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

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1499

To amend the District of Columbia College Access Act of 1999 to permit

individuals who graduated from a secondary school prior to 1998 and

individuals who enroll in an institution of higher education more than

3 years after graduating from a secondary school to participate in the

tuition assistance programs under such Act, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 4, 2001

Mr. NORTON (for herself, Mrs. MORELLA, and Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia)

introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on

Government Reform

A BILL

To amend the District of Columbia College Access Act of

1999 to permit individuals who graduated from a secondary school prior to 1998 and individuals who enroll

in an institution of higher education more than 3 years

after graduating from a secondary school to participate

in the tuition assistance programs under such Act, and

for other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 1499 IH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘District of Columbia

3 College Access Act Technical Corrections Act of 2001’’.

4 SEC. 2. REVISIONS TO ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR

5 TUITION ASSISTANCE UNDER DISTRICT OF

6 COLUMBIA COLLEGE ACCESS ACT.

7 (a) PERMITTING CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS TO PARTICI8 PATE IN TUITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.—

9 (1) INDIVIDUALS GRADUATING FROM SEC10 ONDARY SCHOOL PRIOR TO 1998.—Section

11 3(c)(2)(B) of the District of Columbia College Ac12 cess Act of 1999 (Public Law 106–98; 113 Stat.

13 1325) is amended by striking ‘‘on or after January

14 1, 1998’’.

15 (2) INDIVIDUALS ENROLLING MORE THAN 3

16 YEARS AFTER GRADUATING FROM SECONDARY

17 SCHOOL.—Section 3(c)(2) of such Act (Public Law

18 106–98; 113 Stat. 1325) is amended by striking

19 subparagraph (C).

20 (b) PROHIBITING PARTICIPATION OF FOREIGN NA21 TIONALS.—Section 3(c)(2) of such Act (Public Law 106–

22 98; 113 Stat. 1325), as amended by subsection (a)(2), is

23 amended by inserting after subparagraph (B) the fol24 lowing:

25 ‘‘(C) meets the citizenship and immigra26 tion status requirements described in section
3

•HR 1499 IH

1 484(a)(5) of the Higher Education Act of 1965

2 (20 U.S.C. 1091(a)(5));’’.

3 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

4 The amendments made by this Act shall take effect

5 on the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 07-cr-93-01-SM

Klever Peralta

O R D E R

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

trial is granted (document 8). Trial has been rescheduled for the October 2007

trial period. Defendant Peralta has filed a waiver of speedy trial rights. 

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: September 28, 2007 at 4:00 p.m.

Jury Selection: October 10, 2007 at 9:30 a.m.

Case 1:07-cr-00093-SM Document 10 Filed 06/22/07 Page 1 of 2
2

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

 Chief Judge

June 22, 2007

cc: Jeffrey Levin, Esq.

Alfred Rubega, AUSA

US Probation

US Marshal

Case 1:07-cr-00093-SM Document 10 Filed 06/22/07 Page 2 of 2
#### Lawrence L. BURGER, Petitioner, v. Elsa BURGER, Respondent.

Supreme Court of Florida. Division B.

Nov. 9, 1954.

Virgil L. Milbrath and Frank C. Decker, Ocala, for petitioner.

C. Farris Bryant of Green & Bryant, Ocala, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

This cause having, heretofore been submitted to the Court on Petition for Writ of Certiorari upon the transcript of record and briefs to review the order of the Circuit Court for Marion County in said cause bearing date August 18, 1954, and before consideration of said cause' the attorneys for the petitioner and for the respondent filed a'joint stipulation agreeing for the entry - of an order by this Court in the cause granting the Petition for Writ of Certiorari and quashing the order of the court below denying the motion of petitioner to dismiss the complaint, it is, therefore, ordered that Writ of Certiorari herein be and the same is hereby granted and the order of the Circuit Court of Marion Coun*690ty’ bearing date August 18, 1954, be and the same is hereby quashed.

ROBERTS, C. J., and THOMAS, HOB-SON and DREW, JJ., concur.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff— Appellee, v. Frankie Ozro RANDALL, aka, Frankie Randall aka, Frankie Borzo Randall, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 00-10493.

D.C. No. CR-99-05407-REC.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 10, 2003.*

Decided March 17, 2003.

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

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM**

Frankie Ozro Randall appeals his conviction, following a guilty plea, and sentence for conspiracy to distribute and to possess with intent to distribute a controlled substance in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846.

Pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U. S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Randall’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no arguable issues for review, and a motion to withdraw as *723counsel of record. Randall has filed a pro se supplemental brief.

