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

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 853

To provide for adjustment of immigration status for certain Haitian children.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 7, 1995

Mrs. MEEK of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To provide for adjustment of immigration status for certain

Haitian children.

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

3 SECTION 1. ADJUSTMENT OF IMMIGRATION STATUS FOR

4 CERTAIN HAITIAN CHILDREN.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—The status of any alien described

6 in subsection (b) shall be adjusted by the Attorney Gen7 eral, under such regulations as the Attorney General may

8 prescribe, to that of an alien lawfully admitted for perma9 nent residence if—
2

•HR 853 IH

1 (1) the alien applies for such adjustment within

2 18 months after the date of the enactment of this

3 Act;

4 (2) the alien is otherwise eligible to receive an

5 immigrant visa and is otherwise admissible to the

6 United States for permanent residence, except in de7 termining such admissibility the grounds for exclu8 sion specified in paragraphs (4), (5), (6), and (7)(A)

9 of section 212(a) of the Immigration and Nationality

10 Act shall not apply and the Attorney General may,

11 in his or her discretion, waive any other provision of

12 such section (other than paragraph (2)(C) and sub13 paragraphs (A), (B), (C), or (E) of paragraph (3))

14 with respect to such an adjustment for humanitarian

15 purposes or to assure family unity;

16 (3) the alien is not an alien described in section

17 243(h)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act;

18 (4) the alien is physically present in the United

19 States on the date the application for such adjust20 ment is filed; and

21 (5) the alien is residing with a parent who is a

22 citizen or permanent resident of the United States.

23 (b) ALIENS ELIGIBLE FOR ADJUSTMENT OF STA24 TUS.—The benefits provided by subsection (a) shall apply

25 to any alien—
3

•HR 853 IH

1 (1) who is a national of Haiti; and

2 (2) who qualifies for a visa under section

3 203(a)(1) or (a)(2) of the Immigration and Nation4 ality Act as the unmarried son, daughter, or child of

5 a citizen or permanent resident of the United States.

6 (c) APPLICATION OF IMMIGRATION AND NATIONAL7 ITY ACT PROVISIONS.—Except as otherwise specifically

8 provided in this section, the definitions contained in the

9 Immigration and Nationality Act shall apply in the admin10 istration of this section.

11 (d) NO OFFSET IN NUMBER OF VISAS AVAILABLE.—

12 When an alien is granted the status of having been law13 fully admitted for permanent residence pursuant to this

14 section, the Secretary of State shall not be required to re15 duce the number of immigrant visas authorized to be is16 sued under the Immigration and Nationality Act and the

17 Attorney General shall not be required to charge the alien

18 any fee.

Æ
Exhibit 10.143

 

**JOINDER AGREEMENT**

 

**THIS JOINDER AGREEMENT**(this “Agreement”) dated as of September 28, 2007, by and among BNP PARIBAS (“BNP”), U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION (“US Bank”, and together with BNP, the “New Lenders”), GCI HOLDINGS, INC., an Alaska corporation, GCI COMMUNICATION CORP., an Alaska corporation, GCI CABLE, INC., an Alaska corporation, GCI FIBER COMMUNICATION CO., INC., an Alaska corporation, POTTER VIEW DEVELOPMENT CO., INC., an Alaska corporation, and ALASKA UNITED FIBER SYSTEM PARTNERSHIP, an Alaska partnership (each individually, a “Borrower” and, collectively, the “Borrowers”), GCI, Inc., an Alaska corporation (“GCII”) and CALYON NEW YORK BRANCH, as Administrative Agent (“Administrative Agent”).  Capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Credit Agreement (as defined below).

