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

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3592 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

100 Commerce Drive in Tyrone, Georgia, as the ‘‘First Lieutenant Robert Wilson Collins Post Office Building’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 15, 2010 

Mr. CHAMBLISS (for himself and Mr. ISAKSON) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 100 Commerce Drive in Tyrone, Georgia, as 

the ‘‘First Lieutenant Robert Wilson Collins Post Office 

Building’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. FIRST LIEUTENANT ROBERT WILSON COLLINS 

4 POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

5 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

6 Postal Service located at 100 Commerce Drive in Tyrone, 

7 Georgia, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘First 

8 Lieutenant Robert Wilson Collins Post Office Building’’. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3592 IS

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg2 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

4 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘First Lieutenant Rob5 ert Wilson Collins Post Office Building’’. 

Æ 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF BANTA CORPORATION AS OF AND FOR THE TWELVE
MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 28, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-28-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-28-1996
<CASH>                                          57,417
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  206,245
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,486
<INVENTORY>                                     69,063
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               347,455
<PP&E>                                         650,243
<DEPRECIATION>                                 330,304
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 719,218
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          127,825
<BONDS>                                        133,696
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,097
<OTHER-SE>                                     417,495
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   719,218
<SALES>                                      1,083,763
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,083,763
<CGS>                                          864,736
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  864,736
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               126,855
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              10,214
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 84,207
<INCOME-TAX>                                    33,300
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             50,907
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    50,907
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.63<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.63<F1>
<FN>
<F1>PER SHARE AMOUNTS HAVE BEEN ADJUSTED FOR THREE-FOR-TWO STOCK SPLIT DISTRIBUTED
IN MARCH 1996.  PRIOR PERIOD SCHEDULES HAVE NOT BEEN RESTATED FOR THIS
RECAPITALIZATION.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
IV 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 198 

Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

in the One Hundred Sixteenth Congress. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 8, 2019 

Mr. ENGEL (for himself and Mr. MCCAUL) submitted the following resolution; 

which was referred to the Committee on House Administration 

RESOLUTION 

Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on 

Foreign Affairs in the One Hundred Sixteenth Congress. 

1 Resolved, 

2 SECTION 1. AMOUNTS FOR COMMITTEE EXPENSES. 

3 For the expenses of the Committee on Foreign Af4 fairs (hereafter in this resolution referred to as the ‘‘Com5 mittee’’), including the expenses of all staff salaries, there 

6 shall be paid, out of the applicable accounts of the House 

7 of Representatives for committee salaries and expenses, 

8 not more than $16,144,206 for the One Hundred Six9 teenth Congress. 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 198 IH 

1 SEC. 2. SESSION LIMITATIONS. 

2 Of the amount specified in section 1— 

3 (1) not more than $8,072,103 shall be available 

4 for expenses incurred during the period beginning at 

5 noon on January 3, 2019, and ending immediately 

6 before noon on January 3, 2020; and 

7 (2) not more than $8,072,103 shall be available 

8 for expenses incurred during the period beginning at 

9 noon on January 3, 2020, and ending immediately 

10 before noon on January 3, 2021. 

11 SEC. 3. VOUCHERS. 

12 Payments under this resolution shall be made on 

13 vouchers authorized by the Committee, signed by the 

14 Chairman of the Committee, and approved in the manner 

15 directed by the Committee on House Administration. 

16 SEC. 4. REGULATIONS. 

17 Amounts made available under this resolution shall 

18 be expended in accordance with regulations prescribed by 

19 the Committee on House Administration. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Akiva Daniel Abraham, Appellant.

Submitted November 5, 2012;

decided November 19, 2012

Motion for assignment of counsel granted and Jonathan S. Fishbein, Esq., 35 Fairview Ave., Delmar, New York 12054 assigned as counsel to the appellant on the appeal herein.
EXHIBIT 31

CERTIFICATION

I, Dr. Ron Tripp, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-KSB of Broadband
Wireless International 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 officers and
I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the
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.

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.

Date: July 14, 2005

/s/Dr. Ron
Tripp

Dr. Ron Tripp

Chief Executive
Officer and

Principal Accounting
Officer
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

Novem ber 6, 2019

No. 04

- 19

- 00587

- CV
IN THE INTEREST OF B.T.K., A CHILD
From the 150th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018

- PA

- 00374 Honorable Peter Sakai, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R
Appellant Mom’s brief was due to be filed with this court on October 14, 2019. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.6(a). After this court granted Mom’s first motion for extension of time to file her brief, the brief was due on November 4, 2019. On the once

- extended due date, Mom filed a second motion for a twenty

- day extension of time to file her brief. Appellant Mom’s motion is GRANTED. Her brief is due on November 25 , 2019. Any further motion for extension of time to file the brief is discouraged. S ee T EX

. R. J UD

. A DMIN

. 6.2 (directing courts of appeals to dispose of parental rights termination suits “[w]ithin 180 days of the date the notice of appeal is filed”).

