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

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1258 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1258

 For the relief of Sarabeth M. Davis, Robert S. Borders, Victor Maron, 
                   Irving Berke, and Adele E. Conrad.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 27, 2001

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 For the relief of Sarabeth M. Davis, Robert S. Borders, Victor Maron, 
                   Irving Berke, and Adele E. Conrad.

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

SECTION 1. COMPENSATION FOR DAMAGES CAUSED BY STUDY.

    (a) In General.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall pay, out of 
any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, $______________ 
to the persons named in subsection (b) for damages sustained by such 
persons in connection with the air installation compatible use zone 
study conducted by the Secretary of the Army with respect to Los 
Alamitos Army Airfield under part 256 of title 32, Code of Federal 
Regulations.
    (b) Persons To Receive Compensation.--The Secretary of the Treasury 
shall compensate the following persons under subsection (a):
            (1) Sarabeth M. Davis of Clinton, Washington.
            (2) Robert S. Borders of Newport Beach, California.
            (3) Victor Maron of Long Beach, California.
            (4) Irving Berke of Long Beach, California.
            (5) Adele E. Conrad of Cypress, California.

SEC. 2. SATISFACTION OF CLAIMS AGAINST THE UNITED STATES.

    Payment under section 1 shall constitute full settlement of all 
legal and equitable claims by the persons named in section 1(b) against 
the United States for the damages described in section 1(a).

SEC. 3. LIMITATION ON ATTORNEY AND AGENT FEES.

