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

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 576 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 576

To provide for the transfer to the Secretary of Energy of title to, and 
 full responsibility for the possession, transportation, and disposal 
  of, radioactive waste associated with the West Valley Demonstration 
                    Project, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 5, 2003

Mr. Houghton (for himself, Mr. Quinn, and Mr. Reynolds) introduced the 
   following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                                Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide for the transfer to the Secretary of Energy of title to, and 
 full responsibility for the possession, transportation, and disposal 
  of, radioactive waste associated with the West Valley Demonstration 
                    Project, 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. TRANSFER.

     Not later than September 30, 2004, in exchange for payment to the 
United States of all amounts held by the New York State Energy Research 
and Development Authority for the maintenance of radioactive waste 
solidified under the West Valley Demonstration Project and referred to 
in section 3.05(b) of the cooperative agreement entered into under 
section 2(b)(4) of the West Valley Demonstration Project Act, title to, 
and full responsibility for the possession, transportation, disposal, 
stewardship, maintenance, and monitoring of, all radioactive waste at 
the Western New York Service Center in West Valley, New York, other 
than the waste disposed of in the State-licensed disposal area, shall 
transfer to the Secretary of Energy.
                                 <all>
```
#### Samuel Weber, Jr., et al., Respondents, v Ryder TRS, Inc., et al., Appellants.

[854 NYS2d 480]

*866A party must provide duly executed and acknowledged written authorizations for the release of pertinent medical records when that party has waived the physician-patient privilege by affirmatively putting his or her physical or mental condition in issue *(see*CPLR 3121 [a]; *Dillenbeck v Hess,*73 NY2d 278 [1989]; *Cynthia B. v New Rochelle Hosp. Med. Ctr.,*60 NY2d 452, 456-457 [1983]; *Diamond v Ross Orthopedic Group, P.C.,*41 AD3d 768 [2007]), and CPLR 3101 (a) requires full disclosure of all evidence material and necessary to the prosecution or defense of an action, regardless of the burden of proof *(see Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co.,*21 NY2d 403 [1968]). Here, information as to the nature and severity of the injured plaintiffs previous right shoulder injury and right shoulder surgery are material and necessary to the issue of damages, if any, recoverable for a claimed loss of enjoyment of life due to the current injuries sustained by him in the subject motor vehicle accident *(see Diamond v Ross Orthopedic Group, P.C.,*41 AD3d at 769; *Vanalst v City of New York,*276 AD2d 789 [2000]). Accordingly, that branch of the defendants’ motion which was to compel the plaintiff Samuel Weber, Jr., to provide authorizations for the release of his medical records pertaining to a prior right shoulder injury and surgery should have been granted. Spolzino, J.P., Ritter, Dillon, Balkin and Leventhal, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32.2



                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


Solely for the purposes of complying  with 18 U.S.C.  Section  1350,  as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, I, the  undersigned
Chief  Financial  Officer  of  Speaking  Roses   International,   Inc.,  a  Utah
corporation (the  "Company"),  hereby certify,  based on my knowledge,  that the
Quarterly  Report on Form  10-QSB of the  Company  for the  three  months  ended
September  30, 2004 (the  "Report")  fully  complies  with the  requirements  of
Section  13(a) of the  Securities  Exchange  Act of 1934  and  that  information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.

By  /s/ Dan Mumford
----------------------------------
Dan Mumford,
Acting Chief Financial Officer

November 17, 2004
#### Suset Danitza MARTINEZ, a.k.a. Suset Danitza Hernandez, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 10-73812.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 19, 2012.*

Filed Dec. 21, 2012.

Jose A. Bracamonte, Law Offices of Jose A. Bracamonte, P.C., Phoenix, AZ, for Petitioner.

Oil, Don George Scroggin, Esquire, Trial, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Suset Danitza Martinez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s removal order. We dismiss the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s discretionary determination that Martinez did not merit special rule cancellation of removal for battered spouses. *See*8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i).

Martinez’s contention that the agency violated due process by unilaterally vacating her last scheduled hearing and improperly relying on her Form 1-213, Record of Deportable/Inadmissible Alien, are not supported by the record and do not amount to colorable constitutional claims that would restore our jurisdiction. *See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales,*424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.2005).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
#### Chris Karanikas, Appellant, v New York City Transit Authority, Respondent.

[823 NYS2d 13]

*452Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert D. Lippmann, J.), entered August 23, 2005, which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The Transit Authority is not liable in negligence for a traveler’s injuries sustained in a fall on a slippery entranceway step due to an icy condition caused during an ongoing storm, or for a reasonable time thereafter *(Solazzo v New York City Tr. Auth.,*6 NY3d 734 [2005]). To the extent plaintiffs negligence claim is premised on an alleged defect in one of the steps, plaintiff failed to adduce evidence that the Transit Authority had actual or constructive notice of the alleged defect *(Gordon v American Museum of Natural History,*67 NY2d 836 [1986]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Sullivan, McGuire and Malone, JJ.
