alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Kevin Hall

v. Civil No. 06-cv-95-PB

Merrimack County Department of Corrections

O R D E R

I herewith approve the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge

Muirhead dated March 24, 2006, no objection having been filed.

SO ORDERED.

April 17, 2006 /s/ Paul Barbadoro 

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

cc: Kevin Hall, Pro se

Case 1:06-cv-00095-PB Document 8 Filed 04/17/06 Page 1 of 1
I

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1724

To provide that service of the members of the organization known as the

United States Cadet Nurse Corps during World War II constituted

active military service for purposes of laws administered by the Secretary

of Veterans Affairs.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 3, 2001

Mrs. LOWEY (for herself and Mr. OBERSTAR) introduced the following bill;

which was referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently

determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

A BILL

To provide that service of the members of the organization

known as the United States Cadet Nurse Corps during

World War II constituted active military service for purposes of laws administered by the Secretary of Veterans

Affairs.

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 ‘‘United States Cadet

5 Nurse Corps Equity Act of 2001’’.
2

•HR 1724 IH

1 SEC. 2. SERVICE DEEMED TO BE ACTIVE MILITARY SERV2 ICE.

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of section

4 401(a)(1)(A) of the GI Bill Improvement Act of 1977 (38

5 U.S.C. 106 note), the Secretary of Defense is deemed to

6 have determined that qualified service of a person con7 stituted active military service.

8 (b) DETERMINATION OF DISCHARGE STATUS.—(1)

9 The Secretary of Defense shall issue an honorable dis10 charge under section 401(a)(1)(B) of the GI Bill Improve11 ment Act of 1977 to each person whose qualified service

12 warrants an honorable discharge.

13 (2) Such discharge shall be issued before the end of

14 the one-year period beginning on the date of the enact15 ment of this Act.

16 SEC. 3. PROHIBITION OF RETROACTIVE BENEFITS.

17 No benefits may be paid to any person as a result

18 of the enactment of this Act for any period before the date

19 of the enactment of this Act.

20 SEC. 4. DEFINITION.

21 For purposes of this Act, the term ‘‘qualified service’’

22 means service of a person as a member of the organization

23 known as the United States Cadet Nurse Corps during

24 the period beginning on July 1, 1943, and ending on De25 cember 15, 1945.

Æ
H. R. 1712

One Hundred Seventh Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,

the twenty-third day of January, two thousand and two

An Act

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to make adjustments to the boundary

of the National Park of American Samoa to include certain portions of the islands

of Ofu and Olosega within the park, 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. BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT OF THE NATIONAL PARK OF

AMERICAN SAMOA.

Section 2(b) of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act to establish the National

Park of American Samoa’’ (16 U.S.C. 410qq–1(b)), approved October

31, 1988, is amended—

(1) by striking ‘‘(1)’’, ‘‘(2)’’, and ‘‘(3)’’ and inserting ‘‘(A)’’,

‘‘(B)’’, and ‘‘(C)’’, respectively;

(2) by inserting ‘‘(1)’’ after ‘‘INCLUDED.—’’; and

(3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

‘‘(2) The Secretary may make adjustments to the boundary

of the park to include within the park certain portions of the

islands of Ofu and Olosega, as depicted on the map entitled

‘National Park of American Samoa, Proposed Boundary Adjustment’, numbered 82,035 and dated February 2002, pursuant to

an agreement with the Governor of American Samoa and contingent

upon the lease to the Secretary of the newly added lands. As

soon as practicable after a boundary adjustment under this paragraph, the Secretary shall modify the maps referred to in paragraph

(1) accordingly.’’.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
Exhibit (10)(a)

  

  

  

  

  

  

  Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

  

  

  

  

  We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Post-Effective Amendment No. 43 to the 1933 Act
    Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 333-135039) and Amendment No. 709 to the 1940 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 811-08517), and to the use therein of our reports dated (a) March 13, 2019, with respect to the
    consolidated financial statements of The Lincoln National Life Insurance Company and (b) April 16, 2019, with respect to the financial statements of Lincoln Life Variable Annuity Account N for the registration of interests in a separate account under
    individual flexible payment deferred variable annuity contracts.

  

  

  /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

  

  

  

  

  

  Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

  September 6, 2019
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 07-cr-111-PB

Thomas McNulty

O R D E R

The defendant, through counsel, has moved to continue the

trial scheduled for July 8, 2008, citing the need for additional

time to complete plea negotiations prior to trial. The

government does not object to a continuance of the trial date.

