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

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5151

To transfer administrative jurisdiction over certain land in Clark County, 

Nevada, from the Secretary of the Interior to the Secretary of Veterans 

Affairs. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 28, 2004

Mr. PORTER (for himself, Mr. GIBBONS, and Ms. BERKLEY) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Resources 

A BILL

To transfer administrative jurisdiction over certain land in 

Clark County, Nevada, from the Secretary of the Interior 

to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.

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 ‘‘Foundation for Ne5 vada’s Veterans Land Transfer Act of 2004’’. 
2

•HR 5151 IH 

1 SEC. 2. TRANSFER OF ADMINISTRATIVE JURISDICTION, BU2 REAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT LAND, CLARK 

3 COUNTY, NEVADA. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Administrative jurisdiction over 

5 the land described in subsection (b) is transferred from 

6 the Secretary of the Interior to the Secretary of Veterans 

7 Affairs. 

8 (b) DESCRIPTION OF LAND.—The parcel of land re9 ferred to in subsection (a) is the approximately 150 acres 

10 of Bureau of Land Management land in Clark County, 

11 Nevada, as generally depicted on the map entitled ‘‘Vet12 erans Administration Conveyance’’ and dated September 

13 24, 2004. 

14 (c) USE OF LAND.—The parcel of land described in 

15 subsection (b) shall be used by the Secretary of Veterans 

16 Affairs for the construction and operation of medical and 

17 related facilities, as determined to be appropriate by the 

18 Secretary of Veterans Affairs.

Æ
EX-10.29



 Exhibit 10.29 
 AMENDMENT 2012-2 
 TO THE 

L-3 COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION 
 AMENDED AND RESTATED 
 SUPPLEMENTAL EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT PLAN

 WHEREAS, L-3 Communications Corporation (“L-3”) maintains the L-3 Communications Corporation Amended and
Restated Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan (the “Plan”); and 
 WHEREAS, the Compensation Committee of the Board
of Directors of L-3 (the “Committee”) has the authority to amend the Plan pursuant to Section 5.1 of the Plan; and 
 WHEREAS, on November 5, 2012, the Committee approved the amendment of the Plan as contemplated herein. 
 NOW THEREFORE, Section 3.3 of the Plan is hereby amended by adding the following sentence at the end thereof: 
 Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Committee may determine in its discretion, at the time an employee is designated as an Additional SERP Participant, the period during which benefit accrual service,
vesting service and compensation will be taken into account in determining the Supplemental Pension Benefit for an Additional SERP Participant. 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment to the Plan has been duly executed as of November 5, 2012. 
  

			
	L-3 Communications Corporation
		
	By:	 	  

		 	John M. Hill
		 	Vice President of Human Resources
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 14-11679

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 3:13-cr-00127-MEW-GRJ-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

ROBERT EUGENE SPIKER, 

 Defendant - Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida

________________________

(November 19, 2014)

Before HULL, MARTIN and ROSENBAUM, Circuit Judges

PER CURIAM: 

Case: 14-11679 Date Filed: 11/19/2014 Page: 1 of 2 
2

Roland Falcon, appointed counsel for Robert Spiker, has moved to withdraw 

from further representation of the appellant and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. 

California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967). Our independent review of the 

entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is 

correct. Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable 

issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Spiker’s 

conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.

Case: 14-11679 Date Filed: 11/19/2014 Page: 2 of 2
**Exhibit      32.1**

**CERTIFICATE      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF      2002 **

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

| 2. | The                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the                Company. |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                               |                                    |                                             |
|-------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|
| April                15, 2008 |                                         | /s/              JAMES              D. BURCHETTA |
|                          | James                  D. Burchetta     |
|                          | Chairman                    and Founder |

|        |                                                                                          |                                  |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------|
|   |                                                                                               | /s/ DAVID              M. RAINEY |
|   | David                  M. Rainey                                                              |
|   | President,                  Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and                  Secretary |

----
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION  PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  (SUBSECTIONS (A) AND (B) OF SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE)

Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), I, Darrell Borne, the Chief
Financial Officer, Secretary and Treasurer of First Horizon Pharmaceutical Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), do hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that:

This
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 (the "Form 10-K") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in this Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.

|                     |  | By: | /s/DARRELL BORNEName: Darrell Borne
Title:Chief Financial Officer, Secretary and Treasurer
|-------------------- |  | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: March 11, 2005 |  |     |                                                                                           

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the
electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to First Horizon Pharmaceutical Corporation and will be retained by First Horizon Pharmaceutical
Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---



QuickLinks
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v George Velez, Appellant.