HOUSEHOLD DATA

ANNUAL AVERAGES

34. Unemployed jobseekers by sex, reason for unemployment, and active jobsearch methods used

Sex and reason

2005

Thousands of

persons Methods used as a percent of total jobseekers

Average

number

of

methods

used

Total

unemployed

Total

jobseekers

Employer

directly

Sent out

resumes

or filled

out

applications

Placed

or

answered

ads

Friends

or

relatives

Public

employment

agency

Private

employment

agency

Other

 Total, 16 years and over ......................................................... 7,591 6,657 60.6 55.4 14.8 17.7 18.3 6.7 11.1 1.85

Job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs 1 ........ 3,667 2,734 63.1 54.2 17.6 20.1 23.2 9.0 12.9 2.01

Job leavers ............................................................................... 872 872 62.9 56.6 16.6 16.6 19.4 6.9 10.9 1.90

Reentrants ................................................................................ 2,386 2,386 57.8 55.9 12.8 15.9 14.7 5.0 10.7 1.73

New entrants ............................................................................ 666 666 57.4 56.2 8.5 15.3 10.2 3.0 6.0 1.57

 Men, 16 years and over .......................................................... 4,059 3,467 61.4 53.2 14.7 19.4 18.4 6.8 11.6 1.86

Job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs 1 ........ 2,188 1,596 63.8 51.5 17.5 21.9 22.1 8.9 13.5 2.00

Job leavers ............................................................................... 445 445 65.0 54.8 16.6 17.8 19.5 6.7 11.2 1.92

Reentrants ................................................................................ 1,067 1,067 58.5 53.9 11.8 17.1 14.6 4.9 11.0 1.73

New entrants ............................................................................ 359 359 55.2 56.8 8.3 16.7 11.2 2.7 5.5 1.57

 Women, 16 years and over .................................................... 3,531 3,190 59.8 57.7 15.0 15.8 18.3 6.6 10.6 1.84

Job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs 1 ........ 1,479 1,138 62.2 58.1 17.9 17.6 24.6 9.0 11.9 2.02

Job leavers ............................................................................... 427 427 60.6 58.5 16.5 15.4 19.2 7.2 10.7 1.89

Reentrants ................................................................................ 1,319 1,319 57.3 57.6 13.5 14.9 14.8 5.2 10.4 1.74

New entrants ............................................................................ 306 306 60.0 55.5 8.7 13.6 9.0 3.2 6.5 1.57

1 Data on the number of jobseekers and the jobsearch methods used exclude

persons on temporary layoff.

 NOTE: The jobseekers total is less than the total unemployed because it does

not include persons on temporary layoff. The percent using each method will

always total more than 100 because many jobseekers use more than one method.

Beginning in January 2005, data reflect revised population controls used in the

household survey.

253
II 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5008

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 14, 2004

Received 

AN ACT

To provide an additional temporary extension of programs 

under the Small Business Act and the Small Business 

Investment Act of 1958 through September 30, 2004, 

and for other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

HR 5008 RDS 

1 SECTION 1. ADDITIONAL TEMPORARY EXTENSION OF PRO2 GRAMS UNDER SMALL BUSINESS ACT AND 

3 SMALL BUSINESS INVESTMENT ACT OF 1958. 

4 The authorization for any program, authority, or pro5 vision, including any pilot program, that was extended 

6 through June 4, 2004, by section 1 of Public Law 108–

7 217 is further extended through September 30, 2004, 

8 under the same terms and conditions. 

9 SEC. 2. TECHNICAL AMENDMENT. 

10 Section 2 of Public Law 108–205 is amended by 

11 striking ‘‘October 1, 2003’’ and inserting ‘‘March 15, 

12 2004’’. The amendment made by the preceding sentence 

13 shall take effect as if included in the enactment of the 

14 section to which it relates. 

15 SEC. 3. COMPENSATION OF AGENTS. 

16 Section 5 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 634) 

17 is amended—

18 (1) in subsection (g)(4), by adding at the end 

19 the following: 

20 ‘‘(C) The Administration may contract 

21 with an agent to carry out, on behalf of the Ad22 ministration, the assessment and collection of 

23 the annual fee established under section 

24 7(a)(23). The agent may receive, as compensa25 tion for services, any interest earned on the fee 

26 while in the control of the agent before the time 
3

HR 5008 RDS 

1 at which the agent is contractually required to 

2 remit the fee to the Administration.’’; and 

3 (2) in subsection (h)—

4 (A) by redesignating paragraph (2) as 

5 paragraph (3); and 

6 (B) by inserting after paragraph (1) the 

7 following: 

8 ‘‘(2) The agent described in paragraph (1)(B) 

9 may be compensated through any of the fees as10 sessed under this section and any interest earned on 

11 any funds collected by the agent while such funds 

12 are in the control of the agent and before the time 

13 at which the agent is contractually required to trans14 fer such funds to the Administration or to the hold15 ers of the trust certificates, as appropriate.’’.