_________________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 6th day of November, 2019

.

___________________________________ M ichael A. C ruz , Clerk of Court
97-21.

#### ALLTEL Ohio, Inc. v. Pub. Util. Comm.

Public Utilities Commission, No. 95-845-TP-COI. On motion to dismiss. Motion to dismiss sustained. Cause dismissed.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.

Resnick, J., not participating.
CERTIFICATION
                     PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


      The  undersigned  hereby certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the
undersigned's  best knowledge and belief,  the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for
the Geodyne Energy Income  Limited  Partnership  II-E  ("Issuer") for the period
ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"):

      (a)   fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
            the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
      (b)   the  information  contained in the Report  fairly  presents,  in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Issuer.

      Dated this 13th day of August, 2003.

                                    GEODYNE ENERGY INCOME LIMITED
                                    PARTNERSHIP II-E
                                    ("Issuer")

                                    //s// Dennis R. Neill
                                    -----------------------------------
                                    Dennis R. Neill
                                    President (Chief Executive Officer)

                                    //s// Craig D. Loseke
                                    -----------------------------------
                                    Craig D. Loseke
                                    Chief Accounting Officer
                                    (Chief Financial Officer)

      A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906 has
been  furnished to Geodyne Energy Income  Limited  Partnership  II-E and will be
retained by Geodyne Energy Income Limited  Partnership II-E and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
No. 4985.

(Court of Appeal, Parish of Orleans.)

#### W. J. LEMP BREWING COMPANY vs. C. C. ANDERSON.

S. F. Gautier for plaintiff and appellee.

H. W. Robinson, Buck, Walshe & Buck and E. M. Stafford for defendant -\nd appellant.

*339April 18, 1910.

GODCHAUX, J.

It is not only conceded, but apparent from the record in this case that the sole question to be determined is whether a certain fund garnisheed by plaintiff, a judgment creditor under a fi fa directed against the defendant, its judgment debtor, shall be paid or awarded to plaintiff or to one who claims the fund under an assignment from the judgment debtor executed prior to the garnishment, when it appears that notice of the assignment was not given to the garnishee until after the garnishment process had been served upon him.

The lower Court held that the assignment was not complete, as against the seizing judgment creditor, until the garnishee, the holder of the fund, was duly notified of the assignment, and gave judgment in favor of the judgment creditor, from which judgment the assignee of the fund appeals.

This judgment must be affirmed. The seizing creditor is a third person and it is well settled that, as to the latter transfer of a debt can have no effect only from the date of notification of the transfer to the debtor. Until such notification the debt can be attached and held as the property of the original creditor, notwithstanding the transfer.

Relf & Co. vs. Boro, 17 An. 258; Golson & Co. vs. Powell, 32 An. 521; Jack vs. Harriston & Co., 34 An. 736; Bernard vs. Whitney National Bank, 43 An. 50; Newman vs. Irwin, 43 An. 1114; R. Civil Code, 2643.

The judgment awarding the fund to plaintiff, the seizing creditor, and rejecting the claim thereto of the appellant, as assignee thereof, is correct, and it is accordingly affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.
#### Ellis *v.*Reynolds.

*(Circuit Court, W. D. Pennsylvania.*

June 1, 1888.)

Writs—Service of Process on Absent Defendants in Suits in Rem—Sufp. Rev.' St. U. S. 176.

The specific prayers of the bill *being*(1) for an account of lumber, etc., taken from demised premises; (2) for damages for defendant’s breaches of covenant; (3) for the appointment of a receiver of demised premises, lumber, *etc.,—held,*that the suit was not one within the contemplation of the act which authorizes service upon non-resident defendants wherever found in suits “to enforce any legal or equitable lien upon, or claim to, or to remove any incumbrance or lien or cloud upon, the title to real or personal property within the district where such suit is brought. ”

In Equity. *Sur*motion to rescind an order on an absent defendant to appear, plead, answer, or demur, and to strike off tbe service thereof.

*B. J. Reid,*for complainant.

*J. 0. Parmlee,.*for defendant.

Acheson, J.

