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

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2020 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Department of Health 

and Human Services, Office for Civil Rights for fiscal year 2024. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 29, 2023 

Mr. BIGGS (for himself, Mr. ROSENDALE, Mr. GAETZ, Mr. GOOD of Virginia, 

Mr. ROY, and Mr. CRANE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Civil 

Rights for fiscal year 2024. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 

4 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERV5 ICES, OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS FOR FISCAL 

6 YEAR 2024. 

7 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

8 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise avail9 able for Department of Health and Human Services, OfVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:56 Apr 15, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H2020.IH H2020

DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2020 IH

1 fice for Civil Rights for fiscal year 2024 may not exceed 

2 $38,798,000. 

Æ 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with BILLS
Order entered November 2 9 , 2017

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 17
- 00884
- CR RUDOLPH EDMONDS, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 291st J udicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F16
- 70406
- U



### O RDER By order entered on October 30, 2017, the Court directed Official Court Reporter Sasha Brooks to file the overdue reporter’ s record within twenty

- five days or the Court w ould utilize its available remedies to ensure the timely filing of the record. On November 27, 2017 Ms. Brooks filed a request seeking a short extension.
We GRANT Ms. Brook’s November 27, 2017 request and ORDER her to file the reporter’s record in th is app eal on or before December 1, 2017 . We caution Ms. Brooks that the failure to file the reporter’s record by that time may result in the Court utilizing whatever remedies it has available, including ordering that she not sit until the complete reporter’s re cord in these appeals i s filed.We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order, by electronic transmission, to the

Honorable Stephanie Mitchell, Presiding Judge, 291st Judicial District Court; to Sasha Brooks, official court reporter, 291st Judicial Di strict Court; and to counsel for all parties.

/s/ LANA MYERS JUSTICE
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

WHITNEY BANK, A Mississippi 

State chartered bank, formerly 

known as Hancock Bank,

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 14-0529-CG-B

)

TKR TECHNOLOGIES, INC., and 

TIFFANY J. LEVY,

)

)

)

Defendants. )

ORDER

This cause is before the court on the Notice of Bankruptcy of Tiffany J. Levy 

(Doc. 15) filed by the Plaintiff, in which Plaintiff advises that Tiffany J. Levy filed a 

voluntary petition for bankruptcy under Chapter 7 of the United States Bankruptcy 

Code, in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Alabama 

(Case No. 15-00138). 

Pursuant to 11U.S.C. § 362, the filing of a bankruptcy petition operates as a 

stay of an action. Therefore, this action is hereby STAYED as to Tiffany J. Levy.

The Plaintiff is ORDERED to notify the court within thirty (30) days of the 

resolution of the bankruptcy proceedings, or of a lift of the stay, at which time this 

action will be re-instated against Tiffany J. Levy.

Upon review of the Bankruptcy Petition, the court notes that Mrs. Levy 

represents that TKR Technologies, Inc. has not been in existence as an operating 

Case 1:14-cv-00529-CG-B Document 16 Filed 02/03/15 Page 1 of 2
2

entity since August 2013, and that the building, from which the business was 

operating, was foreclosed upon by Hancock Bank on July 9, 2014. On or before 

February 17, 2015, the Plaintiff is ORDERED to show cause why this action 

should not be stayed in its entirety.

DONE and ORDERED this 3rd day of February, 2015.

/s/ Callie V. S. Granade 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00529-CG-B Document 16 Filed 02/03/15 Page 2 of 2
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4675

To amend the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act to increase the quantity of T-shirts that may receive duty-free treatment during the 1-

year period beginning October 1, 2003. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 23, 2004

Mrs. MYRICK introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL

To amend the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act to 

increase the quantity of T-shirts that may receive dutyfree treatment during the 1-year period beginning October 1, 2003.

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

3 SECTION 1. INCREASE IN QUANTITY OF T-SHIRTS ELIGIBLE 

4 FOR DUTY-FREE TREATMENT. 

5 Section 213(b)(2)(A)(iii)(IV)(cc) of the Caribbean 

6 Basin Economic Recovery Act (19 U.S.C. 
2

•HR 4675 IH 

1 2703(b)(2)(A)(iii)(IV)(cc) is amended by striking 

2 ‘‘10,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘12,000,000’’.

