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

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3046 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3046

  To direct the Secretary of Commerce to study the South Atlantic red 
    snapper fishery and to limit the authority of the Secretary to 
 promulgate any interim rules for the fishery, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 25, 2010

  Mr. Nelson of Florida introduced the following bill; which was read 
     twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
                             Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To direct the Secretary of Commerce to study the South Atlantic red 
    snapper fishery and to limit the authority of the Secretary to 
 promulgate any interim rules for the fishery, 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 ``South Atlantic Red Snapper Fishery 
Protection Act''.

SEC. 2. SOUTH ATLANTIC RED SNAPPER FISHERY.

    (a) Stock Assessment.--
            (1) Requirement.--The Secretary of Commerce shall conduct a 
        benchmark stock assessment of the South Atlantic red snapper 
        fishery that shall include fishery independent data.
            (2) Report to congress.--The Secretary of Commerce shall 
        submit to Congress a report on the findings of the assessment 
        required by paragraph (1).
    (b) Limitation on Interim Rules To Close Fishery.--
            (1) In general.--The Secretary of Commerce may not 
        promulgate any interim rule under section 305(c) of the 
        Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 
        U.S.C. 1855(c)) or any final rule that prohibits fishing in the 
        South Atlantic red snapper fishery--
                    (A) prior to the date the Secretary submits to 
                Congress the report required by subsection (a)(2); and
                    (B) unless such report demonstrates the need for 
                any such an interim or final rule.
            (2) Existing interim rules.--Any interim rule promulgated 
        under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 
        Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1855(c)) that 
        prohibits fishing in the South Atlantic red snapper fishery 
        that was promulgated prior to the date of the enactment of this 
        Act shall have no force or effect.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT NASHVILLE

May 7, 2004 Session

IN RE: A.M.T., Z.T.R., AND K.W.T. 

Appeal from the Juvenile Court for Davidson County

Nos. 22-72605, 2019-53684, 2219-70163 Betty Adams Green, Judge

No. M2003-02926-COA-R3-PT - Filed July 2, 2004

WILLIAM B. CAIN, J., concurring.

I concur in the judgment that clear and convincing evidence establishes abundant grounds

for the termination of the parental rights of the mother in this case and further establishes that it is

in the best interests of the children to terminate her parental rights.

I continue, however, to adhere to my view that a preponderance of the evidence standard on

the one hand and a clear and convincing evidence standard on the other are completely incompatible

with each other both at the trial level and at the appellate level. My views are exhaustively set forth

in Estate of Acuff v. O’Linger, 56 S.W.3d 527 (Tenn.Ct.App. 2001) perm.app.denied (Oct. 1, 2001)

and in In re Z.J.S. and M.J.P., No. M2002-02235-COA-R3-JV, 2003 WL 21266854 (Tenn.Ct.App.

June 3, 2003) (Cain, Judge, concurring) and in State v. R.S. and K.S., No. M2002-00919-COA-R3-

CV, 2003 WL 22098035 (Tenn.Ct.App. Sept.11,2003) (Cain, Judge, concurring), along with In re:

K.N.R., et al., No. M2003-01301-COA-R3-PT (Tenn.Ct.App. 2004); see also Colorado v. New

Mexico, 467 U.S. 310, 104 S.Ct. 2433, 81 L.Ed.2d 247 (1984); Taylor v. Commissioner of Mental

Health, 481 At.2d 139, 153-54 (Me. 1984); Riley Hill General Contractor, Inc. v. Tandy Corp., 737

P.2d 595, 604 (Or. 1987); Beeler v. American Trust Co., 147 P.2d 583 (Ca. 1944), (Traynor, Justice,

dissenting).

In any event, the evidence in this case is overwhelming and the clear and convincing evidence

standard set forth in Estate of Acuff v. O’Linger is clearly met. I concur in the judgment.

___________________________________ 

WILLIAM B. CAIN, JUDGE
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

ROBERT DAMEON GROSS

,

Plaintiff,

v. Civil Action No. 1 3

- 5 2 (J E B)

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,

Defendant.

ORDER

Plaintiff filed the instant action in the District of Columbia Superior Cou rt on November

29, 2012, and Defendant District of Columbia removed it here on January 11, 2013. See ECF

No. 1 (Notice of Removal). Eleven days later, the District moved for dismissal (including, for

some reason, on counts not in the Complaint)

. See ECF No. 3

. Plaintiff has since sought th ree

extensions of time to file his Opposition, which the Court has granted, even though the third was

filed nine days after the deadline for a response. See ECF No. 9. In granting this third Motion,

the Court ordered that Plaintiff should respond to the District’s Motion by April 2. See Minute

Order of March 18, 2013. As he has failed to do so, th e Court will trea t the Motion as conceded

under LCvR 7(b).