Accordingly, for the above reason and to allow the parties

additional time to properly prepare for trial, the court will

continue the trial from July 8, 2008 to September 3, 2008. In

agreeing to continue the trial, the court finds pursuant to 18

U.S.C.A. § 3161(h)(8)(A) that for the above-stated reasons, the

ends of justice served in granting a continuance outweigh the

best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

The June 30, 2008 final pretrial conference is continued to

August 26, 2008 at 2:30 p.m. 

Case 1:07-cr-00111-PB Document 31 Filed 06/11/08 Page 1 of 2
2

SO ORDERED.

/s/Paul Barbadoro 

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

June 11, 2008

cc: Cathy Green, Esq.

Michael Iacopino, Esq.

Helen Fitzgibbon, AUSA

United States Probation

United States Marshal

Case 1:07-cr-00111-PB Document 31 Filed 06/11/08 Page 2 of 2
Q1 2004 Exhibit 10.3





                                           Exhibit 10.3


                                                               **Confidential Treatment Requested




E-LOAN/zipRealty

                  Amendment Three to Marketing, Promotion, Distribution,

                  And Related Services Agreement

 

This Amendment Three ("Amendment") to the Marketing, Promotion,
Distribution, And Related Services Agreement dated April 15, 2002 (the
"Agreement"), by and between E-LOAN, Inc. and zipRealty, Inc., amends, modifies
and supplements the Agreement as set forth below. All terms of the Agreement
shall remain in full force and effect unless expressly amended, modified or
supplemented herein.


	Term. The Term of the Agreement shall be extended beyond December 31,
2003, for an additional period from January 1, 2004 until March 31, 2004 (the
"Extension Period").

	Compensation. During the Extension Period, E-LOAN shall pay to
zipRealty the following compensation:

	
Month
	
Amount

	
January 2004
	
$[**]  

	
February 2004
	
$[**]  

	
March 2004
	
$[**]  

	
Total
	
$[**]  




	Counterparts. This Amendment may be executed in one or more
counterparts, including facsimiles, each of which will be deemed to be a
duplicate original, but all of which, taken together, will be deemed to
constitute a single instrument.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Amendment to be executed and
dated below.


	
E- LOAN, INC.
	
zipRealty, Inc.

	
By:      __/s/    ___ Joseph  Kennedy________________
	
By:      __/s/  Gary M. Beasley____________________

	
Name: __Joseph J. Kennedy________
	
Name: __Gary M. Beasley________

	
Title:   __Pres.________________
	
Title:   __EVP & CFO__________________

	
Date:   __12/22/03_________________
	
Date:   ___12/22/03_______________





E-LOAN - zipRealty

   Amendment Three to Marketing, Promotion, Distribution, and Related Services Agreement



                                                               **Confidential Treatment Requested
I

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 149

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a deduction for

premiums on private mortgage insurance.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 3, 2001

Mr. PASCRELL 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 allow a

deduction for premiums on private mortgage insurance.

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

3 SECTION 1. PREMIUMS ON PRIVATE MORTGAGE INSUR4 ANCE.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (3) of section 163(h)

6 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to quali7 fied residence interest) is amended by adding at the end

8 the following new subparagraph:

9 ‘‘(E) PRIVATE MORTGAGE INSURANCE

10 PREMIUMS TREATED AS INTEREST.—Premiums
2

•HR 149 IH

1 paid or accrued for private mortgage insurance

2 (as defined by section 2 of the Homeowners

3 Protection Act of 1998 (12 U.S.C. 4901), as in

4 effect on the date of the enactment of this sub5 paragraph) by a taxpayer in connection with in6 debtedness with respect to a qualified residence

7 of the taxpayer shall be treated for purposes of

8 this subsection as qualified residence interest.’’

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

10 this section shall apply to premiums paid after December

11 31, 2000.

Æ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Jeffrey M. Rivard

v. No. 06-fp-054

U.S. Social Security Administration,

Commissioner

ORDER GRANTING REQUEST TO

PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis is hereby

granted, but only for the purpose of waiving the filing fee. 

This case has been assigned civil number 06-cv-054-PB. 

SO ORDERED.

_________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge 

Date: February 15, 2006

cc: Karen B. Nesbitt, Esq.

Case 1:06-cv-00054-PB Document 3 Filed 02/15/06 Page 1 of 1
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

August 27, 2021

No. 04-21-00185-CR

Adelida TREVINO,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 451st Judicial District Court, Kendall County, Texas

Trial Court No. 18-203-CR

Honorable Kirsten Cohoon, Judge Presiding

ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case was originally due June 28, 2021. In response to this 

court’s notification that the record was late, the court reporter requested an extension of time to 

file the record until August 23, 2021, and we granted that request. On August 26, 2021, the court 

reporter requested an additional extension of time until September 7, 2021, for a total extension 

of 70 days. After consideration, we GRANT the court reporter’s request and ORDER her to file 

the reporter’s record by September 7, 2021.