In the plea agreement, Randall waived his right to appeal the conviction and sentence. Having independently reviewed the record pursuant to *Penson v. Ohio, 488*U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we are satisfied that the plea agreement, including the waiver of the right to appeal, was entered knowingly and voluntarily. *United States v. Aguilar-Muniz,*156 F.3d 974, 976 (9th Cir.1998). We therefore enforce the waiver, grant the motion to withdraw, and dismiss the appeal.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the appeal is DISMISSED.

**

 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.
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Jimmy Wayne Carr, Appellant

No. 06-19-00127-CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

Appeal from the 6th District Court of Lamar 

County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 27809). 

Memorandum Opinion delivered by Justice

Burgess, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice 

Stevens participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court 

below. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

We note that the appellant, Jimmy Wayne Carr, has adequately indicated his inability to 

pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED JANUARY 9, 2020

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Williams & Hussey Machine Co., Inc.

v. Civil No. 06-cv-387-JM

Woodstock International, Inc.,

Grizzly Industrial, Inc.

O R D E R

Defendant moves to dismiss claiming that the failure to

plead the time when its mark became famous means that the

dilution claim is insufficient. Plaintiff correctly points out

that Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(f) does not require specificity of time in

pleadings and that its complaint easily meets the standard of

forum 16. In any event, an opportunity to amend is preferable. 

The motion (document no. 15) is denied as to its prayer for

dismissal but plaintiff is directed to amend to provide a time

frame. 

SO ORDERED.

____________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: July 10, 2007

cc: Julie A. Katz, Esq.

 Michael S. Katz, Esq.

 Stephen B. Mosier, Esq.

 Joseph F. Schmidt, Esq.

 Jonathan M. Shirley, Esq.

 Todd A. Sullivan, Esq.

Case 1:06-cv-00387-JM Document 25 Filed 07/10/07 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit





Exhibit 4.1


















FOR VALUE RECEIVED,                                          hereby sell, assign and transfer unto                                                                                       Shares represented by this Certificate, and hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint                                  Attorney to transfer the said Shares on the books of the within named Corporation with full power of substitution in the premises.
Dated                
In the presence of
Case 1:07-cv-00100-SM   Document 11   Filed 02/19/08   Page 1 of 4

Case 1:07-cv-00100-SM   Document 11   Filed 02/19/08   Page 2 of 4

Case 1:07-cv-00100-SM   Document 11   Filed 02/19/08   Page 3 of 4

Case 1:07-cv-00100-SM   Document 11   Filed 02/19/08   Page 4 of 4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Civil No. 07-cv-159-SM

Stephen D. Hellwig

O R D E R

After hearing on the government’s petition for civil

contempt and having heard respondent’s unsatisfactory explanation

for failing to comply with the court’s final order requiring him

to comply with the administrative subpoena issued by the Internal

Revenue Service on September 8, 2006, and his declaration of his

intent to comply, the court enters the following order:

Stephen D. Hellwig shall meet with Revenue Officer Diane M.

Doherty immediately and provide what partial information, books

and records he has that are responsive to the subpoena issued on

September 8, 2006, and shall answer all questions posed, or

interpose legitimate objections, and shall meet again with

Officer Doherty at the IRS offices at 1000 Elm Street, Suite 900,

Manchester, New Hampshire, at 9:00 a.m. on Thursday, July 5,

2007, and produce all books, records, and information in his

possession or control subject to the subpoena, and answer all

Case 1:07-cv-00159-SM Document 5 Filed 06/26/07 Page 1 of 2
2

questions posed, or interpose an appropriate objection. Hellwig

has been and is again directly warned that failure to comply will

result in civil contempt sanctions of imprisonment until he

complies.

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

Chief Judge

June 26, 2007

cc: T. David Plourde, Esq.

Stephen D. Hellwig, pro se

Case 1:07-cv-00159-SM Document 5 Filed 06/26/07 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:06-cv-00234-SM   Document 39   Filed 01/30/07   Page 1 of 1
---

B.9. Number of Agricultural Bank Failures Year
                  Q1
                  Q2
                  Q3
                  Q4
                  Total1984
          3
          7
          10
          12
          321985
          12
          21
          17
          18
          681986
          14
          14
          21
          16
          651987
          22
          19
          12
          16
          691988
          11
          6
          12
          7
          361989
          5
          7
          5
          5
          221990
          3
          5
          6
          3
          171991
          2
          2
          3
          1
          81992
          1
          1
          1
          4
          71993
          1
          2
          2
          0
          51994
          0
          0
          0
          0
          01995
          0
          0
          0
          0
          01996
          0
          2
          0
          0
          21997
          0
          0
          0
          1
          11998
          0
          0
          1
          0
          11999
          0
          1
          0
          0
          12000
          0
          0
          0
          0
          02001
          0
          0
          0
          0
          02002
          1
          0
          0
          1
          22003
          0
          1
          0
          0
          12004
          0
          1
          0
          0
          12005
          0
          0
          n.a.
          n.a.
          n.a. Note. Data exclude banks assisted to prevent failure.
Industrial banks and mutual savings banks also are
excluded.  Agricultural banks are defined in the
introduction to section B.
   n.a. Not available.