The Court, accordingly, ORDERS that:

1. Defendant’s Motion is GRANTED; and

2. The case is DISMISSED WITH OUT PREJUDICE.2 SO ORDERED

.

/s/ **James E. Boasberg**

JAMES E. BOASBERG

United States District Judge

Date: April 8 , 2013
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 13 (Thursday, January 22, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 4057]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-1312]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION


Sunshine Act; Notice of Agency Meeting

Time and Date: 10 a.m., Thursday, January 22, 2009.

Place: Board Room, 7th Floor, Room 7047, 1775 Duke Street, Alexandria, 
VA 22314-3428.

Status: Open.

Matters to be Considered: 
    1. Final Rule--Section 740.4 of NCUA's Rules and Regulations, 
Requirements for the Official Sign.
    2. Public Notice--Central Liquidity Facility.
    3. Insurance Fund Report.

Recess: 11 a.m.

Time and Date: 11:15 a.m., Thursday, January 22, 2009.

Place:  Board Room, 7th Floor, Room 7047, 1775 Duke Street, Alexandria, 
VA 22314-3428.

Status: Closed.

Matters to be Considered: 
    1. Appeal under section 701.14 and Part 747, Subpart J of NCUA's 
Rules and Regulations. Closed pursuant to Exemptions (6) and (8).
    2. Personnel. Closed Pursuant to Exemption (2).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Rupp, Secretary of the Board, 
Telephone: 703-518-6304

Mary Rupp,
Board Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-1312 Filed 1-16-09; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 7535-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          15,869
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   68,762
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,153
<INVENTORY>                                    119,389
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               433,965
<PP&E>                                         572,145
<DEPRECIATION>                                 144,656
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,627,038
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          541,191
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           286
<OTHER-SE>                                     423,024
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,627,038
<SALES>                                        831,405
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               831,405
<CGS>                                          707,758
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  707,758
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              28,550
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 35,563
<INCOME-TAX>                                    14,045
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             21,518
<DISCONTINUED>                                   6,073
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  2,332
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    25,259
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.89
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.88


</TABLE>
#### Ronald SMITH, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. John E. POTTER, Postmaster General of the United States, Defendant—Appellee.

No. 04-17421.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted June 12, 2006.*

Filed June 20, 2006.

John P. Doyle, Esq., San Francisco, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Abraham A. Simmons, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Francisco, CA, for Defendant-Appellee.

Before: WALLACE, KLEINFELD, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.

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

MEMORANDUM **

Ronald Smith appeals from the district court’s summary judgment for the Postmaster General John E. Potter in his action under the Rehabilitation Act alleging failure to reasonably accommodate his learning disability. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, *Barnett v. Centoni,*31 F.3d 813, 815 (9th Cir.1994) (per curiam), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Smith’s claim that his employer failed to accommodate his disability because Smith failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to whether his inability to write quickly and legibly substantially limits his ability to learn or work. *See Toyota Motor Mfg., Kentucky, Inc. v. Williams,*534 U.S. 184, 197-98, 122 S.Ct. 681,151 L.Ed.2d 615 (2002) (a person who is disabled within the meaning of the Americans with Disabilities Act or the Rehabilitation Act must have an impairment that substantially limits his ability to engage in a major life activity); *see also Thornton v. McClatchy Newspapers, Inc.,*261 F.3d 789 (9th Cir.2001), *opinion clari*
      *734
      *fied by,*292 F.3d 1045, 1046 (2002) (an inability to engage in continuous handwriting is not a substantial limitation).

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

July 3, 2013

p0626 

# Order

Clerk July 3, 2013

146599

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 146599

COA: 305762

Wayne CC: 10

- 009177

- FH

JAMES CORNELIUS FLANAGAN,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 29, 2012

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
Exhibit 10.9

AMENDMENT 1

This Amendment 1, dated March 29, 2006 is an amendment to theEMPLOYMENT
AGREEMENT (the Agreement), dated June 14, 2004 by and between ANDREA ELECTRONICS CORPORATION (the Company), a New York corporation, and DOUGLAS J. ANDREA (the Executive).

W I T N E S S E T H:

WHEREAS,
the Company wishes to postpone the executives calendar year 2004 and 2005 until such time that the Company has positive cash flows and payment of such bonus would not cause the Company to receive a going concern audit opinion for
the Companys financial statements;

WHEREAS, the Executive is in agreement to this postponement for the benefit of the
Company.

1. Postponed Bonus Payment

Section 1 of Amendment 1 replaces Section 4(b) for the years ending December 31, 2004 and 2005.