Passed the House of Representatives September 13, 

2004. 

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL, 

Clerk.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, : Crim. No. 11-212 (FSH)

v. : O R D E R

NICHOLAS CORDERO :

Defendant. :

This matter having come before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of the United

States Magistrate Judge filed in this matter, which was submitted as a result of this Court having

referred this cause to the Magistrate Judge for the purpose of conducting a plea proceeding under

Fed. R. Crim. P. 11; and the defendant having consented to the Magistrate Judge conducting the

guilty plea proceeding; and the Court having reviewed the Report and Recommendation, as well as

the transcript of the proceedings on April 4, 2011 and there being no objection to the Report and

Recommendation timely filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b); and the Court finding the Report and

Recommendation is neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law; and the Court hereby finding that

the Report and Recommendation should be approved and adopted and the defendant’s guilty plea

accepted,

IT IS ON THIS 4 day of May, 2011, th

ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge is

approved and adopted; and

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defendant’s guilty plea is accepted and a judgment

of guilt to Count One of the Information shall be entered. 

 s/ Faith S. Hochberg 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:11-cr-00212-GEB Document 20 Filed 05/04/11 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 43
#### In the Matter of Peter Caltagirone et al., Appellants, v Zoning Board of Appeals et al., Respondents.

[852 NYS2d 850]

A person whose interest may be adversely affected by a potential judgment must be made a party in a CPLR article 78 proceeding *(see*CPLR 1001 [a]; *Matter of Martin v Ronan,*47 NY2d 486, 490 [1979]; *Matter of Cybul v Village of Scarsdale,*17 AD3d 462, 463 [2005]; *cf. Matter of Red Hook/Gowanus Chamber of Commerce v New York City Bd. of Stds. & Appeals,*49 AD3d 749 [2008] [decided herewith]). Here, the Supreme Court, after correctly balancing the factors articulated in CPLR 1001 (b) *(see Matter of Red Hook/Gowanus Chamber of Commerce v New York City Bd. of Stds. & Appeals,*5 NY3d 452 [2005]), properly dismissed the proceeding for failure to timely join the landowners as necessary parties *(see Matter of Cybul v Village of Scarsdale,*17 AD3d 462, 463 [2005]; *Matter of East Bayside Homeowners Assn., Inc. v Chin,*12 AD3d 370, 371 [2004]; *Matter of Ferruggia v Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Town of Warwick,*5 AD3d 682 [2004]; *Matter of Long Is. Pine Barrens Socy. v Town of Islip,*286 AD2d 683 [2001]; *Matter of Karmel v White Plains Common Council,*284 AD2d 464, 465 [2001]).

The petitioners’ remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review, without merit, or need not be reached in light of our determination. Skelos, J.P., Santucci and Garni, JJ., concur.

Lifson, J.

(concurring and voting to affirm the judgment with the following memorandum): I join in the determination of my *730colleagues to affirm the judgment appealed from. Under the circumstances presented herein, I can discern no basis to conclude that the Supreme Court either abused or improvidently exercised its discretion in determining that the proceeding could not continue in the absence of a necessary and indispensable parties, to wit, the owners of the land benefitting from the grant of the variance under attack. The Supreme Court gave due deference and properly weighed the factors set forth in CPLR 1001 (b) *(cf. Matter of Red Hook/Gowanus Chamber of Commerce v New York City Bd. of Stds. & Appeals,*49 AD3d 749 [2008] [decided herewith]).
EX-10.10


 Exhibit 10.10 
 AMENDMENT TO THE HANCOCK HOLDING COMPANY 
 NONQUALIFIED DEFERRED
COMPENSATION PLAN 
 Whereas, Hancock Holding Company maintains the Hancock Holding Company Nonqualified Deferred
Compensation Plan (the “plan”); and 
 Whereas, the Board of Directors of Hancock Holding Company has the
authority to amend the plan pursuant to Section 11; 
 Now, therefore, effective as of the execution date below, the
plan is amended as follows: 
 The first paragraph of Section 3.6(b) shall be amended as restated as set forth below:

 b. Acceleration Events. Notwithstanding the provisions of subparagraph a hereof, if a Participant dies or becomes
Disabled while employed by the Employer, such Participant’s Company Contribution Account, Company Restoration Matching Account and Supplemental Contribution Account shall be fully vested and nonforfeitable. 