[822 NYS2d 461]

Application by the appellant for a writ of error coram nobis to vacate, on the ground of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, a decision and order of this Court dated August 13, 2001 *(People v Velez,*286 AD2d 406 [2001]), affirming a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered May 9, 1996.

Ordered that the application is denied.

The appellant has failed to establish that he was denied the effective assistance of appellate counsel *(see Jones v Barnes,*463 US 745 [1983]; *People v Stultz,*2 NY3d 277 [2004]). Florio, J.E, Schmidt, Adams and Krausman, JJ., concur.
HOUSEHOLD DATA

ANNUAL AVERAGES

19. Persons at work in agriculture and nonagricultural industries by hours of work

Hours of work

1998

Thousands of persons Percent distribution

All

industries Agriculture Nonagriculturalindustries

All

industries Agriculture Nonagriculturalindustries

 Total, 16 years and over ............................................................. 125,877 3,217 122,660 100.0 100.0 100.0

1 to 34 hours ................................................................................. 33,132 987 32,146 26.3 30.7 26.2

 1 to 4 hours ................................................................................. 1,336 71 1,265 1.1 2.2 1.0

 5 to 14 hours ............................................................................... 4,914 218 4,696 3.9 6.8 3.8

 15 to 29 hours ............................................................................. 15,545 465 15,081 12.3 14.4 12.3

 30 to 34 hours ............................................................................. 11,337 232 11,105 9.0 7.2 9.1

35 hours and over ......................................................................... 92,745 2,231 90,514 73.7 69.3 73.8

 35 to 39 hours ............................................................................. 8,731 174 8,556 6.9 5.4 7.0

 40 hours ...................................................................................... 44,224 760 43,464 35.1 23.6 35.4

 41 hours and over ....................................................................... 39,790 1,297 38,494 31.6 40.3 31.4

 41 to 48 hours ........................................................................... 14,608 268 14,340 11.6 8.3 11.7

 49 to 59 hours ........................................................................... 14,520 387 14,133 11.5 12.0 11.5

 60 hours and over ..................................................................... 10,663 642 10,020 8.5 20.0 8.2

Average hours, total at work ......................................................... 39.3 41.6 39.2 – – –

Average hours, persons who usually work full time ...................... 43.2 47.9 43.1 – – –

 NOTE: Detail on persons at work in tables 19-23 may not sum to the totals

shown because of minor editing problems associated with the redesigned

survey. Beginning in January 1998, data reflect new composite estimation

procedures and revised population controls used in the household survey.
Exhibit 10.1


 




	
  

  	
  2013 Incentive
  Compensation Plan Effective January 1, 2013 Employee Robert E. Balletto
  Estimated 2013 Salary 194,000 $ Title President/CEO Estimated 2013 Target 18%
  34,920 $ Thresholds Maintain CAMELS rating at one of the two highest ratings
  Maintain an Asset Quality Rating of "Satisfactory" or better Goal
  #1: Achieve ROA Annual Payout Target 60% = 20,952 $ Goals Payout 95% of
  Budget 6,914 $ At Budget 13,828 $ 106% of Budget 20,952 $ Stretch Goal Every
  .04% over 106% of Budget 6,914 $ Goal #2: Achieve Efficiency Ratio Annual
  Payout Target 40% = 13,968 $ Goals Payout 102% of Budget $ 4,656 At Budget
  9,312 $ 97% of Budget 13,968 $ Stretch Goal Every 2% under 97% of Budget
  4,656 $ NOTES: Bonus targets are based on Georgetown Bancorp Inc. 2013
  budget. All dollar figures are based on estimates of annualized salary.
  Incentive payments are based on the employee's actual base compensation for
  the fiscal year, which includes straight time pay, vacation, holiday,
  personal, sick and jury duty pay. Overtime and other payments including
  previous year's bonus payout will be excluded from the calculation. To be
  eligible for the Incentive Compensation, the employee must be actively
  employed, performing at a level of "satisfactory" or above, and not
  be on a written warning at the time of the incentive payment. The Bank shall
  have the right to rescind and recoup or "clawback" incentive
  payments paid under this plan if the Compensation Committee concludes that
  such awards were paid out based on information that is later found to be
  materially incorrect, including payments that were determined, in whole or in
  part, on financial statement information that is subsequently restated.
#### In the Matter of Diwantie Seemangal, Petitioner, v New York State Office of Children and Family Services et al., Respondents.

