alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Economic Development Administration
 AGENCY: Economic Development Administration, Department of Commerce.
 ACTION: Notice and Opportunity for Public Comment. Pursuant to Section 251 of the Trade Act 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2341 *et seq.*), the Economic Development Administration (EDA) has received petitions for certification of eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance from the firms listed below. Accordingly, EDA has initiated investigations to determine whether increased imports into the United States of articles like or directly competitive with those produced by each of these firms contributed importantly to the total or partial separation of the firm's workers, or threat thereof, and to a decrease in sales or production of each petitioning firm. List of Petitions Received by EDA for Certification Eligibility To Apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance
[12/23/2014 through 12/29/2014]
Firm name
Firm address
Date accepted for investigation
Product(s)UltraGlas, Inc.
9200 Gazette Avenue, Chatsworth, CA 91311
12/29/2014
The firm manufactures purchased glass including wall systems, dividers, screens, shower and bath enclosures.
 Any party having a substantial interest in these proceedings may request a public hearing on the matter. A written request for a hearing must be submitted to the Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms Division, Room 71030, Economic Development Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC 20230, no later than ten (10) calendar days following publication of this notice. Please follow the requirements set forth in EDA's regulations at 13 CFR 315.9 for procedures to request a public hearing. The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance official number and title for the program under which these petitions are submitted is 11.313, Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms. Dated: December 29, 2014. Michael S. DeVillo, Eligibility Examiner.


[FR Doc. 2014-30820 Filed 1-2-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-WH-P
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2210 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2210

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for US Department 
  of Agriculture, Management of National Forest Lands for Subsistence 
                       Uses 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 Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for US Department 
  of Agriculture, Management of National Forest Lands for Subsistence 
                       Uses for fiscal year 2024.

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

SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR US DEPARTMENT OF 
              AGRICULTURE, MANAGEMENT OF NATIONAL FOREST LANDS FOR 
              SUBSISTENCE USES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024.

     Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, amounts authorized 
to be appropriated or otherwise available for US Department of 
Agriculture, Management of National Forest Lands for Subsistence Uses 
for fiscal year 2024 may not exceed $1,099,000.
                                 <all>
```
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Hector VAZQUEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 05-11089

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Sept. 25, 2006.

*549Frederick M. Schattman, Nancy E. Larson, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Northern District of Texas, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Kirk Matthew Clauneh, The Claunch Law Firm, Fort Worth, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before SMITH, WIENER, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Hector Vazquez appeals from his conviction of being a felon in possession of a firearm. He contends that the firearm on which his conviction was based was not seized during a permissible protective sweep of the type authorized by *Maryland v. Buie,*494 U.S. 325, 110 S.Ct. 1093, 108 L.Ed.2d 276 (1990).

Vazquez was arrested inside one half of a duplex located at 5417 Lindsley in Dallas. The firearm was seized from an ar-moire in Vazquez’s bedroom, in the other half of the duplex, at 5419 Lindsley. The arresting officers had warrants for the arrest of Vazquez and Fidel Aguilera, who listed the duplex as his home address. Both halves of the duplex were owned by Vazquez’s parents, who were on the front porch during Vazquez’s arrest. Vazquez led officers on a chase through both halves of the duplex. After he was apprehended and read his rights, one of the arresting officers asked Vazquez whether there were any weapons present, and Vazquez directed him to the firearm in the armoire.

We do not determine whether the *Buie*protective sweep rationale applies to Vazquez’s case. In light of the possibility that Aguilera might be hiding in the duplex, Vazquez telling the officer of the exact location of the firearm gave rise to an exigent circumstance of potential danger sufficient to justify the arresting officer’s search for, and seizure of, the firearm. *See United States v. Shannon,*21 F.3d 77, 81-82 (5th Cir.1994); *United States v. Richard,*994 F.2d 244, 247-48 (5th Cir.1993). On the findings of the district court, the officer acted reasonably in seizing the weapon specifically identified by Vazquez.

AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. 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 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

CHRISTINE J. WILLIAMS, )

 )

Plaintiff, )

 )

vs. ) CIVIL ACTION 14-594-CG-M

 )

POARCH BAND OF CREEK )

INDIANS, )

 )

Defendant. )

JUDGMENT

In accordance with the Order entered this date, it is ORDERED, 

ADJUDGED, and DECREED that JUDGMENT on all claims is entered in 

favor of Defendant Poarch Band Creek Indians, and against Plaintiff

Christine J. Williams. 

DONE and ORDERED this 8th day of July, 2015.

/s/ Callie V. S. Granade 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00594-CG-M Document 29 Filed 07/08/15 Page 1 of 1
1

The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, Chief Judge, United States District Court for

the District of Nebraska.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 01-3956

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Nebraska.

Laura A. Seger, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: September 30, 2003

Filed: October 6, 2003

___________

Before WOLLMAN, FAGG, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Laura Seger pleaded guilty to an indictment charging her with possessing with

intent to distribute cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 and 18 U.S.C. § 2 (Count

I), and possessing a short-barreled shotgun in relation to the charged drug-trafficking

crime, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 924 and 2 (Count II). At sentencing, the district

court1

 denied Seger’s motion for a downward departure and sentenced her to

consecutive terms of 21 months’ imprisonment on Count I and 120 months’
-2-

imprisonment on Count II, to be followed by concurrent 3-year terms of supervised

release. Seger appeals, arguing that the district court erred in denying her departure

motion.

We conclude that Seger’s argument is unavailing. The district court lacked the

power to depart below the 10-year statutory minimum for Count II, see United States

v. Villar, 184 F.3d 801, 803 (8th Cir. 1999), and we do not review the district court’s

discretionary decision not to depart from the Guidelines imprisonment range for

Count I, see United States v. Rice, 332 F.3d 538, 540 (8th Cir. 2003).

The judgment is affirmed.

______________________________
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 11


Computation of Earnings Per Share for the Quarter and Six Months Ended June 30,
1999 and 1998:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
                                                 Quarter Ended June 30,        Six Months Ended June 30,
                                                    1999         1998              1999          1998
                                                    ----         ----              ----          ----
<S>                                              <C>            <C>            <C>            <C>
Net income*
                                                  $ 4,636        $ 3,875        $ 8,905        $ 7,120

Earnings per common share:
     Basic                                        $   .37        $   .31        $   .70        $   .56
     Diluted                                      $   .35        $   .29        $   .67        $   .53
Shares outstanding (average):
     Common shares                                 14,091         13,717         14,063         13,665
     Treasury shares                               (1,423)        (1,028)        (1,354)        (1,001)
                                                  -------        -------        -------        -------
Common shares-basic (average)                      12,668         12,689         12,709         12,664

Options:  common equivalents                          610            677            624            708
Warrants: common equivalents                           20             18             19             19
                                                  -------        -------        -------        -------
Common shares-diluted (average)                    13,298         13,384         13,352         13,391
                                                  =======        =======        =======        =======
</TABLE>

*Note:  The Company did not have any outstanding preferred stock for the periods
        ending June 30, 1998 and 1999.
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas**
MEMORANDUM OPINION
N o. 04

- 22

- 00308

- CV
IN THE INTEREST OF M.A.C. From the 285th Judicial District Court , Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2021EM503388 Honorable Nick Catoe Jr. , Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice Liza A. Rodriguez , Justice Lori I. Valenzuela , Justice Delivered and Filed: November 9, 2022
DIS MISSED Appellant Guillermo Valverde III filed a notice of appeal, stating that he desired to appeal from all portions of the trial court’s Order Estab lishing the Parent

- Child Relationship “including monthly payments, medical support, and retroactive child support.” On August 30, 2022, he filed his appellant’s brief. On August 31, 2022, we issued an order stating that his brief violated Texas Rule of App ellate Procedure 38 in that it did not (1) identify the parties and counsel; (2) include a table of contents; (3) include an index of authorities; (4) include a statement of the case; (5) includ e a brief statement of the issues presented; (6) include recor d references in the statement of facts; (7) include a summary of the argument; or (8) include a conclusion stating the nature of the relief sought. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 38.1. We explained that while substantial compliance with Rule 38 is sufficient, we coul d order a party to amend, supplement, or redraw a brief if it flagrantly violates04

- 22

- 00308

- CV

- 2

- Rule 38. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 38.9(a). In our order, we concluded that the formal defects described above constitute flagrant violations of Rule 38. Therefore, we ordered Ap pellant Guillermo Valverde III to file an amended brief on or before September 20, 2022. We explained that if the amended brief did not correct the violations, we would strike the brief and prohibit appellant from filing another. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 38.9(a ); see also id. 42.3(c) (allowing dismissal of appellant’s appeal if appellant fails to comply with a requirement of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure or an order of this court). Appellant has not filed an amended appellant’s brief or otherwise respon ded to our order. We therefore strike Appellant’s brief and dismiss this appeal. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 38.9(a); 42.3(c).