The order of April 21,1888, was made by me upon an *ex parte*application, supported by the plaintiff’s affidavit, beyond which-I did not then look. That affidavit brought the case within the terms of the act of congress which authorizes such order and service where the suit is brought “to enforce any legal or equitable lien upon, or claim to, or to remove any incumbrance or lien or cloud upon, the title to real or personal property within the district where such suit is brought.” Supp. Rev. St. U. S. p. 176; Rev. St. § 738. But upon a careful examination of the bill, I am persuaded that the suit is not within the scope of the statute. The first prayer of the bill is for an account of the lumber, etc., taken by the defendant 'from the demised premises, and a decree against him for the balance due the plaintiff. The second prayer is for a decree in favor of the plaintiff for the damages he has sustained by reason of the defendant’s breaches of covenant. These, are the principal prayers, and they disclose the substantial purpose of the suit. They involve, it is plain, only the personal rights and obligations of the parties. The third prayer of the bill, indeed, is for the appointment of a receiver, but this is an auxiliary remedy, invoked as an aid to the principal relief sought. As the bill now stands, I do not see how the suit can be regarded as a proceeding *in rem,*within the contemplation of the act. This conclusion has been reached after consultation with Judge MoKennan, and with his concurrence. And now, June 1, 1888, the order upon the defendant made April 21, 1888, that he appear, etc., is rescinded, and the service thereof upon him is set aside.
# Supplements

> 
Administrative supplements are additional funds provided to active awards in order to conduct or support further research within the scope and timeline of the current award. 

## How can I apply?

Recipients can apply by following the instructions provided in the notice of funding opportunity (NOFO) for the administrative supplement. Before submitting a request for an administrative supplement, it is strongly advised that you contact your program officer (PO) to discuss the scientific rationale for a supplement request and program eligibility. Applicants can find their PO's contact info in eRA Commons.

Visit the Administrative Supplements page to learn about types of administrative supplements and how to find active administrative supplement funding opportunities.

comment

## Administrative Supplements Reporting Requirements

If you have an active administrative supplement, be sure to report on the progress attributed to the supplement in Section B of the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR). Visit the Reporting Requirements page for more information.
# CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

Board of Directors Badger
Paper Mills, Inc. and Subsidiary

We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement of Badger Paper
Mills, Inc. and Subsidiary on Forms S-8 (File No. 333-01671, effective March 13, 1996 and
File No. 333-01673, effective March 13, 1996) of our reports dated February 2, 2004,
(except for Note F, as to which the date is March 1, 2004) with respect to the
consolidated financial statements and schedule of Badger Paper Mills, Inc. for the years
ended December 31, 2003, 2002 and 2001 included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the
year ended December 31, 2003.

/s/ Grant Thornton LLP

Appleton, WisconsinMarch
25, 2004
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-1538

REVEREND DR. SAMUEL T. WHATLEY; SAMUEL T. WHATLEY, II,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

v.

CITY OF NORTH CHARLESTON; NORTH CHARLESTON POLICE 

DEPARTMENT; NORTH CHARLESTON CODE ENFORCEMENT; CITY OF 

NORTH CHARLESTON MUNICIPAL COURT,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at 

Charleston. Sherri A. Lydon, District Judge. (2:23-cv-00516-SAL)

Submitted: October 19, 2023 Decided: October 23, 2023

Before KING and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Samuel T. Whatley, Samuel T. Whatley, II, Appellants Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1538 Doc: 12 Filed: 10/23/2023 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Reverend Dr. Samuel T. Whatley and Samuel T. Whatley, II, appeal the district 

court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing without 

prejudice their action brought pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act for lack of 

subject matter jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. 

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Whatley v. City of N. Charleston, No. 

2:23-cv-00516-SAL (D.S.C. May 12, 2023). We dispense with oral argument because the 

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1538 Doc: 12 Filed: 10/23/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Commodity Futures Trading Commission

# AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

## Sunshine Act Meetings

# TIME AND DATE: 

11 a.m., Friday July 24, 2009.

# PLACE: 

1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission Conference Room.

# STATUS: 

Closed.

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 

Surveillance Matters.

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

 Sauntia S. Warfield, 202-418-5084.

Sauntia S. Warfield, 

Assistant Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. E9-14644 Filed 6-17-09; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
```

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 118 (Monday, June 22, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 29522]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-14391]

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

POSTAL SERVICE

International Product Change--Direct Entry Parcels Contracts, 
International Return Service, and Harmonization Service

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add International Direct Entry Parcels 
Contracts, International Return Service, and Harmonization Service to 
the Competitive Products List pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642.

DATES: June 22, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Margaret M. Falwell, 703-292-3576.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that it has filed with the Postal Regulatory 
Commission a Request of United States Postal Service to Add Direct 
Entry Parcels Contracts, International Return Service, and 
Harmonization Service to the Competitive Products List, and Notice of 
Filing (Under Seal) of Contract and Enabling Governors' Decision. 
Documents are available at http://www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2009-26 
and CP2009-36.

Neva R. Watson,
Attorney, Legislative.
[FR Doc. E9-14391 Filed 6-19-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```