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

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6364 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 6364

 To amend the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area Improvement 
Act to extend the exception to the closure of certain roads within the 
     Recreation Area for local businesses, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 10, 2022

     Mr. Cartwright (for himself, Mr. Meuser, and Mr. Fitzpatrick) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                           Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area Improvement 
Act to extend the exception to the closure of certain roads within the 
     Recreation Area for local businesses, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. USE OF CERTAIN ROADS WITHIN THE DELAWARE WATER GAP NATIONAL 
              RECREATION AREA.

    Section 4(b) of the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area 
Improvement Act (Public Law 109-156; 119 Stat. 2948) is amended in the 
matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking ``Until'' and all that 
follows through ``subsection (a)'' and inserting ``Until September 30, 
2026, subsection (a)''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 10.1


 


 


 





May 6, 2014


 


First Amendment to the "Letter
Agreement" between Tidewater Oil and Gas Company
LLC, "Tidewater", and Virtus oil and gas, "Virtus" signed
November 14, 2013 and
approved by the bankruptcy court on December 11,
2013.


 


The parties to this agreement,
Tidewater and Virtus, mutually agreed that it is to their best interest to postpone the drilling
date as provided in the Letter Agreement in paragraphs 1.2 and 1.5. This date is February 3,
2015. The parties to
this agreement have mutually agreed to change the drilling date in paragraph 1.2 and 1.5 to September,
2015. This mutual agreement was
done in an effort to give Virtus additional time to shoot and
acquire additional seismic to delineate additional structural
elements that that may be defined with
this additional data.
Both parties see this as being beneficial to the overall
program and it is their wish to make this amendment to
the agreement.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned parties as
of this 6th day of May, 2014.


 





Tidewater
Oil & Gas Company LLC




 


 


By: /s/ James S. Jones


 


Name: James S. Jones


 


Title: Manager 


 


 


 


Virtus Oil and Gas


 


By: /s/ Dan Ferris


 


Name: Dan Ferris


 


Title: CEO
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

KARINE PETROSYAN; HARUTYUN

KHACHATRYAN; SERGEY

KHACHATRYAN,

 Petitioners,

 v.

LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 10-72715

Agency Nos. A098-824-758

A098-824-759

A098-824-760

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted March 16, 2016** 

San Francisco, California

Before: KLEINFELD, RAWLINSON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

Petitioners Karine Petrosyan (Petrosyan), Harutyun Khachatryan, and

Sergey Khachatryan, Armenian citizens, challenge the Board of Immigration

FILED

JAN 09 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Appeals’ (BIA) denial of Petrosyan’s motion to reopen.1

 Petrosyan contends that

reopening of her immigration proceedings is warranted due to ineffective

assistance of counsel and changed country conditions. We review the BIA’s

decision for abuse of discretion. Maravilla Maravilla v. Ashcroft, 381 F.3d 855,

857 (9th Cir. 2004). 

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Petrosyan’s untimely motion

to reopen because Petrosyan failed to exercise due diligence in pursuing her

ineffective assistance of counsel claim. Despite dissatisfaction with her attorney’s

performance, Petrosyan waited two years after the BIA’s denial of her appeal to

file her motion to reopen and “took no affirmative steps to investigate” whether her

counsel rendered ineffective assistance. Avagyan v. Holder, 646 F.3d 672, 680

(9th Cir. 2011).

In addition, Petrosyan failed to establish that her “counsel’s performance

was so inadequate that it may have affected the outcome of the proceedings.”

Martinez-Hernandez v. Holder, 778 F.3d 1086, 1088 (9th Cir. 2015) (citation and

internal quotation marks omitted). The immigration judge’s adverse credibility

determination was based on Petrosyan’s inconsistent testimony, her demeanor, and

1

 This memorandum disposition refers to petitioners collectively as

Petrosyan because her husband’s and son’s petitions are derivative. 

2
her nonresponsive answers. See id. (requiring claim to be plausible before finding

counsel’s performance inadequate). 

 Finally, the BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Pestrosyan’s motion

to reopen premised on changed country conditions. The BIA properly concluded

that country condition reports and other evidence concerning political persecution

in Armenia were immaterial to Petrosyan’s asylum claim because she failed to

credibly establish that she was persecuted as a political activist. Toufighi v.

Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 996-97 (9th Cir. 2008), as amended (holding that new

evidence of persecution was immaterial due to failure to establish “a prima facie

case for eligibility”). 

PETITION DENIED.

