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

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 643 

To amend the Agricultural Credit Act of 1987 to reauthorize State mediation 

programs. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 16, 2005 

Mr. ROBERTS (for himself and Mr. HARKIN) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry 

A BILL 

To amend the Agricultural Credit Act of 1987 to reauthorize 

State mediation programs. 

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

3 SECTION 1. REAUTHORIZATION OF STATE MEDIATION PRO4 GRAMS. 

5 Section 506 of the Agricultural Credit Act of 1987 

6 (7 U.S.C. 5106) is amended by striking ‘‘2005’’ and in7 serting ‘‘2010’’. 

Æ
#### Chandragopaul Salick, Appellant, v Radhica Salick, Respondent.

Submitted November 30, 2009;

decided January 14, 2010

Reported below, 66 AD3d 757.

*931Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution.
[EMC Logo]**ITEM 1123 ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE EMC MORTGAGE CORPORATION The undersigned officers of EMC Mortgage Corporation ("EMC") as servicer pursuant to the Prime Mortgage Trust 2007-1 (the "Agreement") hereby certify that: 1.  A review of EMC's activities during the period from and including January 1, 2007 through and including December 31, 2007 (the "Reporting Period") and EMC's performance under the Agreement has been made under my supervision. 2.  To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, EMC has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate this 12th day of March 2008. ******By:  /s/ David B. Little  /s/ William Glasgow Jr. ******David B. Little  William Glasgow Jr. Executive Vice President Executive Vice President Default Administration Enterprise Operations Services****/ s /   J e n n a   K e m p  J e n n a   K e m p  Executive Vice President Investor Administration**
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>                     
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997             JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996             JUL-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996             SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                          30,990                       0
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  102,833                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (3,524)                       0
<INVENTORY>                                     65,648                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               212,773                       0
<PP&E>                                          65,082                       0
<DEPRECIATION>                                (25,948)                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 353,516                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           65,693                       0
<BONDS>                                         65,363                       0
<COMMON>                                        12,112                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     200,279                       0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   353,516                       0
<SALES>                                         80,571                  84,240  
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                80,571                  84,240
<CGS>                                           43,226                  56,399
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   43,226                  56,399
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                14,673                   8,821
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,688                   1,415
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,338                     828
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,758                   4,780
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,188                   1,789
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,570                   2,991
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                 (2,723)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,570                     268
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .15                     .01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .15                     .01 

<FN> 
NOTE:  1995 is Restated for Discontinued Operations and Changes in Segment Data.
</FN>
 
        

</TABLE>
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 Sitting by designation. **

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision ***

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MORRIS RODGERS,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

RUBEN REYNAGA; et al.,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 09-17161

D.C. No. 1:06-cv-01083-JAT

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

James A. Teilborg, District Judge, Presiding **

Submitted August 10, 2010*** 

Before: HAWKINS, McKEOWN, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.

Morris Rodgers, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district

court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to exhaust

administrative remedies under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 42 U.S.C.

FILED

AUG 25 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 09-17161

§ 1997e(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the

district court’s dismissal for failure to exhaust, and its factual determinations for

clear error, Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1117 (9th Cir. 2003), and we affirm.

Contrary to Rodgers’s contentions, the district court did not clearly err by

resolving disputed issues of fact in favor of defendants. See id. at 1119-20 (“In

deciding a motion to dismiss for failure to exhaust nonjudicial remedies, the court

may look beyond the pleadings and decide disputed issues of fact.”). Accordingly,

the district court properly dismissed the action because Rodgers failed to exhaust

administrative remedies prior to filing suit. See Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 93-

95 (2006) (holding that “proper exhaustion” under 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a) is

mandatory and requires adherence to administrative procedural rules). 

Rodgers’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 442 Referred in House (RFH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 442

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 27, 2005

               Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To provide for the Secretary of Homeland Security to be included in the 
                    line of Presidential succession.

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

SECTION 1. SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY IN PRESIDENTIAL LINE OF 
              SUCCESSION.

    Section 19(d)(1) of title 3, United States Code, is amended by 
inserting ``Secretary of Homeland Security,'' after ``Attorney 
General,''.

            Passed the Senate July 26, 2005.

