alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                         827,785
<SECURITIES>                                 2,540,598
<RECEIVABLES>                                  469,148
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,762,347
<PP&E>                                      69,681,246
<DEPRECIATION>                              18,467,682
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              58,207,130
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,810,711
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,749,869
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                58,207,130
<SALES>                                      9,081,735
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             9,167,138
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             5,940,378
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,310,368
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                993,824
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   993,824
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     5.74
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     5.74
        

</TABLE>
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4182 Filed: 10/10/19 Entered: 10/10/19 15:14:18 Page 1 of

1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                            9660
<SECURITIES>                                     37218
<RECEIVABLES>                                    45049
<ALLOWANCES>                                      1970
<INVENTORY>                                        612
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 94238
<PP&E>                                           17968
<DEPRECIATION>                                    7868
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  117263
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            26582
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         52460
<OTHER-SE>                                       33163
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    117263
<SALES>                                         131705
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                131705
<CGS>                                            21930
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    58650
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 16128
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                1211
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  23396
<INCOME-TAX>                                      7598
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              15798
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     15798
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.01


</TABLE>
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14**  **- 6734** 

ROBIN EUGENE LAND , Petitioner

- Appellant ,

v. SUSAN WHITE , Respondent

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina , at Charlotte
. Frank D. Whitney , Chief District Judge. ( 3:13

- cv - 00681

- FDW )

Submitted : August 28, 2014 Decided: September 3, 2014

Before WILKINSON, KING , and DUNCAN , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. Robin Eugene Land, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Robin Eugene Land seeks to appe al the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(1) (A) (2012) . A certificate of appealability w ill not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012)
. When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would fi nd that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conc lude that Land has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal3 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
EXHIBIT 32.2





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 Annual Report on Form 10-K/A second amended of Lightlake Therapeutics Inc. (the"Company") for the year ended July 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Seijin Ki, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, 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 results of operations o f the Company.








Date: May 11, 2010
 
 By: /s/ Seijin Ki
 Seijin Ki
 Chief Financial Officer








This certification accompanies each Report pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shalL not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of ss.18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### STATE v. JAMES EDWARD HICKS.

(Filed 18 October, 1950.)

Criminal Daw § 67c—

Where defendant appellant merely requests that the judgment against him be modified solely on the ground that it was harsh, unreasonable, and excessive, the appeal presents no legal question for decision and will be dismissed.

Appeal by defendant from *Bone, J.,*June Term, 1950, of Chaven.

Criminal prosecution on indictment charging the defendant with a felonious assault upon Ed Henry Sheppard with a deadly weapon with intent to kill, inflicting serious injury, not resulting in death.

The State’s evidence is to the effect that on Sunday afternoon, 11 September 1949, the defendant went to the store of Virginia Latham in James City, Craven County, discovered Ed Henry Sheppard therein, accused him of having broken into the defendant’s house and stolen some money and demanded that he turn over to the defendant the sum of $40.00. Upon denial of the accusation, the defendant whipped out a pistol, shot him in the chest and inflicted a serious injury, requiring hospitalization for two weeks.

The defendant tendered a plea of *nolo contendere*to the lesser offense of an assault with a deadly weapon, which was accepted by the solicitor.

Judgment: Two years on the roads.

The defendant appeals from the judgment as being harsh, unreasonable and excessive.

*Attorney-General McMullan and Assistant Attorney-General Rhodes for the State.*

*L. T. Grantham and H. P. Whitehurst for the defendant.*

Stacy, C. J.

In the defendant’s brief he asks simply that the judgment be “modified,” not that it be declared void or vacated, and this is the whole of his brief. No authority is cited and no reason is given for the request. The brief presents no legal question for decision and hardly suffices to retain the appeal on our docket.

Appeal dismissed.
**BF** IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 19 - 0711 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. KARI LYNN DERBY,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 30 -day extension of time, and good cause appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellee is granted an extension of time to and including Dec em

ber 21 , 2021 , within which to prepare, serve, and file its response brief

.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

November 9 2021

11/09/2021

Case Number: DA 19-0711
Exhibit
10.1


 


MEDAREX, INC.