Statistical releases

---

Home Economic research and data  Accessibility Contact Us  Last update: September 27, 2005
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Robert Rockwood, et al.

v. Civil No. 08-cv-00168-JL

SKF USA, Inc.

 O R D E R

The plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file amended complaint

(doc. no. 175) is DENIED. While the motion correctly describes

a portion of the discussion at the status conference, it is not

accompanied by a memorandum of law, which would be in order given

the reservations expressed by defendant's counsel at the

conference, as well as the dictates of Rule 15 and the applicable

decisional law interpreting it. Further, the plaintiffs filed no

reply to the objection, which cries out for a response given the

applicable law, the equities of the situation, and the "law of

the case,” as none of the customary factors favoring liberal

amendment--permissibility of delay, lack of prejudice, lack of

new claims, etc.--favor the defendant's position on the record

before the court.

Case 1:08-cv-00168-JL Document 177 Filed 08/06/10 Page 1 of 2
SO ORDERED.

 

Joseph N. Laplante

United States District Judge

Dated: August 6, 2010

cc: Donald C. Crandlemire, Esq.

Steve M. Gordon, Esq.

William E. Aivalikles, Esq.

David Richman, Esq.

Gregory A. Moffett, Esq.

Matthew R. Williams, Esq.

Peter G. Callaghan, Esq.

Alexander J. Walker, Esq.

2

Case 1:08-cv-00168-JL Document 177 Filed 08/06/10 Page 2 of 2
18

A.13. Characteristics of Bank Loans to Farmers -- Small and Mid-sized Farm Lenders, by Risk Rating, APercent except as notedLoan characteristic All Minimal Low Moderate Acceptable Special Not rateVolume of loans (thousands of dollars) 379,270 38,242 103,205 125,819 14,458 n.a. 17,95Number of loans 9,324 911 2,814 3,112 897 n.a. 37Weighted average maturity (months)1 38.52 128.63 32.34 34.97 35.97 n.a. 11.0

Weighted average repricing interval (months)2 13.39 17.84 14.39 12.96 19.54 n.a. 1.5

Weighted average risk rating3 2.41 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 n.a. n.a

Weighted average interest rate4 9.00 8.58 9.21 9.36 9.36 n.a. 8.4

 Standard error5 .13 .17 .23 .15 .37 n.a. .2

 Interquartile range6 75th percentile 9.50 8.47 9.58 10.16 9.50 n.a. 8.2 25th percentile 8.33 8.23 8.68 8.84 9.12 n.a. 8.2 Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 8.44 8.62 8.93 9.52 9.16 n.a. 8.2 Other livestock 9.60 8.42 n.a. 9.81 n.a. n.a. n.a Other current operating expenses7 9.28 8.81 9.50 9.42 9.73 n.a. 9.2

 Farm machinery and equipment 8.81 9.27 9.35 8.76 9.61 n.a. 8.5 Farm real estate 8.33 8.40 8.00 8.14 9.32 n.a. n.a Other8 8.87 n.a. 8.34 9.75 n.a. n.a. n.a

Share of total loan volume Features of loan Floating rates 47.57 64.19 72.59 32.49 56.31 n.a. 84.9 Under commitment 51.06 22.06 63.93 62.10 46.94 n.a. 92.8 Callable 13.80 3.55 2.51 12.69 37.06 n.a. 4.9 Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 20.20 2.72 5.55 5.51 41.77 n.a. 79.6 Other livestock 22.81 5.20 26.31 35.28 n.a. n.a. n.a Other current operating expenses7 32.76 25.60 49.57 34.26 23.12 n.a. 17.8

 Farm machinery and equipment 8.75 8.43 2.43 14.59 4.95 n.a. 2.4 Farm real estate 14.10 58.05 13.57 8.74 30.16 n.a. n.a Other8 1.38 n.a. 2.57 1.62 n.a. n.a. n.a

 Type of collateral Farm real estate 25.59 58.22 15.72 36.47 17.35 n.a. .6 Other 72.48 41.78 78.19 63.30 81.49 n.a. n.a Note. Most small and mid-sized farm lenders that reported loans to farmers had less than $25 million in farm loans. For explanation of footnotes, see table A.8. n.a. Not available.
Exhibit 10.5


 


FIRST AMENDMENT TO

TRADENAME LICENSING AGREEMENT


 


This FIRST AMENDMENT
TO TRADENAME LICENSING AGREEMENT (this “Amendment”) is made and entered into as of September 10, 2019, by and
between Apollo Medical Holdings, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Apollo”), and AP-AMH Medical Corporation, a
California professional medical corporation ("AP-AMH").