3
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

QUADIR SHAHIDD TAYLOR,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 15 MAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 15th day of May, 2019, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>


     <ARTICLE> 5
     <LEGEND>
     THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
     CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND RELATED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME
     OF J. C. PENNEY FUNDING CORPORATION AS OF APRIL 29, 2000, AND IS
     QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
     </LEGEND>
     <MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000

     <S>                             <C>
     <PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
     <FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-27-2001
     <PERIOD-END>                               APR-29-2000
     <CASH>                                               0
     <SECURITIES>                                         0
     <RECEIVABLES>                                    1,277
     <ALLOWANCES>                                         0
     <INVENTORY>                                          0
     <CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,277
     <PP&E>                                               0
     <DEPRECIATION>                                       0
     <TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   1,277
     <CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               43
     <BONDS>                                              0
     <PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
     <PREFERRED>                                          0
     <COMMON>                                           145
     <OTHER-SE>                                       1,089
     <TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     1,277
     <SALES>                                              0
     <TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
     <CGS>                                                0
     <TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
     <OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
     <LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
     <INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 (2)
     <INCOME-PRETAX>                                      2
     <INCOME-TAX>                                         1
     <INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  1
     <DISCONTINUED>                                       0
     <EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
     <CHANGES>                                            0
     <NET-INCOME>                                         1
     <EPS-BASIC>                                        0
     <EPS-DILUTED>                                        0



</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-2163

ISIDORO RODRIGUEZ, Esq.,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

DANILO DEVIS PEREIRA,

Defendant - Appellee,

and

HFP INCORPORATED, General Partner; IOTA

PARTNERS, L.P.; ARMADA COMPANY, General

Partner; SEA SEARCH ARMADA; DOE ENTITIES 1-6;

MURDOCK & COMPANY; EDRIS E. HARBESTON; JACK

HARBESTON; JEROME BARRON; DAVE LAROCQUE; DON

MIDDLEBROOK; ED CARPENTER; JOHN DOES 1-20,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District

Judge. (CA-02-1523-GBL)

Submitted: January 19, 2006 Decided: January 24, 2006

Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
- 2 -

Isidoro Rodriguez, Appellant Pro Se. Danilo Devis Pereira,

Appellee Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 3 -

PER CURIAM:

Isidoro Rodriguez appeals a district court’s amended

final judgment adopting in part the magistrate judge’s report and

recommendation and dismissing without prejudice his motion for a

default judgment. We have reviewed the record and the district

court’s order and affirm for the reasons of the district court.

See Rodriguez v. Pereira, No. CA-02-1523-GBL (E.D. Va. filed Sept.

19, 2005; entered Sept. 21, 2005). We deny Rodriguez’s motions to

disqualify the judges of this circuit court, for the issuance of a

scheduling order and for permission to file a formal brief. We

also deny the motion for oral argument because the facts and legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 171 (Wednesday, September 3, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 51469]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-20387]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-ORD-2008-0200; FRL-8710-4]


Board of Scientific Counselors, Water Quality Mid-Cycle 
Subcommittee Meeting--2008

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of Cancellation of Meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and 
Development (ORD), announces the cancellation of a meeting of the Board 
of Scientific Counselors (BOSC) Water Quality Mid-Cycle Subcommittee. 
This meeting, a teleconference September 15, 2008, was announced in a 
Federal Register Notice published on Friday, August 15, 2008 (73 FR 
47949). The purpose of this meeting was to prepare for the September 23 
face-to-face meeting of the subcommittee. The proposed agenda topics 
will be covered during the September 4, 2008 meeting (telecon).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Designated Federal Officer via 
mail at: Susan Peterson, Mail Code 8104-R, Office of Science Policy, 
Office of Research and Development, Environmental Protection Agency, 
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460; via phone/voice 
mail at: (202) 564-1077; via fax at: (202) 565-2911; or via e-mail at: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#88f8edfcedfafbe7e6a6fbfdfbe9e6c8edf8e9a6efe7fe"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="8cfce9f8e9feffe3e2a2fff9ffede2cce9fceda2ebe3fa">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: August 26, 2008.
Fred Hauchman,
Director, Office of Science Policy.
[FR Doc. E8-20387 Filed 9-2-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
CMF

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 19-0564

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

RYAN WILLIAM MCCAULEY,

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 October 18, 2020, within which to prepare, serve, and file its 

response brief.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

September 15 2020

09/15/2020

Case Number: DA 19-0564
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.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Disaster Declaration #11264 and #11265]

# AGENCY:

U.S. Small Business Administration.

# ACTION:

Amendment 13. 

# SUMMARY:

This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of Iowa (FEMA-1763-DR), dated 05/27/2008.

*Incident:*                         Severe Storms, Tornadoes, and Flooding.                    

*Incident Period:*                         05/25/2008 through 08/13/2008.                    

*Effective Date:*                         08/26/2008.                    

*Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         09/29/2008.                    

*EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         02/27/2009.                    

# ADDRESSES:

Submit completed loan applications to:U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road,Fort Worth, TX 76155.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance,U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of the Presidential disaster declaration for the State of Iowa, dated 05/27/2008 is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster:

*Primary Counties: (Physical Damage and Economic Injury Loans):*

Humboldt, Howard, Jackson, Poweshiek.

All other counties contiguous to the above named primary counties have previously been declared.

All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008)

Herbert L. Mitchell,

Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.