_________________________________

Beth Watkins, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 27th day of August, 2021.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
#### Dina PADILLA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 02-16795.

D.C. No. CV-02-01260-GEB(PAN).

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 10, 2003.*

Decided March 14, 2003.

Before CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, Padilla’s request for oral argument is denied.

MEMORANDUM **

Dina Padilla appeals pro se the district court’s judgment dismissing her action, which alleged the California Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board deprived her of constitutional rights. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo and may affirm on any ground supported by the record. *Steckman v. Hart Brewing, Inc.,*143 F.3d 1293, 1295 (9th Cir.1998). We affirm because Padilla’s action effectively seeks review of a final, state court decision. *See Fontana Empire Center, LLC v. City of Fontana,*307 F.3d 987, 992 (9th Cir.2002) (federal district courts lack jurisdiction to review final, state court judgments).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
1 The Honorable G. Thomas Eisele, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas, sitting by designation in the Northern District of Iowa. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 03-2334

___________ Tracey Toles, * * Appellant, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the v. * Northern District of Iowa. * Coastal Mart, Inc.; Mark Thornburg, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellees. *

___________ Submitted: April 29, 2004 Filed: May 12, 2004

___________ Before BYE, McMILLIAN, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Tracey Toles appeals the district court’s 1 adverse grant of summary judgment in her action brought under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 1981, and the Iowa Civil Rights Act. Toles sued her former employer, Coastal Mart, Inc., and its area manager, Mark Thornburg, claiming race discrimination. Having carefully reviewed the record, see Jacob-Mua v. Veneman , 289 F.3d 517, 520 (8th Cir. 2002), we affirm.-2- Specifically, we reject Toles’s argument that the district court erred byconcluding defendants’ actions were insufficient to create a trialworthy hostile-workenvironment claim, seeBurkett v. Glickman , 327 F.3d 658, 662 (8th Cir. 2003) (for hostile-work-environment claim to succeed, alleged conduct must be so extreme as to change terms and conditions of employment); and we also reject her contention that the district court improperly declined to consider her retaliation claim, see Speer v. Rand McNally & Co. , 123 F.3d 658, 665 (7th Cir. 1997) (district court was well within its discretion not to permit plaintiff to proceed on new theory, raised first in summary judgment resistance, as discovery had ended and summary judgment ruling was pending). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health 

                    There will be a meeting of the NIH Blue Ribbon Panel to advise on the Risk Assessment of the National Emerging Infectious Diseases Laboratories (NEIDL). The meeting will be held on Tuesday, October 14, 2008, at the Roxbury Center for the Arts, Hibernian Hall, 184 Dudley Street, Roxbury, MA                           ( print page 54842)                        02119 from approximately 6:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m.                 

Discussions will focus on principles and strategies for effective community engagement. There will also be time allotted on the agenda for public comment. 

Sign up for public comment will begin at approximately 5:30 p.m. on October 14, 2008. In the event that time does not allow for all those interested to present oral comments, anyone may file written comments using the address below. 

                    For further information concerning this meeting contact Ms. Laurie Lewallen, Advisory Committee Coordinator, Office of Biotechnology Activities, Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health, Mail Stop Code 7985, Bethesda, MD 20892-7985, telephone 301-496-9838, e-mail                     *lewallla@od.nih.gov.*                    Background information may be obtained by contacting NIH OBA by e-mail                     *oba@od.nih.gov.*

Dated: September 16, 2008. 

Kelly R. Fennington, 

Special Assistant to the Director, Office of Biotechnology Activities, National Institutes of Health.

[FR Doc. E8-22313 Filed 9-22-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 26 (Thursday, February 7, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7288-7289]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-2219]


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

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

[FMR B-17]


Stewardship of Federal Property; Notice of GSA Bulletin

AGENCY: Office of Governmentwide Policy, General Services 
Administration (GSA).

ACTION: Notice of a bulletin.

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

[[Page 7289]]

SUMMARY: This notice announces GSA Federal Management Regulation (FMR) 
Bulletin B-17 which provides guidance to Federal agencies to maximize 
the use and benefits of property throughout the asset management 
lifecycle and to explain how those benefits are extended to the public. 
GSA Bulletin FMR B-17 may be found at http://www.gsa.gov/fmrbulletin.