(a) The Company
shall pay the Executive a bonus of not less than one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) payable when the Company has positive cash flows and such payment would not cause the Company to receive a going concern audit opinion for the
Companys financial statements, as determined by the Board of Directors in its sole discretion. This bonus may be payable in lump sum or over time as determined by the Board of Directors in its sole discretion and consistent with the intent of
the Amendment 1.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Agreement as of the date first written above.



ANDREA ELECTRONICS CORPORATIONBy:

/s/ Gary A. JonesName:

Gary A. JonesTitle:

DirectorBy:

/s/ Louis LibinName:

Louis LibinTitle:

DirectorBy:

/s/ Joseph J. MigliozziName:

Joseph J. MigliozziTitle:

DirectorBy:

/s/ Jonathan D. SpaetName:

Jonathan D. SpaetTitle:

DirectorBy:

/s/ Douglas J. AndreaDouglas J. Andrea
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 205 (Monday, October 26, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54987-54988]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-25621]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. PR09-25-002]


Crosstex North Texas Pipeline, L.P.; Notice of Compliance Filing

October 19, 2009.
    Take notice that on October 12, 2009, Crosstex North Texas 
Pipeline, L.P. filed a Statement of Operating Conditions, including a 
Statement of Rates summary page, pursuant to section 284.123(e) of the 
Commission's regulations and to comply with the Commission's letter 
order issued on September 10, 2009, in Docket Nos. PR09-25-000 and 
PR05-21-001.
    Any person desiring to participate in this proceeding must file a 
motion 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 and 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 date as indicated below. Anyone filing 
an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the 
Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the 
intervention or protest date need not 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 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

[[Page 54988]]

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#a6e0e3f4e5e9c8cacfc8c3f5d3d6d6c9d4d2e6c0c3d4c588c1c9d0"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="9ddbd8cfded2f3f1f4f3f8cee8ededf2efe9ddfbf8effeb3faf2eb">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll 
free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern on Monday, October 26, 2009.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-25621 Filed 10-23-09; 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>
---

Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, _John L. Threshie Jr., certify that:

(1) I have reviewed this Form 10-QSB of The Tirex Corporation;

(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 small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;

(4) The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s)
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)) (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the small business
issuer 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 small
>   business issuer, 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 small business
>   issuer'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 small
>   business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred
>   during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small
>   business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that
>   has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
>   small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and

(5) The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s)
and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control
over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit
committee of the small business issuer'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 small business issuer'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 small business issuer's internal
>   control over financial reporting.

/s/ ________________ 
John L. Threshie Jr., CEO

Date: February 15, 2005

---
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 February 17, 2017

s0214

Order 

Clerk

February 17, 2017

155148

SC: 155148

In re DENG, Minors. COA: 333365

Kent CC Family Division:

14-053706-NA; 14-053707-NA; 

14-053708-NA; 14-053709-NA

_______________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 20, 2016 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
Biography

National Indian Gaming Commission

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY (EEO) DIRECTOR

EBONY R. JARRETT

Ebony R. Jarrett joined NIGC as the Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Director in January 2023. As the EEO 

Director, Ebony works with leadership, management and staff to further a more inclusive, and supportive environment 

for all members of the organization. She is also responsible for the agencies EEO program and strives to ensure that all 

employees are afforded the opportunity to work in an environment that is not only inclusive, but embraces the diversity 

of its employees and customers. Additionally, she assists the leadership team in maintaining a workplace free of 

harassment and that agency policies and practices are implemented in a fair and equitable manner. 

Jarrett has over 19 years of experience in the areas of EEO/Diversity, Equality, Inclusion and Accessibility (DEIA). 

She started her career as an Office Automation Clerk in the EEO office and has since, gained the experience and 

knowledge necessary to lead both program areas. During her career, she has worked for the Department of the Air 

Force, Department of the Navy, Office of Marine and Avation Operations, Federal Maritime Commission, Surface 

Transportation Board, and the US International Development Finance Corporation. She also provides a full spectrum of 

EEO services to the Inter-American Foundation (IAF).

Jarrett is a certified Instructor, Mediator, EEO Counselor, and DEIA Change Agent, and has used these skills to 

educate, guide and motivate countless employees over the years. 

Jarrett received a Certificate of Diversity and Inclusion from Cornell University of South Florida, she is currently using 

the knowledge gained to improve inclusive behaviors both at work and in her community. In her spare time, Jarrett

loves teaching group fitness classes, building legos, and watching football.

The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act created the National Indian Gaming Commission to support tribal self-sufficiency and the integrity of Indian gaming. 

NIGC oversees the efficient regulation of 510 gaming establishments operated by 243 tribes across 29 states.

Updated 2/13/23