    Not more than 10 percent of the payment made under section 1 may be 
paid to or received by an agent or attorney as consideration for any 
service rendered in connection with this Act. Each violation of this 
section shall be a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than 
$1,000.
                                 <all>
```
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 08-cr-14-PB

Alan Katz

O R D E R

The defendant, through counsel, has moved to continue the

trial scheduled for December 2, 2008, citing the need for

additional time to investigate additional discovery and engage in

plea negotiations or prepare for trial. The government does not

object to a continuance of the trial date.

Although the defendant has asked for a 120-day continuance,

he has not justified a continuance of more than 30 days.

Accordingly, for the above reasons and to allow the parties

additional time to properly prepare for trial, the court will

continue the trial from December 2, 2008 to January 6, 2009. 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 

Case 1:08-cr-00014-PB Document 17 Filed 11/14/08 Page 1 of 2
2

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

The November 25, 2008 final pretrial conference is continued

to December 22, 2008 at 2:00 p.m. 

No further continuances.

SO ORDERED.

/s/Paul Barbadoro 

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

November 14, 2008

cc: Michael Iacopino, Esq.

Alfred Rubega, AUSA

United States Probation

United States Marshal

Case 1:08-cr-00014-PB Document 17 Filed 11/14/08 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 31.2

Certification Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Certifications
--------------

I, Richard R. Royall, Chief Financial Officer, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Eagle Broadband, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects,
the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant
as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the registrant and have:

a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

c. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.


Date:  January 14, 2004


/S/ Richard R. Royall
--------------------
Richard R. Royall,
Chief Financial Officer
**Exhibit 21****MAJOR SUBSIDIARIES OF LAFARGE NORTH AMERICA INC.**     The following indicates the corporate names (and all other significant names, if any, underwhich business is conducted) and jurisdictions of incorporation of the subsidiaries of LafargeNorth America Inc., all of which are wholly-owned or majority-owned. Indirect subsidiaries ofLafarge North America are indented and listed following their direct parent corporations.   Name(s) Jurisdiction of IncorporationAmerican Transport Leasing, Inc. DelawareCement Transport, Ltd. North DakotaFriday Harbor Sand & Gravel Co. WashingtonInternational Atlantins Insurance Company VermontLafarge Midwest, Inc. DelawareLafarge Presque Isle, Inc. DelawareMountain Prairie Insurance Company, Inc. VermontRedland Inc. DelawareLafarge Mid-Atlantic, Inc. DelawareLafarge West, Inc. DelawareLafarge Southwest, Inc. New MexicoSierra Bay Receivables Inc. NevadaSystech Environmental Corporation DelawareLafarge Canada Inc. CanadaGestion Carim Inc. QuebecInternational Atlantins Agencies Inc. British ColumbiaJohnson Concrete & Material Ltd. SaskatchewanLafarge Gypsum Canada Inc. NewfoundlandLCI-Warren Merger Inc. CanadaLafarge Canada Finance Inc. CanadaWarren Materials Inc. CanadaLulu Transport Inc. British ColumbiaMitchell Park Ash Ltd. OntarioQuality Ready-Mix Limited OntarioRe-Wa Holdings Ltd. AlbertaRichvale York Block Inc. OntarioValley Rite-Mix Ltd. British Columbia     Lafarge North America also does business under the following names: Lafarge Gypsum, TrinityPortland Cement Company.     Lafarge Canada Inc. also does business under the following names: Alberta Concrete Products,Apex Gravel, Canada Concrete, Capital Concrete, Challenge Concrete, Champion Concrete, CinqConcrete, Coldstream Concrete, Columbia Concrete, Conmac Western Industries, Crown Equipment, CrownPaving and Engineering, Duracon, Francon-Lafarge, Great Lakes Flyash (joint venture), High RiverConcrete, Johnston Ready Mix (joint venture), Lafarge Concrete, Lafarge Construction Materials,Lafarge Gypsum, Lethbridge Concrete Products, Nelson Aggregate Co. (partnership), O.K. ConstructionMaterials, Permanent-Lafarge, Red-D-Mix Block, Richvale — McCord, Rocky Mountain Precast, StandardAggregates, Standard Asphalt, Supercrete, Trans-Alta Flyash (joint venture).     Information regarding approximately 85 additional subsidiaries of the Registrant has beenomitted because such subsidiaries, considered in the aggregate as a single subsidiary, do notconstitute a “significant subsidiary” as defined in Rule 1-02(w) of Regulation S-X [17 CFR210.1-02(w)].
**Exhibit
      15**




TXU
      Corp.


1601
      Bryan Street


Dallas,
      TX 75201









We
      have reviewed, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
      Oversight Board (United States), the unaudited interim financial information
      of
      TXU Corp. and subsidiaries for the periods ended June 30, 2007 and 2006, as
      indicated in our report dated August 9, 2007; because we did not perform an
      audit, we expressed no opinion on that information.




We
      are aware that our report referred to above, which is included in your Quarterly
      Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, is incorporated by
      reference in Registration Statement Nos. 333-37652, 333-84418, 333-84418-01,
      333-84418-02, 333-110125 and Amendment No. 1 thereto and 333-115159 on Form
      S-3; and Registration Statement Nos. 333-32833, 333-32837, 333-45657, 333-46671,
      333-62014, 333-92260, 333-105133, and 333-125169 and Post Effective Amendment
      No. 1 thereto on Form S-8.





We
      also are aware that the aforementioned report, pursuant to Rule 436(c) under
      the
      Securities Act of 1933, is not considered a part of the Registration Statement
      prepared or certified by an accountant or a report prepared or certified by
      an
      accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.








/s/
      Deloitte & Touche LLP





Dallas,
      Texas


August
      9, 2007
Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed June 9 , 202 2.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 2 2

- 00 233

- CV

JAVIER CASTILLO , Appellant

V.

MI

- JACK PRODUCTS, IN C.; ACE INDUSTRIES, INC.; AND JAMES

SCOTT PARCHMONT , Appellee s

On Appeal from the 269 th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2019

- 84588

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This is an appeal from a judgment signed January 14 , 202 2 . The notice of appeal was due February 14 , 202 2

. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1 (a)

. 1 Appellant, however,

1 Although the notice of appeal could have been timely filed within six months after the judgment was signed if this were a restricted appeal, see Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(c), this cannot be a restricted appeal. The record reflects that appellant’s counsel part icipated in a January 13, 2022 hearing that resulted in the final judgment, and restricted appeals are limited to parties who “did not participate

— either in person or through counsel

— in the hearing that resulted in the judgment complained of.” Tex. R. App . P. 30.2

filed his notice of appeal on March 30 , 202 2 , a date more than 15 days after the due date for the notice of appeal. See Verburgt v. Dorner , 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997). 2