DATES: The bulletin announced in this notice is effective January 29, 
2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For clarification of content, contact 
General Services Administration, Office of Governmentwide Policy, 
Office of Travel, Transportation and Asset Management, at (202) 501-
1777. Please cite Bulletin FMR B-17.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. Background

    Section 521 of Title 40 of the United States Code ( 40 U.S.C. 521) 
and General Services Administration (GSA) policies require the maximum 
use of excess property by executive agencies, and provide for the 
transfer of excess property to other Federal agencies and eligible 
recipients. In addition, section 524 of Title 40 United States Code (40 
U.S.C. 524) and Federal Management Regulation (FMR) section 102-36.45 
(41 CFR 102-36.45) require that the agencies perform care and handling 
of excess property. Maintaining the utility of property protects the 
Government's investment in that property and saves Federal agencies and 
taxpayers valuable resources by avoiding the need to acquire new 
property.
    This notice announces GSA Bulletin FMR B-17 which provides guidance 
to Federal agencies to maximize the use and benefits of property 
throughout the asset management lifecycle and to explain how those 
benefits are extended to the public.

B. Procedures

    Bulletins regarding asset management are located on the Internet at 
http://www.gsa.gov/fmrbulletin as Federal Management Regulation (FMR) 
bulletins.

    Dated: January 30, 2008.
Robert Holcombe,
Director, Personal Property Management Policy.
[FR Doc. E8-2219 Filed 2-6-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-14-P
#### State Insurance Fund, Appellant, v Utica First Insurance Co., Respondent.

[807 NYS2d 351]

Oder, Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Werner Kornreich, J.), entered August 25, 2004, which, inter alia, granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed the complaint, unanimously modified, on the law, to declare in defendant’s favor that its disclaimer of coverage based on the subject policy’s employee exclusion was proper, and otherwise affirmed, with costs in favor of defendant payable by plaintiff.

Although defendant’s initial disclaimer notice erroneously indicated that the insurance policy was not in effect at the time of the accident, it also clearly advised that the denial of coverage was additionally premised on the policy’s employee exclusion, which provided that the company would not pay for bodily injury to an employee of an insured if the injury was sustained in the course of employment. Accordingly, the disclaimer was not ambiguous and was properly applied to bar coverage *(see Town of Massena v Healthcare Underwriters Mut. Ins. Co.,*98 NY2d 435 [2002]; *cf. Consolidated Edison Co. of N.Y. v Hartford Ins. Co.,*203 AD2d 83 [1994]). Since the disclaimer provided two separate bases for denying coverage and defendant never sought to change its position to rely on a ground not set forth in its disclaimer, defendant’s reliance on the employee exclusion was never waived *(cf. Mutual Redevelopment Houses v Greater N.Y. Mut. Ins. Co.,*204 AD2d 145 [1994], *lv denied*86 NY2d 710 [1995]).

*389As the court found, defendant was not required to send a separate disclaimer notice to The Estates, the party that actually sued the insured and was indemnified by plaintiff *(see Ringel v Blue Ridge Ins. Co.,*293 AD2d 460, 462 [2002]; *Excelsior Ins. Co. v Antretter Contr. Corp.,*262 AD2d 124, 127 [1999]). In any event, once defendant was notified of additional potential claimants, it promptly responded by sending its disclaimer to The Estates’ insurer and attorneys.

We have considered plaintiffs remaining contentions and find them unavailing.

We modify only to declare in defendant’s favor *(see Lanza v Wagner,*11 NY2d 317, 334 [1962], *cert denied*371 US 901 [1962]). Concur—Sullivan, J.P., Nardelli, Catterson, McGuire and Malone, JJ.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 06-cr-157-01-SM

Chad Ramish

O R D E R

Defendant Ramish’s motion to continue the final pretrial conference and

trial is granted (document 10). Trial has been rescheduled for the June 2007

trial period. Defendant Ramish shall file a waiver of speedy trial rights not later

than March 27, 2007. On the filing of such waiver, his continuance shall be

effective. 

The Court finds that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance

outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, 18

U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv), in that failure to grant a continuance would

unreasonably deny defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective

preparation taking into account the exercise of due diligence under the

circumstances. 

Final Pretrial Conference: May 23, 2007 at 4:00 p.m.

Jury Selection: June 5, 2007 at 9:30 a.m.

Case 1:06-cr-00157-SM Document 11 Filed 03/20/07 Page 1 of 2
2

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

 Chief Judge

March 20, 2007

cc: Jeffrey Levin, Esq.

Jennifer Davis, AUSA

US Probation

US Marshal

Case 1:06-cr-00157-SM Document 11 Filed 03/20/07 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:05-cv-00092-JD Document 11 Filed 08/29/05 Page 1 of 1