            Attest:

                                             EMILY J. REYNOLDS,

                                                             Secretary.
```
#### MS LIFE INSURANCE CO., Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellee, v. Donna J. BARFIELD, Defendant-Counter-Claimant-Appellant.

No. 06-10565

Non-Argument Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Oct. 31, 2006.

Walter D. Wilson, Jackson, MS, for Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellee.

James J. Egan, Jacksonville, FL, for Defendant-Counter-Claimant-Appellant.

*307Before DUBINA, BLACK and MARCUS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

In her notice of appeal, appellant Donna Barfield (“Barfield”) appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of MS Life Insurance Company (“MS”), and third party-defendant Buddy Hutchinson, Inc., and that portion of the district court’s order which denied Bar-field’s motion for continuance and for leave to amend.

We first observe, after reading Bar-field’s amended initial brief, that she fails to address the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of MS. Issues not argued on appeal are deemed waived. *See United States v. Curtis,*380 F.3d 1308, 1310 (11th Cir.2004) (discussing longstanding rule in this circuit that issues not raised in a party’s initial brief on appeal are deemed waived), *cert. denied,*— U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 418, 163 L.Ed.2d 319 (2005).

We review a district court’s denial of trial continuances for abuse of discretion. *United States v. Bowe,*221 F.3d 1183, 1189 (11th Cir.2000). We also review a district court’s denial of a motion for leave to amend a complaint for an abuse of discretion. Car*ruthers v. BSA Advertising, Inc.,*357 F.3d 1213, 1217-18 (11th Cir.2004).

Assuming we have jurisdiction over the district court’s order filed on October 18, 2005, which denied Barfield’s motion to continue and motion for leave to amend, we affirm that order because we conclude from the record that the district court did not abuse its discretion in its rulings.

AFFIRMED.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 819 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.819

                       One Hundred Ninth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
             the third day of January, two thousand and six

                                 An Act

 To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to reallocate costs of the 
 Pactola Dam and Reservoir, South Dakota, to reflect increased demands 
       for municipal, industrial, and fish and wildlife 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 ``Pactola Reservoir Reallocation 
Authorization Act of 2005''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

    Congress finds that--
        (1) it is appropriate to reallocate the costs of the Pactola 
    Dam and Reservoir, South Dakota, to reflect increased demands for 
    municipal, industrial, and fish and wildlife purposes; and
        (2) section 302 of the Department of Energy Organization Act 
    (42 U.S.C. 7152) prohibits such a reallocation of costs without 
    congressional approval.

SEC. 3. REALLOCATION OF COSTS OF PACTOLA DAM AND RESERVOIR, SOUTH 
              DAKOTA.

    The Secretary of the Interior may, as provided in the contract of 
August 2001 entered into between Rapid City, South Dakota, and the 
Rapid Valley Conservancy District, reallocate, in a manner consistent 
with Federal reclamation law (the Act of June 17, 1902 (32 Stat. 388, 
chapter 1093), and Acts supplemental to and amendatory of that Act (43 
U.S.C. 371 et seq.)), the construction costs of Pactola Dam and 
Reservoir, Rapid Valley Unit, Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program, South 
Dakota, from irrigation purposes to municipal, industrial, and fish and 
wildlife purposes.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                             723
<SECURITIES>                                    13,759
<RECEIVABLES>                                      674
<ALLOWANCES>                                       250
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         329,975
<DEPRECIATION>                                  28,365
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 331,415
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                        235,291
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      84,448
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   331,415
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                16,541
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    9,743
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,076
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,471
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,590)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,590)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,590)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.40)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.40)
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 31(a)**
**CERTIFICATIONS**
I, Alan J. Lacy, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this amendment to quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Sears, Roebuck and Co.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining 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 disclosurecontrols and procedures,or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures tobe designed under oursupervision, to ensurethat material informationrelating to theregistrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries,is made known to us byothers within thoseentities, particularlyduring the period in whichthis report is beingprepared;  (b) Evaluated theeffectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosurecontrols and proceduresand presented in thisreport our conclusionsabout the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controlsand procedures, as of theend of the period coveredby this report based onsuch evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this reportany change in theregistrant’s internalcontrol over financialreporting that occurredduring the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter(the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the caseof an annual report) thathas materially affected,or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, theregistrant’s internalcontrol over financialreporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditorsand the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions):
 (a) All significantdeficiencies and materialweaknesses in the designor operation of internalcontrol over financialreporting which arereasonably likely toadversely affect theregistrant’s ability torecord, process, summarizeand report financialinformation; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involvesmanagement or otheremployees who have asignificant role in theregistrant’s internalcontrol over financialreporting.