This amendment was approved by the Board of Directors and was executed the 18th day of August, 2009. 

 

	
	Hancock Holding Company
	
	 
	By:
	Its:
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 11

                                   EXHIBIT 11

                  STATEMENT RE:  COMPUTATION OF LOSS PER SHARE
                     (in thousands, except for share data)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                           FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED
                                                                                   MARCH 31,
                                                                     --------------------------------------
                                                                             1998                 1997
                                                                             ----                 ----
NUMERATOR:
<S>                                                                  <C>                 <C>
   Net loss before preferred stock dividends                               $    (7,785)        $    (4,997)
   Preferred stock dividends                                                      (807)                  -
                                                                           -----------         -----------

NUMERATOR FOR BASIC EPS - LOSS APPLICABLE TO COMMON SHAREHOLDERS                (8,592)             (4,997)
                                                                           -----------         -----------

   EFFECT OF DILUTIVE SECURITIES                                                     -                   -
                                                                           -----------         -----------

   NUMERATOR FOR DILUTED EPS - LOSS APPLICABLE TO COMMON                           (8,592)          (4,997)
   SHAREHOLDERS                                                            -----------         -----------
 
 
DENOMINATOR:

   Denominator for basic EPS - weighted average shares                      10,560,111          10,370,907

EFFECT OF DILUTIVE SECURITIES                                                        -                   -
                                                                           -----------         -----------

   Denominator for diluted EPS - adjusted weighted average shares           10,560,111          10,370,907
                                                                           ===========         ===========

BASIC LOSS PER SHARE                                                       $     (0.81)        $     (0.48)
                                                                           ===========         ===========

DILUTED LOSS PER SHARE                                                     $     (0.81)        $     (0.48)
                                                                           ===========         ===========
</TABLE>
HOUSEHOLD DATA

ANNUAL AVERAGES

30. Unemployed total and full-time workers by duration of unemployment

[Numbers in thousands]

Duration of unemployment

Total Full-time workers

Unemployed Percent distribution Unemployed Percent distribution

2016 2017 2016 2017 2016 2017 2016 2017

Total unemployed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,751 6,982 100.0 100.0 6,345 5,649 100.0 100.0

Less than 5 weeks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,362 2,270 30.5 32.5 1,723 1,643 27.2 29.1

5 to 14 weeks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,226 2,008 28.7 28.8 1,819 1,632 28.7 28.9

5 to 10 weeks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,489 1,350 19.2 19.3 1,196 1,083 18.9 19.2

11 to 14 weeks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 737 657 9.5 9.4 623 548 9.8 9.7

15 weeks and over. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,163 2,704 40.8 38.7 2,803 2,374 44.2 42.0

15 to 26 weeks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,158 1,017 14.9 14.6 1,002 884 15.8 15.7

27 weeks and over. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,005 1,687 25.9 24.2 1,801 1,490 28.4 26.4

27 to 51 weeks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 681 632 8.8 9.1 613 568 9.7 10.1

52 weeks and over. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,323 1,055 17.1 15.1 1,188 921 18.7 16.3

Average (mean) duration, in weeks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27.5 25.0 – – 29.7 26.7 – –

Median duration, in weeks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.6 10.0 – – 12.1 11.2 – –

NOTE: Full-time workers are unemployed persons looking for full-time work (35 hours or more per week) or on layoff from full-time jobs. Updated population controls are

introduced annually with the release of January data. Dash indicates no data or data that do not meet publication criteria (values not shown where base is less than

35,000).

1
$200

$400

$600

$800

$1,000

$1,200

1979 1982 1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006

$200

$400

$600

$800

$1,000

$1,200

Chart 2-6. Real median weekly earnings for college 

graduates have trended up over time

Less than a high school diploma

High school graduates, no college

Some college or associate degree

Bachelor's degree and higher 

Median weekly earnings of full-time workers (In constant 2006 dollars)

NOTE: Median weekly earnings of full-time wage and salary workers 25 years and older. Earnings data have been adjusted using 

the CPI-U-RS research series as of April 2007. Beginning in 1992, data are based on highest diploma or degree received; prior to 

1992, data were based on years of school completed.

SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics 

Chart 2-6. Real median weekly earnings for college 

graduates have trended up over time

• Only college graduates have experienced growth in real median weekly 

earnings since 1979. In contrast, high school dropouts have seen their real 

median weekly earnings decline by about 22 percent.

• Real earnings for high school graduates and for persons with some college or 

an associate degree were little changed over the 1979-2006 period.

• For most workers, real earnings have been relatively flat since 1998.