On April 29 , 2022, this court infor med appellant by letter about the untimely notice of appeal and warned him his appeal was subject to dismissal if he failed to show meritorious grounds for continuing the appeal. Appellant filed no response to the letter. Accordingly, due to the lack of any basis for exercising jurisdiction over this appeal, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Christopher and Justices Wise and Jewell.

2 Appellant dated his notice of appeal February 28, 2022, but the trial court clerk filestamped the notice of appeal on March 30, 2022 to reflect its filing on that date. There is no evidence that the notice of appeal was actually received by the trial court clerk within 10 days of the February 28th deadline, see Tex. R. App. P. 9.2(b)(1), so this discrepancy cannot help demonstrate the notice of appeal might be timely

.
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 186 (Wednesday, September 24, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55066-55067]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-22276]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER08-1526-000]


NorthWestern Corporation; Notice of Filing

September 17, 2008.
    Take notice that on September 12, 2008, NorthWestern Corporation 
filed an executed Regulation and Frequency Response Self-Supply 
Agreement with Bonneville Power Administration, dated May 22, 2008, 
pursuant to section 205 of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. Sec.  824d 
(2006), and Part 35 of the Commission's regulations, 18 CFR Part 35 
(2008).
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must 
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of 
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, 
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or 
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to 
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically

[[Page 55067]]

should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention 
to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#aee8ebfcede1c0c2c7c0cbfddbdedec1dcdaeec8cbdccd80c9c1d8"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="ffb9baadbcb0919396919aac8a8f8f908d8bbf999a8d9cd1989089">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 3, 2008.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-22276 Filed 9-23-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

 v. Case No. 07-cr-80-01/02-SM

Michael Monahan

Jeffrey Mealey

O R D E R

Defendants assented-to motions to continue the trial (document nos. 21 and 22)

are granted. Trial has been rescheduled for the March 2008 trial period. Defendants

shall file a Waiver of Speedy Trial Rights not later than November 2, 2007. On the filing

of such waivers, their 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 defendants in a speedy trial, 18 U.S.C. §

3161(h)(8)(B)(iv), in that failure to grant a continuance would unreasonably deny the

defendants the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation taking into account

Case 1:07-cr-00080-SM Document 23 Filed 10/25/07 Page 1 of 2
2

the exercise of due diligence under the circumstances.

Final Pretrial Conference: February 20, 2008 at 4:30 PM

Jury Selection: March 4, 2008 at 9:30 AM

SO ORDERED.

October 25, 2007 _________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

Chief Judge

cc: Robert Kinsella, Esq.

 Mark Sisti, Esq.

 William Christie, Esq.

 U. S. Probation

 U. S. Marshal

Case 1:07-cr-00080-SM Document 23 Filed 10/25/07 Page 2 of 2
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 Commerce

###### International Trade Administration

Pursuant to Section 6(c) of the Educational, Scientific and Cultural Materials Importation Act of 1966 (Pub. L. 89-651, as amended by Pub. L. 106-36; 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR part 301), we invite comments on the question of whether instruments of equivalent scientific value, for the purposes for which the instruments shown below are intended to be used, are being manufactured in the United States.

Comments must comply with 15 CFR 301.5(a)(3) and (4) of the regulations and be postmarked on or before October 14, 2008. Address written comments to Statutory Import Programs Staff, Room 2104, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C. 20230. Applications may be examined between 8:30 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. at the U.S. Department of Commerce in Room 2104.

*Docket Number: 08-047.*                     Applicant: Stanford University, Department of Structural Biology, D100 Fairchild Building, 299 Campus Drive West, Stanford, CA 94305-5126. Instrument: Electron Microscope, Model Tecnai G2 F20 TWIN. Manufacturer: FEI Company, the Netherlands. Intended Use: The instrument is intended to be used to study purified proteins from yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, also known as baker's yeast, which are involved in transcription. Researchers plan to employ single particle analysis to study the protein complexes involved in transcription, the synthesis on RNA from a DNA template. Application accepted by Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection: August 25, 2008.                

Dated: September 16, 2008.

Faye Robinson,

Director, Statutory Import Programs Staff.

[FR Doc. E8-22107 Filed 9-19-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 146 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  1st Session

                               H. R. 146

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to study the suitability and 
    feasibility of designating the Great Falls Historic District in 
 Paterson, New Jersey, as a unit of the National Park System, and for 
                            other purposes.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 146

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to study the suitability and 
    feasibility of designating the Great Falls Historic District in 
 Paterson, New Jersey, as a unit of the National Park System, 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. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Great Falls Historic District Study 
Act of 2001''.

SEC. 2. NATIONAL PARK SERVICE STUDY REGARDING GREAT FALLS HISTORIC 
              DISTRICT, PATERSON, NEW JERSEY.

    (a) Definitions.--In this section:
            (1) Great falls historic district.--The term ``Great Falls 
        Historic District'' means the Great Falls Historic District in 
        the city of Paterson, New Jersey, established as an historic 
        district by section 510 of the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands 
        Management Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-333; 110 Stat. 4158; 16 
        U.S.C. 461 note).
            (2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
        of the Interior, acting through the Director of the National 
        Park Service.
    (b) Study.--As soon as practicable after funds are made available 
to carry out this section, the Secretary shall commence a study 
regarding the suitability and feasibility of further recognizing the 
historic and cultural significance of the lands and structures of the 
Great Falls Historic District through the designation of the Great 
Falls Historic District as a unit of the National Park System.
    (c) Study Process and Completion.--Section 8(c) of Public Law 91-
383 (16 U.S.C. 1a-5(c)) shall apply to the study required by this 
section.
    (d) Submission.--The Secretary shall submit to the Committee on 
Resources of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy 
and Natural Resources of the Senate a report describing the results of 
the study.
    (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized to be 
appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out this section.

            Passed the House of Representatives May 9, 2001.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```