Date: December 1, 2004
 /s/ Alan J. Lacy
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: In the Interest of K.N.C.

Appellate case number: 01

- 1 7

- 0 0 520

- CV

Trial court case number: C2012

- 0499A

Trial court: 22nd District Court of Comal County

On October 6 , 201 7 , appellant filed her brief. Appellee, the Office of the Attorney General

, had a briefing deadline of November 6, 2017 in which to file its brief, but no brief has been filed

. On November 20 , 201 7 , we notified appellee that we would set th e case for submission without

an appellee’s brief unless appellee filed (1) a motion to extend time to file its brief or (2) its brief

accompanied by a motion to extend time. Appellee has neither filed a motion to extend time or its

appellee’s brief. Acc ordingly, the case is hereby set at issue.

The time for filing the APPELLEE’S brief has expired. See T EX

. R. A PP . P. 38.6(b).

Further, appellee’s deadline for responding to the notice issued by this Court on November 20,

2017 , requiring appellee to fi le either a brief or a motion to extend time to file its brief, has expired.

Accordingly, this case is now at issue and ready to be set for submission.

.

It is so ORDERED

.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Sherry Radack

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: February 8 , 2018
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 805 

To amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance 

Act to allow the area of a Presidentially declared disaster to include 

the outer Continental Shelf. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 14, 2005 

Mr. VITTER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

A BILL

To amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to allow the area of a Presidentially 

declared disaster to include the outer Continental Shelf.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Offshore Infrastruc5 ture Emergency Relief Act of 2005’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PRESIDENTIALLY DECLARED DISASTER AREA MAY 

7 INCLUDE THE OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 102(3) of the Robert T. 

9 Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act 
2

•S 805 IS

1 (42 U.S.C. 5122(3)) is amended by inserting ‘‘, and in2 cludes the outer Continental Shelf (as defined in section 

3 2(a) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 

4 1331(a))’’ after ‘‘Islands’’. 

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

6 this section shall apply to— 

7 (1) declarations made after the date of the en8 actment of this Act, or 

9 (2) modifications made after such date with re10 spect to declarations made after December 31, 2003.

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

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

WILLIAM ESLEY HUGS, Sr.,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 12-30209

D.C. No. 1:11-cr-00055-RFC

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Montana

Richard F. Cebull, Chief Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 11, 2013** 

Before: FERNANDEZ, TASHIMA, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.

William Esley Hugs, Sr., appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges the 18-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for

conspiracy to traffic in eagles and migratory birds, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371.

FILED

FEB 13 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 12-30209

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Hugs contends that the district court violated his due process rights by

relying on hearsay evidence to determine the market value of the trafficked birds

under U.S.S.G. § 2Q2.1(b)(3)(A)(ii). Hugs does not contest that the court may

consider hearsay evidence at sentencing, but argues that the evidence relied upon

by the court lacked sufficient indicia of reliability. See United States v. Petty, 982

F.2d 1365, 1369 (9th Cir. 1993) (“Due process requires that some minimal indicia

of reliability accompany a hearsay statement.”). We review the district court’s

determination of reliability for abuse of discretion. See id.

The court relied upon a sworn affidavit prepared by a special agent of the

United States Fish and Wildlife Service, in which the affiant estimated the

reasonable replacement cost for the illegally-trafficked birds based on information

provided by an expert in the field. See U.S.S.G. § 2Q2.1 cmt. n.4 (where the fairmarket retail price is “difficult to ascertain,” market value can be determined by

reasonable replacement costs). The court did not abuse its discretion by finding

that the affidavit possessed sufficient indicia of reliability.

AFFIRMED.
- 1

- In The



### Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

No. 1 4 -1 5 -00 376

- CV

____________

MANUEL AL FRIAS, Appellant

V.

SOVRAN HHF STORAGE HOLDINGS, LLC, Appellee

============================================================

On Appeal from County Court at Law #2

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1031244

=============================================================

APPELLANT ’ S MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE BRIEF

Appellant Manuel Al Frias and his attorney of record, Thomas E. Ross, files this

Motion to Extend Time to File Brief and in support of such motion show unto the Court

the following:

1. The Appellant’s Brief was due on or about June 29, 2015.

2. Appellant’s attorney requests an extension of time until August 21, 2015

3. Appellant ’s attorney needs additional time to research and

present an effective brief.

4. There have been no previous extensions of time granted to file Appellant’s

brief

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Appellant requests this exte nsion of time to

file his Brief. ACCEPTED

14-15-00376-CV

FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS

6/30/2015 3:36:49 PM

CHRISTOPHER PRINE

CLERK- 2

- Respectfully submitted,

/S/ Thomas E. Ross

Thomas E. Ross

State Bar No. 17301900

440 Louisiana, Suite 1550

Houston, Texas 77002

Tel 713

- 951

- 9008

Fax 713

- 222

- 0438

tomross@wt.net

CERTI FICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that a copy of this Motion to Extend Time to File Brief was served in accordance

with Rule 9.5 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure as follows:

Part y : Sovran Acquisition Limited Partnership

Attorney of Record: Jes sica Z. Barger

Address of Attorney: One Riverway, Suite 2200

Houston, Texas 77056

Method of Service: Email: barger@wrightclose.com

Date of Service: June 29, 2015

/s/Thomas E. Ross

Thomas E. Ross