 


A.           Apollo
and AP-AMH have previously entered into that certain Tradename Licensing Agreement dated as of May 10, 2019 (the “Agreement”).


 


B.           Apollo
and AP-AMH desire to amend the Agreement as set forth herein.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in
consideration of the premises and of the mutual agreements, representations, warranties, provisions and covenants herein contained,
the parties hereto, each intending to be bound hereby, agree as follows:


 


1.    
      Definitions. Capitalized terms used but not defined in this Amendment shall have
the meanings given to such terms in the Agreement.


 


2.     
     Section 2. The following is hereby added at the end of Section 2 of the Agreement:


 


“To the extent that AP-AMH
is unable to pay any Tradename License Fee when due hereunder because it has received Series A Dividends in an amount insufficient
(or because it has not received any Series A Dividends) to pay in full such Tradename License Fee, such unpaid Tradename License
Fee(s) shall accrue and be paid upon receipt by AP-AMH of sufficient funds.”


 


3.      
    Section 3.3.1. Section 3.3.1 of the Agreement is hereby amended and restated in its entirety
as follows:


 


3.3.1        Immediately
upon termination of the Tradename License, (i) AP-AMH shall cease using the name “Apollo Medical Associates” and every
variation and portion of it, in every respect (including but not limited to signage), and AP-AMH shall not make any reference on
its letterhead or other materials to its former or then current affiliation with Apollo or its former license or use of said name;
and (ii) AP-AMH shall cause to be filed with the California Medical Board a cancellation of the fictitious name permit issued to
AP-AMH for the name “Apollo Medical Associates,” which cancellation shall be in form and substance acceptable to Apollo.


 


4.   
       Schedule 1. Schedule 1 to the Agreement (Tradename License Fee Percentage)
is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as set forth in Exhibit A to this Amendment.


 


5.    
      Effect of Amendment. Except as expressly amended by this Amendment, all of the
terms of the Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect.


 




    - 1 -


     


    




 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
this Amendment has been executed as of the date first above written.


 


	“Apollo”	 	“AP-AMH”
	 	 	 
	APOLLO MEDICAL HOLDINGS, INC.	 	AP-AMH MEDICAL CORPORATION
	 	 	 
	By:	/s/ Mitchell Kitayama	 	By:	/s/ Thomas Lam
	 	Mitchell Kitayama	 	 	Thomas S. Lam, M.D.,
	 	Independent Committee Director	 	 	Chief Executive Officer
	 	 	 
	By:	/s/ Eric Chin          	 	 
	 	Eric Chin	 	 
	 	Chief Financial Officer	 	 


 


Signature Page to


FIRST AMENDMENT TO TRADENAME LICENSING
AGREEMENT
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**





**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 Quarterly Report of National Holdings Corporation (the
      “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2007 as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
      I, Mark Goldwasser, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
      to
      18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
      2002, that, to my knowledge:





(1)
            The
                Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)
                of
                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





(2)
            The
                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
                Company.





/s/
                Mark GoldwasserMark
                GoldwasserChief
                Executive OfficerFebruary
                13, 2008
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Criminal No. 05-cr-167-01-B

Dario Manon 

O R D E R

The defendant has moved to continue the February 7, 2006

trial in the above case. Defendant cites the need for additional

time to negotiate a possible resolution in this matter. The

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

Accordingly, in order to allow the parties additional time

to negotiate a resolution and/or properly prepare for trial, the

court will continue the trial from February 7, 2006 to May 2,

2006. 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.

Case 1:05-cr-00167-PB Document 17 Filed 01/31/06 Page 1 of 2
3

The January 25, 2006 final pretrial conference is continued

until April 18, 2006 at 4:30 pm.

SO ORDERED.

/s/ Paul Barbadoro

 

Paul Barbadoro

Chief Judge

January 31, 2006

cc: Paul Garrity, Esq.

Arnold Huftalen, Esq.

United States Probation

United States Marshal

Case 1:05-cr-00167-PB Document 17 Filed 01/31/06 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1748 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                       Calendar No. 334
107th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 1748

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 13, 2002

  Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental 
                                Affairs

                             March 21, 2002

              Reported by Mr. Lieberman, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 805 Glen Burnie Road in Richmond, Virginia, as the ``Tom Bliley Post 
                           Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 805 
Glen Burnie Road in Richmond, Virginia, shall be known and designated 
as the ``Tom Bliley Post Office Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Tom Bliley Post Office 
Building''.

                                                       Calendar No. 334

107th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 1748

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 805 Glen Burnie Road in Richmond, Virginia, as the ``Tom Bliley Post 
                           Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             March 21, 2002

                       Reported without amendment
```