[854 NYS2d 379]

Substantial evidence supports respondents’ findings that petitioner violated four Department of Social Services regulations covering the management and administration of group family day care homes (18 NYCRR 416.15 [a] [10] [refusal to cooperate and allow access to the home]; 416.8 [c] [2] [use of an unauthorized caregiver]; 416.15 [a] [4] [exceeding authorized capacity]; 416.4 [f] [nonapproved second egress]) and that such violations placed the health, safety and welfare of the children in imminent danger *(see 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights,*45 NY2d 176, 179-180 [1978]).

Petitioner’s due process rights were not violated by the issu*461anee of the report by a person who did not preside at the hearing. The regulations specifically require that the decision after fair hearing be made by the Commissioner or his or her designee and that it be based “exclusively on the record of the hearing” (18 NYCRR 413.5 [m]; *see Matter of Pluta v New York State Off. of Children & Family Servs.,*17 AD3d 1126, 1127 [2005], *lv denied*5 NY3d 715 [2005]).

The determination to revoke petitioner’s license does not shock the conscience *(see Matter of Featherstone v Franco,*95 NY2d 550, 554 [2000]; *Matter of Pell v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County,*34 NY2d 222, 232-234 [1974]).

We have considered petitioner’s remaining arguments and find them without merit. Concur—Friedman, J.P., Gonzalez, McGuire and Moskowitz, JJ.
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.
 Federal Maritime Commission
 Notice is hereby given that the following Ocean Transportation Intermediary licenses have been reissued by the Federal Maritime Commission pursuant to section 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984 (46 U.S.C. Chapter 409) and the regulations of the Commission pertaining to the licensing of Ocean Transportation Intermediaries, 46 CFR part 515. License No.
Name/address
Date reissued017712N
Awell Logistics Group, Inc., 655 John Muir Drive, #E421, San Francisco, CA 94132
May 6, 2009.004084N
Glory Express, Inc., 17420 S. Avalon Blvd., Suite 202, Carson, CA 90746
May 22, 2009.013172N
Yung Hoon Kim dba Conex International, 20695 So. Western Ave., Suite 136, Torrance, CA 90501
April 10, 2009.016706N
Inter-Trade Liner Shipping Co., Inc., 2111 W. Crescent Ave., Suite E,  Anaheim, CA 92801
June 5, 2009.018694N
Global Parcel System LLC, 8304 Northwest 30th Terrace, Miami, FL 33122
April 11, 2009.002355F
Pro-Service Forwarding Co., Inc., 901 W. Hillcrest Boulevard, Inglewood, CA 90301
March 6, 2009.021444N
J & V International Shipping Corp., 806 Arcadia Ave., Ste. 4, Arcadia, CA 91007
June 5, 2009.
 Sandra L. Kusumoto, Director, Bureau of Certification  and Licensing.


[FR Doc. E9-16104 Filed 7-7-09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
**EXHIBIT 32.2**
**Section 906 Principal Financial Officer Certification**
I, Peter Q. Repetti, Chief Financial Officer of Blackboard Inc. (“the Company”), do hereby certify,under the standards set forth in and solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:
1. The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year endedDecember 31, 2004 (the “Annual Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and
2. The information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.        Dated: March 1, 2005 /s/ PETER Q. REPETTI   Peter Q. Repetti                         Chief Financial Officer
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

IN RE: COPART, INC., COPART OF 

HOUSTON, INC., AND HOUSTON 

COPART SALVAGE AUTO 

AUCTIONS, LP,

 

 Relators.

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-18-00204-CV

AN ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

IN MANDAMUS

O R D E R

On April 12, 2019, the Court abated this original proceeding to give the Honorable Selena 

Solis an opportunity to reconsider the ruling of the former judge of the 243rd District Court of El 

Paso County. The District Clerk forwarded to this Court an order signed by Judge Solis on May 

28, 2019. Therefore, the above-styled and numbered cause is reinstated. In the event Relators 

wish to file an amended mandamus petition, it is due to be filed twenty-one days from the date of 

this order. Any response by the Real Party in Interest is due to be filed twenty-one days after the 

amended mandamus petition is filed with the Court. 