Æ
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17
- 1457

In re: ROBERTO ANTOINE DARDEN, a/k/a Dizz

- e, a/k/a Javon , Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus . ( 4:11

- cr
- 00052

- AWA

- LRL

- 1 )

Submitted : June 20, 2017 Decided: June 22, 2017

Before SHEDD, WYNN, and DIAZ , Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by un published per curiam opinion

.
Roberto Antoine Darden, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Roberto Antoine Darden petitions for a writ of mandamus , alleging that the district court has unduly delayed in ruling on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. We find the present recor d does not reveal undue delay in the district court. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis , we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately prese nted in the
materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED June 21, 2005 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-30864 Conference Calendar

NAOMI SANDRES, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus STATE OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL, ET AL., Defendants, OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL; ROSE WOODEN, Defendants-Appellees

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana

USDC No. 3:03-CV-712-C

-------------------- Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Naomi Sandres appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Rose Wooden and the dismissal of her civil claims against Wooden pursuant to F ED . R. C IV . P. 12(b)(6). Her claims against the other defendants in the lawsuit remain to be adjudicated.No. 04-30864 -2- When an action involves multiple parties or multiple claims, any decision that adjudicates the liability of fewer than all of the parties does not terminate the action and is therefore not appealable unless certified by the district court under F ED . R. C IV . P. 54(b). Borne v. A & P Boat Rentals No. 4, Inc. , 755 F.2d 1131, 1133 (5th Cir. 1985); Thompson v. Betts , 754 F.2d 1243, 1245 (5th Cir. 1985). The district court has not certified the order for appeal. Accordingly, this court is without jurisdiction, and the appeal is dismissed. We have previously dismissed an appeal filed by Sandres as frivolous. See Sandres v. Div. of Admin. , No. 02-31244 (5th Cir. Aug. 19, 2003). Sandres is warned that sanctions may be imposed if she continues to file appeals for which there is no jurisdiction or that are frivolous. These sanctions may include monetary sanctions and restrictions on her ability to file pleadings.
APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S.

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         1,038,342
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  76,471
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               1,128,834
<PP&E>                                         28,575
<DEPRECIATION>                                 8,929
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1,199,063
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          3,082,625
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       412,992
<OTHER-SE>                                     (2,744,845)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1,199,063
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               26,489
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  16,628
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               212,985
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             63,171
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (227,067)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (227,067)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (227,067)
<EPS-BASIC>                                  (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.01)


</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6794

BRETT C. KIMBERLIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (CA-98-730-AW) Submitted: November 19, 1998 Decided: December 2, 1998 Before HAMILTON and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Brett C. Kimberlin, Appellant Pro Se. Lynne Ann Battaglia, United States Attorney, Tamera Lynn Fine, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* Although the district court’s judgment or order is marked as “filed” on April 30, 1998, the district court’s records show that it was entered on the docket sheet on May 5, 1998. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that the judgment or order was physically entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986). 2 PER CURIAM: Brett C. Kimberlin appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1998) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Kimberlin v. United States Dep’t of Justice , No. CA-98-730-AW (D. Md. May 5, 1998). * We deny Kimberlin’s motion to place this case in abeyance and dispense with oral argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
AO 245D (Rev. 12/03) Judgment in a Criminal Case for Revocations (11433)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA JUDGMENT IN A CRIMINAL CASE

V. (For Revocation of Supervised Release)

JAMES CLAYTON GIBSON CASE NUMBER: 1:11-CR-00054-001

USM NUMBER: 12022-003

THE DEFENDANT: Robert A. Thomas, Esquire

Defendant's Attorney

admitted guilt to violation of supervision conditions: Drug surveillance, 3, 5 & 6 as set forth in 

the Petition dated 9/22/2014.

was found in violation of supervision condition: 

Violation Number Nature of Violation

Date violation

Occurred

Drug Surveillance

3

5

6

Technical

Technical

Technical

Technical

The defendant is sentenced as provided in pages 2 through 2 of this judgment. The sentence is 

imposed pursuant to the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984.

The defendant has not violated condition(s) and is discharged as to such violation(s) 

condition.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defendant shall notify the United States Attorney for this 

district within 30 days of any change of name, residence, or mailing address until all fines, restitution, 

costs, and special assessments imposed by this judgment are fully paid.

Defendant's Social Security No. 3118

Defendant's Date of Birth: 1970

Defendant's Residence Address:

Mobile, AL

__________________________

Defendant's Mailing Address:

___________________________

___________________________

July 7, 2015

Date of Imposition of Judgment

/s/ Callie V. S. Granade

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

July 10, 2015

Date

X

Case 1:11-cr-00054-CG-N Document 44 Filed 07/10/15 Page 1 of 2
Judgment 2

AO 245D (Rev. 12/03) Judgment in a Criminal Case for Revocations: Sheet 2 - Imprisonment

Defendant: JAMES CLAYTON GIBSON

Case Number: 1:11-CR-00054-001

IMPRISONMENT

The defendant is hereby committed to the custody of the United States Bureau of Prisons to be 

imprisoned for a total term of TWELVE (12) MONTHS.

The court makes the following recommendations to the Bureau of Prisons: 

The defendant is remanded to the custody of the United States Marshal.

The defendant shall surrender to the United States Marshal for this district:

at .m. on .

as notified by the United States Marshal.

The defendant shall surrender for service of sentence at the institution designated by the Bureau 

of Prisons:

before 2 p.m. on .

as notified by the United States Marshal.

as notified by the Probation or Pretrial Services Office.