PER CURIAM
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2216 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Related Agencies, 

Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, Salaries and Expenses 

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 Related Agencies, Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, Salaries and Expenses 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 RELATED AGENCIES, CHEMICAL SAFETY AND 

5 HAZARD INVESTIGATION BOARD, SALARIES 

6 AND EXPENSES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024. 

7 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

8 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise avail9 able for Related Agencies, Chemical Safety and Hazard 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 2216 IH

1 Investigation Board, Salaries and Expenses for fiscal year 

2 2024 may not exceed $12,000,000. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
Exhibit 10.1


 





AMENDMENT TO PROMISSORY NOTE


 


This
Amendment to Promissory Note (this “Amendment”) is made effective as of May 21, 2015, by and between
Western Capital Resources, Inc., a Minnesota corporation (“Borrower”), and River City Equity, Inc. a Nebraska
corporation (“Lender”).


 


RECITALS


 


Borrower and Lender are
parties to a Promissory Note dated as of October 18, 2011, as amended and restated in an Amended and Restated Promissory Note dated
as of December 7, 2012 (the “Note”). Capitalized terms used in this Amendment and not defined herein shall
have the meanings given in the Note. The parties now desire to amend the Note as set forth below.


 


AGREEMENT


 


Now,
Therefore, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties
agree as follows:


 


1.Maturity Date. Paragraph 1.1
of the Note shall be amended to extend the Maturity Date (as defined in the Note) to June 30, 2016.


 


2.Conflicts. In the event of
any conflict between the terms of the Note and this Amendment, the terms of this Amendment shall govern.


 


3.Counterparts. This Amendment
may be executed in counterparts which, when taken together, shall constitute one and the same agreement.


 


4.Modifications. Except as otherwise
expressly modified by this Amendment, all terms, provisions, covenants and agreements contained in the Note shall remain unmodified
and in full force and effect.


 


 


	BORROWER: 	 	LENDER:
	 	 	 	 
	WESTERN CAPITAL RESOURCES, INC.	 	RIVER CITY EQUITY, INC.
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	John Quandahl	 	By:  	 
	Chief Executive Officer	 	Its:
Exhibit 32



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 Coca-Cola Bottling Co. Consolidated (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending September 26, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report) we, J. Frank
Harrison, III, Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and David V. Singer, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial 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:



(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 represents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                                      
|--------------------------------------
|/s/ J. Frank Harrison, III            
|J. Frank Harrison, III                
|Chairman of the Board of Directors and
|Chief Executive Officer               
|November 4, 2004                      
|                                      
|/s/ David V. Singer                   
|David V. Singer                       
|Executive Vice President and          
|Chief Financial Officer               
|November 4, 2004
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

FELISA G. MYERS, *

 *

Plaintiff, *

 *

vs. * Civil Action No. 04-00822-CB-B

 *

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, *

Commissioner of * 

Social Security, *

 *

Defendant. *

ORDER

After due and proper consideration of all portions ofthisfile deemed relevant to the issues raised,

and there having been no objections filed, the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge made under 28

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and dated November 8, 2005, that Plaintiff’smotionforleave (Doc. 2) be denied

and Defendant’s motion to dismiss (Doc. 12) be granted, is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court.