 [FR Doc. E8-20447 Filed 9-3-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Darryl Brickhouse, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (West, J.), rendered October 20, 1988, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that his claim of error with respect to the trial court’s denial of his preplea request for production of a confidential informant is preserved for appellate review because the People allegedly specifically agreed to its preservation. Since the record does not support the defendant’s contention, we find that the issue is not preserved for appellate review *(see, People v O’Brien,*56 NY2d 1009, *affg*84 AD2d 567), and we decline to review it in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction under the particular circumstances of this case *(cf., People v Thomas,*74 AD2d 317, 318, *affd*53 NY2d 338). We note that the defendant may move to vacate his plea of guilty by postjudgment motion on the basis that it was induced by a mistaken belief that he had preserved his right to appellate review of this issue *(see, People v Boyce,*150 AD2d 471; *see also, People v O’Brien, supra; People v Montanus,*90 AD2d 992). Bracken, J. P., Kunzeman, Fiber and O’Brien, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 171 (Wednesday, September 3, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 51493]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-20190]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


Clinical Center; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of a meeting of 
the Board of Scientific Counselors of the NIH Clinical Center.
    The meeting will be closed to the public as indicated below in 
accordance with the provisions set forth in section 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended for the review, discussion, and evaluation of 
individual intramural programs and projects conducted by the Clinical 
Center, including consideration of personnel qualifications and 
performance, and the competence of individual investigators, the 
disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of 
personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Board of Scientific Counselors of the NIH 
Clinical Center.
    Date: September 8-9, 2008.
    Time: 8 a.m. to 2 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate the Transfusion Medicine 
Department Review.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, Building 10, 10 Center 
Drive, Room 4-2551, Bethesda, MD 20892.
    Contact Person: David K. Henderson, MD, Deputy Director for 
Clinical Care, Office of the Director, Clinical Center, National 
Institutes of Health, Building 10, Room 6-1480, Bethesda, MD 20892, 
(301) 496-3515.
    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the urgent need to meet timing limitations imposed by 
the intramural research review cycle.

    Dated: August 25, 2008.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. E8-20190 Filed 9-2-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
# F ourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

April 22, 2022

No. 04

- 22

- 00214

- CV

IN RE Hector SANCHEZ

Original Mandamus Proceeding 1

ORDER

Sitting: Irene Rios , Justice

Beth Watkins , Justice

Liza A. Rodriguez , Justice

On April 11, 2022, relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus complaining that

respondent

, the Honorable Jessica Crawford

, failed to rule on relator’s motion to re cuse and three

other motions filed by the relator

. However, on April 12

, respondent signed an order recusing

herself from the underlying proceeding. Under these circumstances, this court is afforded the

discretion to either deny the petition for writ of mandamus or abate the proceeding to allow

consideration of the pending motions by the new trial judge. See In re Blevins , 480 S.W.3d 542,

544 (Tex. 2013). We believe abatement under these circumstances is the better and more

efficient manner of resolving this dispute. Id.

Accordingly, we ABATE the case for 60 days from the date of this order to allow the

new trial judge to rule on relator’s filed and noticed motions . During t he period of abatement,

relator shall present to the trial judge each issue made the subject of the pending petition for writ

of mandamus and obtain a ruling on each. 2

Relator is further ORDERED to file in this court either an amended petition and append ix

or the appropriate motion to dismiss this mandamus proceeding no later than 15 days after the

trial judge has ruled on all of the pending motions

.

It is further ORDERED that relator ’s motion to proceed inform a pauperis is GRANTED

and relator’s motion for leave to file a petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED because leave

is not required to file a petition in an intermediate appellate court. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 52.1; In re

Medina

, No. 04

- 19

- 00041

- CR, 2019 WL 360534, at *1 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio Jan. 30, 2019,

orig. proceeding ).

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 19

- 2853

- CV

- A , styled In the Matter of the Marriage of Adela Porcallo

and Hector Sanchez , pending in the 25th Judicial District Court

, Guadalupe County, Texas, the Honorable Jessica

Crawford presiding.

2 We hold in ab eyance r elator’s motion for leave to invoke T EX

. R. A PP

. P. Rule 2 during the abatement period.It is so ORDERED on April 22, 2022

.

PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO:

_______________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ

, Clerk of 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 State

          - [Public Notice 6325] 

Based upon a review of the Administrative Record assembled in this matter, and in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of the Treasury, I conclude that there is a sufficient factual basis to find that the circumstances that were the basis for the 2003 re-designation of the Real Irish Republican Army as a foreign terrorist organization have not changed in such a manner as to warrant revocation of the designation and that the national security of the United States does not warrant a revocation. 

Therefore, I hereby determine that the designation of the Real Irish Republican Army as a foreign terrorist organization, pursuant to Section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended (8 U.S.C. 1189), shall be maintained. 

                    This determination shall be published in the                     **Federal Register**                    .                 

Dated: August 11, 2008. 

John D. Negroponte, 

Deputy Secretary of State, Department of State.

[FR Doc. E8-19282 Filed 8-19-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710-10-P