IT IS SO ORDERED this 5

th day of June, 2019.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez and Palafox, JJ.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5045 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5045

                     To restore State sovereignty.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 9, 2004

Mr. Culberson introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                     To restore State sovereignty.

    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 ``Restoration of State Sovereignty Act 
of 2004''.

SEC. 2. STATES TO RETAIN RIGHTS AND AUTHORITIES THEY DO NOT EXPRESSLY 
              WAIVE.

    (a) Retention of Rights and Authorities.--No officer, employee, or 
other authority of the Federal Government shall enforce against an 
authority of a State, nor shall any authority of a State have any 
obligation to obey, any requirement imposed as a condition of receiving 
Federal financial assistance under a grant program established under 
Federal law, nor shall such program operate within a State, unless the 
legislature of that State shall have by law expressly approved that 
program and, in doing so, have waived the State's rights and 
authorities to act inconsistently with any requirement that might be 
imposed by the Federal Government as a condition of receiving that 
assistance.
    (b) Definition of State Authority.--As used in this section, the 
term ``authority of a State'' includes any officer or employee of the 
State and any local government authority of the State.
    (c) Effective Date.--This section applies in each State beginning 
at the end of the first regular session of the legislature of that 
State that begins after the date of the enactment of this Act and shall 
continue to apply in subsequent years until otherwise provided by law.
                                 <all>
```
EX-10.3



 Exhibit 10.3 

December 6, 2012 
 Steve Filton 
 Senior Vice President & CFO 

UHS of Delaware, Inc. 
 367 South Gulph Road

 King of Prussia, PA 19406 
 Dear
Steve; 
 The Board of Trustees of Universal Health Realty Income Trust (“UHT”), at their December 6, 2012
meeting, authorized the renewal of the current Advisory Agreement between Universal Health Realty Income Trust and UHS of Delaware, Inc. (“Agreement”) upon substantially the same terms and conditions contained in the Agreement, except that
the annual advisory fee will be increased from .65 percent to .70 percent of the Average Invested Real Estate of UHT, as defined in the Agreement. 
 This letter constitutes Universal Health Realty Income Trust’s offer to renew the Agreement, through December 31, 2013, upon such terms and conditions approved at the December 6, 2012
meeting. 
 Please acknowledge UHS of Delaware, Inc.’s acceptance of this offer by signing in the space provided below and
returning one copy of this letter to me. Thank you. 
 Sincerely, 

/s/ Cheryl K. Ramagano 

Cheryl K. Ramagano 
 Vice President and Treasurer 
 Agreed and Accepted:

 UHS OF DELAWARE, INC. 

By: /s/ Steve Filton  
 Steve Filton 
 Senior Vice President and CFO 

cc: Charles Boyle
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NOS. WR-79,487-01 AND WR-79,487-02

EX PARTE ERMINIO ARROYOS, JR., Applicant

ON APPLICATIONS FOR WRITS OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NOS. W11627-1 AND W11713-1 IN THE 355TH DISTRICT COURT

FROM HOOD COUNTY

Per curiam.

O P I N I O N

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of possession of a

firearm by a felon and possession of a controlled substance, and sentenced to ninety-nine years’

imprisonment. The Second Court of Appeals affirmed his convictions. Arroyos v. State, Nos. 02-

1100135-CR and 02-11-00136-CR (Tex. App. – Fort Worth, May 3, 2012). 

Applicant contends that his appellate counsel rendered ineffective assistance because counsel

failed to timely notify Applicant that his conviction had been affirmed. We remanded this

application to the trial court for findings of fact and conclusions of law.
2

Appellate counsel filed an affidavit with the trial court. In addition, the trial court obtained

an affidavit from the custodian of records of the prison mail room on the unit where Applicant was

imprisoned during the applicable time period. Based on those affidavits, the trial court has entered

findings of fact and conclusions of law recommending that relief be granted. Ex parte Wilson, 956

S.W.2d 25 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997). 

We find, therefore, that Applicant is entitled to the opportunity to file an out-of-time petition

for discretionary review of the judgments of the Second Court of Appeals in Cause Nos. 02-11-

00135-CR and 02-11-00136-CR that affirmed his convictions in Cause Nos. W11627-1 and

W11713-1 from the 355th District Court of Hood County. Applicant shall file his petition for

discretionary review with this Court within 30 days of the date on which this Court’s mandate issues.

Delivered: September 11, 2013

Do not publish