RETURN

I have executed this judgment as follows:

__________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________

Defendant delivered on to at __________________

with a certified copy of this judgment.

 UNITED STATES MARSHAL 

By _________________________________

 Deputy U.S. Marshal

X

Case 1:11-cr-00054-CG-N Document 44 Filed 07/10/15 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT  99.2

                            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 Annual Report of 21st Century  Technologies,  Inc.
(the  "Company")  on Form 10-KSB for the year ended  December  31, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
I, Larry B. Bach,  Secretary  of the  Company,  certify,  pursuant  to 18 U.S.C.
ss.1350,  as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
to the best of my knowledge:

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

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



 /s/ LARRY B. BACH
__________________________________________
Larry B. Bach
Secretary
April 15, 2003
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

JOE HENRY SCOTT, III, :

Plaintiff, :

vs. :

CIVIL ACTION 09-00610-WS-B

J.O. DAVIS CORRECTIONAL :

FACILITY, et al.,

 :

Defendants.

 :

ORDER

After due and proper consideration of all portions of this file

deemed relevant to the issue raised, and there having been no

objections filed, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate

Judge made under 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(B) is ADOPTED as the opinion

of this Court. It is ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for a

Restraining Order (Doc. 6) be and is hereby DENIED as moot.

DONE this 17th day of February, 2010.

s/WILLIAM H. STEELE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:09-cv-00610-WS-B Document 11 Filed 02/17/10 Page 1 of 1
#### William Howard MILES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jack KAVANAGH, Warden; Ernest Potee, Corporal, Correctional Officer II; Terrance Estep, Corporal, Correctional Officer II; Eric A. Nelson, Sergeant; Linda Bethea, Lieutenant; Dennis Dusing, Hearing Adjustment Officer, Defendants-Appellees, and Charles M. Kimbrow, R.N., License No. R048407, M.C.A.C., in their individual capacity, Defendant.

No. 00-7033.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted May 17, 2001.

Decided May 22, 2001.

William Howard Miles, pro se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Gloria Wilson Shelton, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, MD, for appellees.

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

William Howard Miles appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 *145U.S.C.A. § 1988 (West Supp.2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. *See Miles v. Kavanagh,*No. CA-99-1084-MJG (D.Md. July 7, 2000). We deny Miles’ pending motions to compel, for an injunction, and to reconsider. We dispense with 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.*
Exhibit 10.17_DirectorComp


Exhibit 10.17






Description of Director Compensation
The Board of Directors (the "Board") of Black Box Corporation (the "Company"), upon the recommendation of the Nominating & Governance Committee of the Board (the "Governance Committee") on the advice of its compensation consultants as to prevailing Board practices, eliminated the meeting fees paid to directors and increased the annual retainer to $70,000 per year, payable quarterly. 
The Chairpersons of each of the Audit Committee of the Board, Compensation Committee of the Board and Governance Committee will receive an annual retainer of $15,000, payable quarterly. The non-executive Chairperson of the Board will continue to receive an annual retainer of $75,000, payable quarterly. 
Each of the foregoing actions was effective as of April 1, 2014.
In addition, on May 15, 2014, each non-employee director received an immediately-vested restricted stock unit award with a value of approximately $100,000 on such date (which was the same amount for the previous four (4) fiscal years).  Based on the closing price of the Common Stock on the date of grant (and rounding to the nearest ten shares), this grant resulted in a restricted stock unit award to each non-employee director for 4,590 shares of the Common Stock which vested immediately upon grant. 
The Company maintains directors' and officers' liability insurance. Directors also are reimbursed customary expenses for attending meetings of the board of directors, board committees and stockholders.
**Exhibit 23.2**

 

Consent of Independent Auditors

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (Registration No.: 333-63874) of Medis Technologies Ltd. of our report dated February 25, 2003, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Medis Technologies Ltd. included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002.

 

 
|               | /s/ Ernst & Young LLP |
|--------------------|---------------------------|
|               |                      |
|               |                      |
| New York, New York |                      |
| March 27, 2003     |                      |

 

----
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21

- 7644

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. ROOSEVELT SPANN, JR., a/k/a Russell Rice, Jr., a/k/a Peachy , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Baltimore

. Richard D. Bennett , Senior District Judge. ( 1:06

- cr - 00179

- RDB

- 1 )

Submitted : March 2 9 , 2022 Decided: April 1, 2022

Before HARRIS, QUATTLEBAUM, and HEYTENS , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Roosevelt Spann, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Roosevelt Spann, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denyi ng his motions for compassionate release and for home confinement . We have reviewed the record on appeal and conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Spann’s motions.
See United States v. Kibble , 992 F.3d 326, 329 (4th Cir .) (providing standard), cert. denied , 142 S. Ct. 383 (2021). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. United States v. Spann , No. 1:06

- cr - 00179

- RDB

- 1 (D. Md. Nov. 9, 2021). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contention s are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED