-

LED, 6:12-cv-00948-LED, 6:12-cv-00949-LED, 6:12-cv00950-LED, and 6:12-cv-00951-LED, Chief Judge Leonard Davis.

______________________ 

ON MOTION

Case: 14-1336 Document: 60 Page: 1 Filed: 10/23/2014
2 CLEAR WITH COMPUTERS, LLC v. DICK'S SPORTING GOODS, INC. 

______________________ 

O R D E R

The parties jointly move to withdraw the abovecaptioned appeals. 

Upon consideration thereof, 

 IT IS ORDERED THAT: 

(1) The motion to withdraw is granted. The appeals 

are dismissed.

(2) Each side shall bear its own costs.

 FOR THE COURT

 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole 

Daniel E. O’Toole 

Clerk of Court

s21

ISSUED AS A MANDATE: October 23, 2014

Case: 14-1336 Document: 60 Page: 2 Filed: 10/23/2014