 


2002 EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN


AMENDMENT


 


Pursuant
to Section 15 of the Medarex, Inc. 2002 Employee Stock Purchase Plan
(the “Plan”), the Plan is amended as follows, effective  on
the date of an Agreement and Plan of Merger among the Company, Bristol-Myers
Squibb Company, and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company:


 


1.     Section 6
of the Plan is amended by adding the following new subsection (f):


 


(f)            Notwithstanding
anything to the contrary in the Plan or any Offering, no Eligible Employee
shall become a Participant in the Plan or any current or future Offering after
the date of the Agreement and Plan of Merger among the Company, Bristol-Myers
Squibb Company, and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company.


 


2.     Section 8(a) of
the Plan is amended by adding the following at the end of the last sentence:


 


provided,
however, that notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Plan or any
Offering, no Participant may increase his or her Contributions after the date
of the Agreement and Plan of Merger among the Company, Bristol-Myers Squibb
Company, and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company.
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 

DOCS_SF:101557.1

PACHULSKI STANG ZIEHL 

& JONES LLP 

ATTORNEYS AT LA W

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA

Eric Seiler

FRIEDMAN KAPLAN SEILER & ADELMAN LLP 

7 Times Square 

New York, NY 10036-6516 

Telephone: 212-833-1100 

Email: eseiler@fklaw.com 

 

-andIsaac M. Pachulski (CA Bar No. 62337) 

Debra I. Grassgreen (CA Bar No. 169978) 

Gabriel I. Glazer (CA Bar No. 246384) 

PACHULSKI STANG ZIEHL & JONES LLP 

150 California Street, 15th Floor 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone: (415) 263-7000 

Facsimile: (415) 263-7010 

E-mail: ipachulski@pszjlaw.com 

 dgrassgreen@pszjlaw.com 

 gglazer@pszjlaw.com 

Attorneys for The Baupost Group, L.L.C., as the general 

partner and investment manager for certain entities 

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

In re: 

PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CORP., et al., 

Debtor. 

 Case No. 19-30088 

Chapter 11 

ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR 

ADMISSION OF ATTORNEY ERIC 

SEILER PRO HAC VICE 

Upon the application of Eric Seiler, whose business address and telephone number is 

Friedman Kaplan Seiler & Adelman LLP, 7 Times Square, New York, New York 10036-6516, 

Telephone: 212-833-1100, and who is an active member in good standing of the bar of the State of 

New York and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, for admission to practice in the 

Northern District of California in the above-entitled action on a pro hac vice basis, representing The 

Baupost Group L.L.C., 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the application is granted, subject to the terms and 

conditions of Civil L.R. 11-3. All papers filed by the attorney must indicate appearance pro hac 

vice. Service of papers upon and communication with co-counsel designated in the application will 

Signed and Filed: July 22, 2019

________________________________________

DENNIS MONTALI

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge

Entered on Docket 

July 22, 2019

EDWARD J. EMMONS, CLERK 

U.S. BANKRUPTCY COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3132 Filed: 07/22/19 Entered: 07/22/19 16:12:06 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 

DOCS_SF:101557.1 

 2 

PACHULSKI STANG ZIEHL 

& JONES LLP 

ATTORNEYS AT LA W

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA

constitute notice to the represented party. All future filings in this action are subject to the 

Bankruptcy Local Rules and Electronic Case Filing Procedures adopted by the United States 

Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California. 

**END OF ORDER** 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3132 Filed: 07/22/19 Entered: 07/22/19 16:12:06 Page 2 of

2
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

In re:

PG&E CORPORATION and PACIFIC GAS 

AND ELECTRIC COMPANY,

Debtors

Chapter 11 

No. 19-30088 (DM) 

(Jointly Administered)

TRANSFER OF CLAIM OTHER THAN FOR SECURITY

A CLAIM HAS BEEN FILED IN THIS CASE or deemed filed under 11 U.S.C. § 1111(a). 

Transferee hereby gives evidence and notice pursuant to Rule 3001(e)(2) of the Federal Rules of 

Bankruptcy Procedure of the transfer, other than for security, of the claim referenced in this 

evidence and notice.

Tenera Environmental Inc. Cherokee Debt Acquisition, LLC

Name of Transferor Name of Transferee

Name and Current Address of

Transferor:

Tenera Environmental Inc.

141 Suburban Rd., Suite A2

San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 

Attn: John Steinbeck

Name and Address where notices and payments 

to transferee should be sent: 

Cherokee Debt Acquisition, LLC

1325 Avenue of the Americas, 28th Floor 

New York, NY 10019 

Attn: Vladimir Jelisavcic

Schedule/Claim No. Creditor Name Amount Debtor Case No.