DONE and ORDERED this the 30th day of November, 2005.

s/Charles R. Butler, Jr. 

Senior United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-00822-CB-B Document 17 Filed 11/30/05 Page 1 of 1
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

CELESTINO FLORES MARTINEZ, AKA

Celestino Flores, AKA Celestino Laureano,

Petitioner,

v.

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney

General,

Respondent. No. 19

- 72291

Agency No. A206

- 407

- 147

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Argued and Submitted July 15, 2022

Pasadena, California

Before: BENNETT and COLLINS, Circuit Judges, and FOOTE, * * District

Judge.

Celestino Flores Martinez, a native and citizen of Mexico , petitions for

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal fr o m an

immigration judge’s decision denying his application s for asylum, withholding of

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

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The Honorable Elizabeth E. Foote, United States District Judge for the

Western District of Louisiana, sitting by designation. 

# FILED

AUG 31 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2

removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have

jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the

agency’s factual fin dings

, Flores

- Vega v. Barr , 932 F.3d 878, 886 (9th Cir. 2019)

,

and we deny the petition for review.

Flores Martinez does not raise , and thus waives, any challenge to the

agency’s determination that his asylum application is untimely

. See Rios v. Lynch

,

807 F.3d 1123, 1125 n.1 (9th Cir. 2015) (issues not specifically raised and argued

in a party’s opening brief are waived).

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of withholding of removal

bec ause Flores Martinez failed to show past persecution or a clear probability of

future persecution. See Sharma v. Garland , 9 F.4th 1052, 1060 (9th Cir. 2021)

(persecution is an extreme concept) ; Nahrvani v. Gonzales , 399 F.3d 1148, 1154

(9th Cir. 2005) ( po ssibility of future harm too speculative )

.

Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT protection

because Flores Martinez failed to show it is more likely than not he will be tortured

by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to Mexico

.

See Xiao Fei Zheng v. Holder , 644 F.3d 829, 835

– 36 (9th Cir. 2011) (possibility of

torture too speculative) ; Delgado

- Ortiz v. Holder

, 600 F.3d 1148, 1152 (9t h Cir.

2010) (per curiam) (“Petitioners’ generalized evidence of violence and crime in3

Mexico is not part icular to Petitioners and is insufficient to meet [the CAT]

standard.”)

.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2290 

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

of Agriculture, Foreign Assistance and Related Programs, Office of 

Codex Alimentarius 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 Agriculture, and in addition to the Committee 

on Foreign Affairs, 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 for a limitation on availability of funds for US 

Department of Agriculture, Foreign Assistance and Related Programs, Office of Codex Alimentarius 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, 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2290 IH

1 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 

2 US DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, FOR3 EIGN ASSISTANCE AND RELATED PROGRAMS, 

4 OFFICE OF CODEX ALIMENTARIUS FOR FIS5 CAL YEAR 2024. 

6 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

7 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise avail8 able for US Department of Agriculture, Foreign Assist9 ance and Related Programs, Office of Codex Alimentarius 

10 for fiscal year 2024 may not exceed $3,976,000. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Terris Hanks, Appellant.

[972 NYS2d 141]

— Motion for writ of error coram nobis denied. Present — Scudder, EJ., Smith, Lindley and Sconiers, JJ.
Exhibit
23.1
 
  CONSENT
OF REGISTERED INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
   We
hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.
333-69460 and Registration Statement No. 333-141555 on Form S-8 of our
report dated March 18, 2009 relating to the consolidated balance sheet of
Chembio Diagnostics Inc. and Subsidiaries as of December 31, 2008 and the
consolidated statement of operations, stockholders’ equity and cash
flow for the year ended December 31, 2008 appearing in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K of Chembio Diagnostics, Inc. for the year ended December 31,
2008.
   Parente
Randolph, LLC
   /s/ Parente Randolph,
LLC
  New York,
New York
 March 18,
2009