 

**WITNESSETH:**

 

**WHEREAS**, the Borrowers, GCII, the Initial Lenders signatory thereto and the Administrative Agent are party to that certain Amended and Restated Credit Agreement, dated as of August 31, 2005 (as amended, amended and restated, supplemented or otherwise modified from time to time, the “Credit Agreement”);

 

**WHEREAS**, the Third Amendment to the Credit Agreement, dated as of September 14, 2007, by and between the Borrowers, GCII, the Initial Lenders and the Administrative Agent (the “Third Amendment”) provides for the funding of the Incremental Loans in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth therein and pursuant to Section 2.2(g) of the Credit Agreement; 

 

**WHEREAS**, the New Lenders are willing to commit to an aggregate increase in the Revolving Commitment in an amount equal to thirteen million, five hundred thousand dollars ($13,500,000) and to an aggregate increase in the Term Commitment in an amount equal to sixteen million, five hundred thousand dollars ($16,500,000) as more fully set forth on Exhibit A attached hereto;

 

**WHEREAS**, the Administrative Agent has agreed to sell and assign to US Bank and US Bank has agreed to purchase and assume from the Administrative Agent an interest in the Total Commitments in an aggregate amount equal to five million dollars ($5,000,000) pursuant to that certain Assignment and Acceptance Agreement, dated as of September 28, 2007, by and between US Bank and the Administrative Agent; and

 

**WHEREAS**, each New Lender is willing to join and become a party to the Credit Agreement and the other Loan Documents as a Lender in order to provide Incremental Loans pursuant to Section 2.2(g) of the Credit Agreement;

 

1

 

----
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 6191 

To provide for interim appropriations for the District of Columbia courts 

and related agencies with respect to any fiscal year for which appropriations are not otherwise provided for such courts and agencies. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 8, 2021 

Ms. NORTON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Appropriations 

A BILL 

To provide for interim appropriations for the District of 

Columbia courts and related agencies with respect to 

any fiscal year for which appropriations are not otherwise 

provided for such courts and agencies. 

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

3 SECTION 1. INTERIM APPROPRIATIONS FOR DISTRICT OF 

4 COLUMBIA COURTS AND RELATED AGENCIES. 

5 (a) AVAILABILITY OF INTERIM APPROPRIATIONS.— 

6 If during any fiscal year (beginning with fiscal year 2021) 

7 there is an appropriation made for a Federal payment de8 scribed in subsection (c), and during the next fiscal year 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 6191 IH

1 there is no appropriation made for such a payment, there 

2 shall be appropriated for such next fiscal year, out of any 

3 money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, such 

4 sums as are necessary for such payment, at a rate for op5 erations and under the terms and conditions provided in 

6 the previous fiscal year. 

7 (b) EFFECT OF ENACTMENT OF SUBSEQUENT AP8 PROPRIATIONS.—If an appropriation for a Federal pay9 ment described in subsection (c), or a general appropria10 tion bill providing appropriations for Federal funds for the 

11 District of Columbia without provision for such a pay12 ment, is enacted into law on any date during a fiscal year 

13 following the expenditure of funds during such fiscal year 

14 pursuant to this Act— 

15 (1) such expenditure shall be charged to such 

16 appropriation (if any); and 

17 (2) appropriations made available pursuant to 

18 this Act shall not be available after the date of en19 actment of such appropriation or general appropria20 tion bill. 

21 (c) FEDERAL PAYMENTS DESCRIBED.—The Federal 

22 payments described in this subsection are as follows: 

23 (1) A Federal payment to the District of Co24 lumbia Courts. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 6191 IH

1 (2) A Federal payment for defender services in 

2 District of Columbia courts. 

3 (3) A Federal payment to the Court Services 

4 and Offender Supervision Agency for the District of 

5 Columbia. 

6 (4) A Federal payment to the District of Co7 lumbia Public Defender Service. 

8 (5) A Federal payment to the Criminal Justice 

9 Coordinating Council. 

10 (6) A Federal payment to the District of Co11 lumbia Commission on Judicial Disabilities and Ten12 ure. 

13 (7) A Federal payment to the District of Co14 lumbia Judicial Nomination Commission. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 632 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 632

   To enhance fairness in compensating owners of patents used by the 
                             United States.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 23, 1995

  Mr. Frost introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To enhance fairness in compensating owners of patents used by the 
                             United States.

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

SECTION 1. JUST COMPENSATION.

    (a) Amendment.--Section 1498(a) of title 28, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end of the first paragraph the following: 
``Reasonable and entire compensation shall include the owner's 
reasonable costs, including reasonable fees for expert witnesses and 
attorneys, in pursuing the action if the owner is an independent 
inventor, a nonprofit organization, or an entity that had no more than 
500 employees at any time during the 5-year period preceding the use or 
manufacture of the patented invention by or for the United States.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply to actions under section 1498(a) of title 28, United States Code, 
that are pending on, or brought on or after, January 1, 1995.
                                 <all>
```
#### Ellen R. Logan, as Administratrix, etc., Respondent, v. Frederic Nelson Whitley and Another, Appellants.

Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied, without costs. Present — Hirschherg, P. J., Jenks, Gaynor, Rich and Miller, JJ.
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 10.23


           MOORE MEDICAL CORP. - 2000 EXECUTIVE OFFICERS' BONUS PLAN


     1.  Purpose:  Eligibility, Etc.   This Plan, which has been adopted by the
     -------------------------------
Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of Moore Medical Corp. (the
"Company"), is designed to offer the incentive of bonus compensation to officers
--------
designated by the Board or its Compensation Committee, for purposes of the Plan,
as participating executive officers ("Participants").  Neither this Plan nor the
                                      ------------
designation as a Participant constitutes an agreement of continued employment
and it confers no such right.  No bonus will be payable if a Participant
breaches a material obligation to the Company.  An officer who is designated a
Participant during the year will (unless the Board or its Compensation Committee
otherwise provides) be eligible for a bonus computed on an elapsed day basis,
from the date of designation until the year-end.  If, for any reason whatsoever
other than death or disability, a Participant should cease being an employee of
the Company or a subsidiary on a full-time basis before year-end, he or she will
(unless the Board or its Compensation Committee otherwise provides) be entitled
to no bonus compensation.

     2.  Bonus.    As bonus compensation, the Company will pay each Participant,
     ----------
within 75 days after its 2000 fiscal year-end, the percentage of his or her Base
Salary (defined below) set forth in the right-side column below if: (a) at least
5% of its net revenue for the year is from Internet sales, (b) its gross margin
for the year is at least 29.5%, and (c) its net revenue for the year, as shown
in its audited financial statements for the year, exceeds the amount opposite
said percentage in the left-side column below:


               $155,000,000           37.5%
               $145,000,000           27.5%
               $135,000,000           25.0%
               $125,000,000          18.75%


     A Participant's "Base Salary" is his or her W-2 gross pay for 2000,
                      -----------
excluding any bonus under this Plan, any award under the Company's 2000
Incentive Compensation Plan, and compensation not paid for a period (other than
normal vacation) during which he or she was actively working full-time for the
Company or a subsidiary, such as for a period of disability or for severance.
#### Robert Ray STROUP, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 72-3634.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Dec. 15, 1972.

Robert Stroup, pro se.

William J. Schloth, U. S. Atty., Macon, Ga., for respondent-appellee.

Before THORNBERRY, COLEMAN and INGRAHAM, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

It is ordered that the petitioner’s motion for leave to appeal *in forma pauperis*is granted, and the judgment below is summarily vacated and the cause remanded for further proceedings on the *696merits. Thomas v. United States, 5th Cir. 1972, 460 F.2d 1222; Juelich v. United States, 5th Cir. 1961, 300 F.2d 381.1

1

. It is appropriate to dispose of this case summarily. See Groendyke Transportation, Inc. v. Davis, 5 Cir., 1969, 406 F.2d 1158.
I n an y ev ent , cont r ar y t o t he i m pl i cat i on i n t he m aj or i t y opi ni on, I dou bt t hat we can cl ai m t hat 1 t hi s cour t has f ound t hat t he “ Ant hony pr i nci pl es” app l y i n case s not i nv ol v i ng ki dnapp i ng - - t he cr i m e t hat i s n e c e s s a ril y p ro v e n u p o n p ro o f o f s u c h a s s a u l ti v e c rim e s a s ra p e o r ro b b e ry. A s fo r th e re fe re n c e to St at e v
. C or nel i us T

. Lust er , N o. 02C01- 9201- C R

- 00019 , Shel by C o. ( T enn. C r i m
. App. N ov
. 29, 1992) , t he m aj or i t y opi ni on f ai l s t o no t e t hat t he l ead opi ni on’ s app l i cat i on o fAnt hony app ar ent l y di d no t gai n t he s u p p o r t o fth e o th e r tw o m e m b e r s o fth e p a n e l, o n e c o n c u r r in g in r e s u lts o n ly a n d th e o th e r e x p r e s s ly r e j e c tin g th e u s e o fA n th o n y. 

# FILED

A pr il 16, 1 996 Cec il Cr ow son , Jr
. Ap p e l l a te C o u rt C l e rk IN THE CO UR T OF CR IM IN AL AP PEALS OF TENN ESSEE

AT KN OXVILLE OC TOBER1994 SESSI ON

STATE OF TENN ESSEE , ) ) Appel lee , ) No. 03C 01- 9407- CR -0 0262

) ) Sul li v an C ounty v
. ) ) H on. R . J er ry

Bec k, Judg e ) P HI L L I P S

. RO B E RT S , ) (A t t e m p t e d T h e f t ; B u rg la ry) ) Appel lan t. )

CO NC UR RI NG A ND D ISSE NT IN G O PIN ION

I c oncur w it h the aff ir mance of the one bur g lar y , t he at tempted theft and the p oss ess ion of bur g lar y i nst ru ments conv ic ti ons. I di ss ent fr om the re v er sal and dism issal of

the rem aining three burglary convictions. I believe that th e evidence jus ti fies all of the c onv ic ti ons that the d efendant r ecei v ed and that w e need not deter mine in thi s c ase w hether Sta te v Ant hony , 817 S.W .2d 2 99 ( Tenn. 1991 ), appl ies in any fashi on to the off enses of bur g lar y and attempt ed th eft. The v er y fact t hat n ot 1

ev er y att empted c ar

theft i nv olv es a burg lar y - - a poi nt c onced ed i n the maj or it y opi nio n

-- r enders t he reason ing i n Ant hony i nappl ic abl e to thi s c ase.

If w e w er e c onfronte d w it h a c ase in w hic h the so le pr oof f or an a ttempt ed theft w as the b re aki ng i nto a ca r, then i t mi g ht be w orth c onsi der ing an A nthony due pr oces s a nal y si s - - becau se, then , ev er y bur g lar y w oul d nec ess ar il y

pr ov e the cr ime of attemptto commi t t he felony or theft i ntended

. But w e ar e not

. In ea ch ins tanc e, t he2

defendant c ommitt ed ac ts ins ide the cars t hat w er e unr ela ted t o the br eaki ng and enter ing , butw er e ev ide nce of attempted thefts

. I w oul d hol d tha t t he s epar ate

conv ic ti ons ar e j ust ified

.

Jo se p h M. T ip to n , J u d ge
<PAGE>
                                                                   Exhibit 12.1



                       UNIVERSAL OUTDOOR, INC. AND AFFILIATES
                 COMPUTATION OR RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                              (DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                               1991        1992        1993       1994       1995     1996
                             -------     -------     --------   --------   -------   -------
<S>                          <C>         <C>         <C>        <C>        <C>       <C>

Pre-tax income (loss)
from continuing operation    (4,500)     (6,349)      (5,727)    (1,671)      969     3,660
                             ------      ------       ------     ------    ------    ------

Fixed charges:
  Interest expense and
    amortization of debt
    discount on all
    indebtedness              6,599       9,591        8,965      8,314     8,627    15,730
                             ------      ------       ------     ------     -----    ------

Earnings before income
  taxes and fixed charges     2,099       3,242        3,238      6,643     9,596    19,390