Claim No. 7754 Tenera Environmental Inc. $88,598.03 Pacific Gas and Electric Company 19-30089

Schedule F 

(#1031978 & 3.3608) Tenera Environmental Inc $113,930.00 Pacific Gas and Electric Company 19-30089

I declare under penalty of perjury that the information provided in this notice is true and correct 

to the best of my knowledge and belief. 

By: _____________________ Date: October 30, 2019 

Transferee/Transferee’s Agent

Penalty for making a false statement: Fine of up to $500,000 or imprisonment for up to 5 years, 

or both. 18 U.S.C. §§ 152 & 3571. 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4517 Filed: 10/30/19 Entered: 10/30/19 08:36:55 Page 1 of

3
CHEROKEE DEBT ACQUISITION, LLC

1325 Avenue of the Americas, 28th Floor

New York, NY 10019

Attn: Vladimir Jelisavcic

CHEROKEE DEBT ACQUISITION, LLC

Vladimir Jelisavcic

Manager

88,598.03

100

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4517 Filed: 10/30/19 Entered: 10/30/19 08:36:55 Page 2 of

3
CHEROKEE DEBT ACQUISITION, LLC

1325 Avenue of the Americas, 28th Floor

New York, NY 10019

Attn: Vladimir Jelisavcic

113,930.00

100

CHEROKEE DEBT ACQUISITION, LLC

Vladimir Jelisavcic

Manager

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4517 Filed: 10/30/19 Entered: 10/30/19 08:36:55 Page 3 of

3
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 Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP 767 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10153-0119

EXHIBIT 1-U

WMP Support Services

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4602-22 Filed: 11/07/19 Entered: 11/07/19 19:32:50 Page 1

of 14
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4602-22 Filed: 11/07/19 Entered: 11/07/19 19:32:50 Page 2

of 14
7/15/2019

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4602-22 Filed: 11/07/19 Entered: 11/07/19 19:32:50 Page 3

of 14
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4602-22 Filed: 11/07/19 Entered: 11/07/19 19:32:50 Page 4

of 14
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4602-22 Filed: 11/07/19 Entered: 11/07/19 19:32:50 Page 5

of 14
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4602-22 Filed: 11/07/19 Entered: 11/07/19 19:32:50 Page 6

of 14
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4602-22 Filed: 11/07/19 Entered: 11/07/19 19:32:50 Page 7

of 14
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4602-22 Filed: 11/07/19 Entered: 11/07/19 19:32:50 Page 8

of 14
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4602-22 Filed: 11/07/19 Entered: 11/07/19 19:32:50 Page 9

of 14
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4602-22 Filed: 11/07/19 Entered: 11/07/19 19:32:50 Page

10 of 14
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4602-22 Filed: 11/07/19 Entered: 11/07/19 19:32:50 Page

11 of 14
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4602-22 Filed: 11/07/19 Entered: 11/07/19 19:32:50 Page

12 of 14
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4602-22 Filed: 11/07/19 Entered: 11/07/19 19:32:50 Page

13 of 14
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4602-22 Filed: 11/07/19 Entered: 11/07/19 19:32:50 Page

14 of 14
J-A20037-16

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

: PENNSYLVANIA

v. :

:

JAMES PUORRO, :

:

Appellant : No. 1657 WDA 2015

Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence entered September 30, 2015

in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County,

Criminal Division, No(s): CP-02-SA-0001328-2015

BEFORE: BOWES, STABILE and MUSMANNO, JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY MUSMANNO, J.: FILED AUGUST 22, 2016

James Puorro (“Puorro”) appeals, pro se, from the judgment of 

sentence imposed following his conviction of two violations of the 

Pennsylvania Dog Law. See 3 P.S. §§ 459-305(a)(3); 459-502-A(a)(1)(ii). 

We affirm.