                             ------      ------       ------     ------     -----    ------
                             ------      ------       ------     ------     -----    ------

Ratio of earnings to 
fixed charges                  (A)         (A)          (A)        (A)        1.1       1.2
                             ------      ------       ------     ------     -----    ------
                             ------      ------       ------     ------     -----    ------

</TABLE>

(A) As a result of the loss incurred, the Company was unable to fully cover 
    the indicated fixed charges.
#### Jessie McDowell v. State.

No. 25132.

January 31, 1951.

No attorney for appellant of record on appeal.

*George P. Blackburn,*State’s Attorney, Austin, for the state.

WOODLEY, Judge.

Appellant was charged by complaint and information with *416the offense of possession of whiskey for the purpose of sale in a dry area.

A jury being waived, trial was had before the court on a plea of not guilty, resulting in a judgment of conviction with punishment at a fine of $150.00, and one day in jail.

T. R. Gholson, an employee of the Texas Liquor Control Board, in possession of search warrant, entered the premises of appellant situated in a dry area. According to the statement of facts, following the overruling of an objection to the testimony regarding such search, “Mr. Gholson was then permitted to testify that he found several bottles of intoxicating liquor on the premises and that the amount of intoxicating liquor found there was in excess of one quart.”

We find no proof in the record that the intoxicating liquor found on the premises of appellant was whiskey.

Such being the allegation of the state, in the absence of proof that appellant possessed whiskey for the purpose of sale, the conviction cannot stand.

The affidavit for search warrant includes the positive averment that the premises occupied by appellant was a place where alcoholic beverages were unlawfully possessed, sold, manufactured, kept and stored in violation of the provisions of the Texas Liquor Control Act, 666-1 et. seq. The objection to the introduction of testimony as to the search made thereunder, and the result thereof, was therefore not error. See Harris v. State, 112 Tex. Cr. R. 219, 15 S.W. 2d 1048.

The evidence being insufficient to support the conviction, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

Opinion approved by the court.
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 the Treasury

###### Office of Thrift Supervision 

          - [AC-23: OTS Nos. 04433 and H4522] 

                    Notice is hereby given that on August 12, 2008, the Office of Thrift Supervision approved the application of First Savings Bank, F.S.B., Clarksville, Indiana, to convert to the stock form of organization. Copies of the application are available for inspection by appointment (phone number: 202-906-5922 or e-mail                     *Public.Info@OTS.Treaas.gov*) at the Public Reading Room, 1700 G Street, NW., Washington, DC 20552, and the OTS Central Regional Office, 1 South                           ( print page 49242)                        Wacker Drive, Suite 2000, Chicago, Illinois 60606.                 

Dated: August 13, 2008. 

By the Office of Thrift Supervision. 

Sandra E. Evans, 

Federal Register Liaison. 

[FR Doc. E8-19127 Filed 8-19-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6720-01-M
1 The Honorable Ralph R. Erickson, United St ates District Judge for the District of North Dakota. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 07-3770

___________ Abraham A. Ungar, * * Plaintiff-Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of North Dakota. North Dakota State University, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Defendant-Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: February 27, 2009 Filed: March 6, 2009

___________ Before BYE, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Abraham A. Ungar appeals the district court’s 1 adverse grant of summary judgment in his employment-discrimination action. Based on our de novo review, see Clegg v. Arkansas Department of Corrections , 496 F.3d 922, 926 (8th Cir. 2007), we agree with the district court’s analysis of the merits of Ungar’s claims and its conclusion that there were no trialworthy issues. Accordingly, we affirm. See8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________