On April 23, 2015, Officer Craig Cummings (“Officer Cummings”) of 

the Springdale Township Police Department was dispatched to Greg 

Vansach’s (“Vansach”) home in Springdale Township. Vansach lives next 

door to Puorro. Vansach led Officer Cummings to his backyard, where his 

Pomeranian, Benny, was lying dead. Vansach told Officer Cummings that he 

witnessed one of Puorro’s dogs holding Benny in its mouth, and that the dog 

had killed Benny. Officer Cummings spoke with Puorro, who stated that one 

of Puorro’s dogs had escaped from his yard and killed Benny. Puorro was 
J-A20037-16

- 2 -

subsequently cited for two violations of the Pennsylvania Dog Law: Unlawful 

Confinement and Control and Harboring a Dangerous Dog. 

Puorro challenged the citations, and appeared, pro se, for a summary 

appeal hearing before the Honorable Robert C. Gallo (“Judge Gallo”) on 

September 30, 2015. Judge Gallo found Puorro guilty of both violations and 

imposed a $600 fine and additional costs. On October 22, 2015, Puorro filed 

a timely Notice of Appeal. Judge Gallo entered an Order directing Puorro to 

file a Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) concise statement of matters complained of on 

appeal. Puorro did not comply.

It is well-settled that a pro se appellant is not entitled to any 

advantage due to their lack of legal training, and must comply with the 

Pennsylvania Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Commonwealth v. 

Adams, 882 A.2d 496, 497-98 (Pa. Super. 2005); see also id. at 498 

(stating that “any person choosing to represent himself in a legal proceeding 

must, to a reasonable extent, assume that his lack of expertise and legal 

training will be his undoing.”). Thus, because he failed to comply with the 

trial court’s Order directing him to file a concise statement, Puorro has 

waived his opportunity to have this Court consider his issues on appeal. See 

Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b)(4)(vii); Commonwealth v. Lord, 719 A.2d 306, 309 (Pa. 

1998) (stating that “issues have been considered waived where no 1925(b) 

statement was filed or where an issue was not included in a filed 

statement.”).
J-A20037-16

- 3 -

Judgment of sentence affirmed.

Judgment Entered.

Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.

Prothonotary

Date: 8/22/2016
44553.00001

ANDREW M. LEBLANC

Partner

1850 K Street, NW, Suite 1100 | Washington, DC 20006

T: 202.835.7574

aleblanc@milbank.com | milbank.com

August 1, 2019

VIA ECF

Honorable Dennis Montali

United States Bankruptcy Court

Northern District of California

450 Golden Gate Avenue, 16th Floor

San Francisco, CA 94102

Re: In re PG&E Corporation, Case No. 19-30088 (DM) (Jointly Administered)

Dear Judge Montali:

I write on behalf of the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors (the “Committee”) of 

PG&E Corporation and its affiliated debtors (collectively, the “Debtors”), in connection with the 

Court’s July 29, 2019 Order re Telephone Discovery Conference [Docket No. 3235].

The Committee has the following open discovery request of the Official Committee of 

Tort Claimants (the “TCC”) and its individual members: information, including but not 

necessarily limited to, username and secure login password, that is sufficient to permit access to 

and download capability in the BrownGreer Portal,1including all data contained therein.

2

Sincerely,

/s/ Andrew M. Leblanc

Andrew M. Leblanc

 

1

“BrownGreer Portal” refers to a database established in the California North Bay Fire Cases Coordinated 

Proceeding, Case Number CJC-17-004955JCCP, in the Superior Court of the State of California, and 

referenced in Case Management Order 5: Collection and Production of Case Management Order 

Compliance Information and Subrogation Files, entered on December 28, 2018 in that proceeding.

2 The Committee understands that both the Debtors and certain owners of common stock of PG&E 

Corporation (the “PG&E Shareholders”) have served subpoenas on BrownGreer PLC for all documents 

contained in, or accessible through, the BrownGreer Portal.

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3350 Filed: 08/01/19 Entered: 08/01/19 11:09:44 Page 1 of

1
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5245 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5245

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 314 Lennon Drive in Wilmington, North Carolina, as the ``Meadowlark 
                          Lemon Post Office''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 29, 2014

  Mr. Jones introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
              Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 314 Lennon Drive in Wilmington, North Carolina, as the ``Meadowlark 
                          Lemon Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. MEADOWLARK LEMON POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 314 Lennon Drive in Wilmington, North Carolina, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Meadowlark Lemon Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Meadowlark 
Lemon Post Office''.
                                 <all>
```
Case: 19-30088    Doc# 4834-1    Filed: 11/21/19    Entered: 11/21/19 11:44:30    Page 1of 1