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

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 25

Supporting efforts to promote greater awareness of the need for youth 

mentors and increased involvement with youth through mentoring. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 8, 2003

Mr. OSBORNE (for himself, Mr. KELLER, Ms. MCCOLLUM, Mrs. DAVIS of 

California, Mr. FORD, Mr. WAXMAN, Mr. BEREUTER, Mr. CARSON of 

Oklahoma, Mr. BAIRD, Mr. ETHERIDGE, and Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce 

RESOLUTION

Supporting efforts to promote greater awareness of the need 

for youth mentors and increased involvement with youth 

through mentoring.

Whereas mentors serve as role models, advocates, friends, 

and advisors to young people in need; 

Whereas numerous studies document that mentors help 

young people augment social skills, enhance emotional 

well-being, improve cognitive skills, and plan for the future; 

Whereas, for some children, having a caring adult mentor to 

turn to for guidance and encouragement can make the 

crucial difference between success and failure in life; 
2

•HRES 25 IH 

Whereas, 17.6 million young people, nearly half the youth 

population, want or need mentors to help them reach 

their full potential; 

Whereas there exists a large ‘‘mentoring gap’’ of unmet 

needs, with only 2.5 million youth in formal mentoring 

relationships, leaving 15 million young people still in need 

of mentors; 

Whereas the celebration of National Mentoring Month will institutionalize the Nation’s commitment to mentoring and 

raise awareness of mentoring in its various forms; 

Whereas a month-long focus on mentoring will tap into the 

vast pool of potential mentors and motivate adults to 

take action to help a young person; 

Whereas National Mentoring Month will encourage organizations of all kinds, including businesses, faith communities, government agencies, schools, and more, to engage 

their constituents in mentoring; 

Whereas the celebration of National Mentoring Month would 

above all encourage more people to volunteer as mentors, 

to the benefit of the Nation’s children; and 

Whereas on January 2, 2003, President George W. Bush 

signed a proclamation naming January 2003 as National 

Mentoring Month and called upon the people of the 

United States to recognize the importance of being role 

models for youth, to look for mentoring opportunities in 

their communities, and to celebrate this month with appropriate ceremonies, activities, and programs: Now, 

therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives—
3

•HRES 25 IH 

1 (1) commends those who give their time and 

2 talents to support mentoring programs; and 

3 (2) supports efforts to promote greater aware4 ness of the need for youth mentors and increased in5 volvement with youth through mentoring.

Æ
IB

Union Calendar No. 18

108TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 659

[Report No. 108–27]

To amend section 242 of the National Housing Act regarding the

requirements for mortgage insurance under such Act for hospitals.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 11, 2003

Mr. NEY (for himself, Ms. WATERS, and Mr. BAKER) introduced the following

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services

MARCH 6, 2003

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union

and ordered to be printed

A BILL

To amend section 242 of the National Housing Act regarding

the requirements for mortgage insurance under such Act

for hospitals.

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 ‘‘Hospital Mortgage In5 surance Act of 2003’’.
2

•HR 659 RH

1 SEC. 2. STANDARDS FOR DETERMINING NEED AND FEASI2 BILITY FOR HOSPITALS.

3 Paragraph (4) of section 242(d) of the National

4 Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715z–7) is amended to read as

5 follows:

6 ‘‘(4)(A) The Secretary shall require satisfactory evi7 dence that the hospital will be located in a State or polit8 ical subdivision of a State with reasonable minimum

9 standards of licensure and methods of operation for hos10 pitals and satisfactory assurance that such standards will

11 be applied and enforced with respect to the hospital.

12 ‘‘(B) The Secretary shall establish the means for de13 termining need and feasibility for the hospital. If the State

14 has an official procedure for determining need for hos15 pitals, the Secretary shall also require that such procedure

16 be followed before the application for insurance is sub17 mitted, and the application shall document that need has

18 also been established under that procedure.’’.

Union Calendar No. 18

108TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 659

[Report No. 108–27]

A BILL

To amend section 242 of the National Housing Act

regarding the requirements for mortgage insurance under such Act for hospitals.

MARCH 6, 2003

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the

State of the Union and ordered to be printed
#### PATHE INDUSTRIES, Inc. v. GENERAL FILM DISTRIBUTORS, Limited.

United States District Court S. D. New York.

June 6, 1953.

Morris Gutt, New York City, for plaintiff.

Phillips, Nizer, Benjamin *&*Krim, New York City, for witness, J. Arthur Rank Organization, Inc., Walter S. Beck, New York City, of counsel.

WEINFELD, District Judge.

The subpoena duces tecum served upon the corporate witness is too broad. Lack of identification of documents makes it difficult to predicate a finding of contempt for alleged failure to produce. While plaintiff in its efforts to establish that the defendant was doing business in this district is entitled to probe thoroughly into the facts, it will have to limit the subpoena to documents, agreements, letters, cables and other data which bear on that issue. The motion to punish for contempt is denied but the order to be entered hereon may contain a provision limiting the subpoena, as noted, and for the years 1950 and 1951.

Upon the continued examination plaintiff may inquire of the witness if there are in existence (other than those produced and marked as exhibits) agreements, documents, letters, cables and other data of the defendant or in anywise relating to its activities during the period in question, in the possession of, or under the control of, the corporate witness, and, if so, the date and a general description thereof sufficient for identification purposes. This general identification will enable plaintiff’s counsel to apply for appropriate relief under the Rules for the production or inspection of such documents in the event a dis*465pute exists as to whether they are relevant to the subject matter of the special issues a9 to which a preliminary trial has been ordered.

Settle order on notice.
#### Adalberto MEDRANORIOS, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 11-72183.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 19, 2012.*

Filed Dec. 28, 2012.

Adalberto Medrano-Rios, Las Vegas, NV, pro se.

Rachel Louise Browning, Trial, Kathryn L. Moore, Esquire, Trial, OIL, DOJ-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 **

Adalberto Medrano-Rios, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

In his opening brief, Medrano-Rios fails to raise, and therefore waives, any challenge to the BIA’s denial of his motion to reopen on the grounds that his notice argument was adjudicated in a prior BIA decision, that his motion to apply for cancellation of removal was untimely, and that cancellation of removal was not available to aliens in deportation proceedings. *See Rizk v. Holder,*629 F.3d 1083, 1091 n. 3 (9th Cir.2011) (a petitioner waives an issue by failing to raise it in the opening brief).

We lack jurisdiction to consider Medra-no-Rios’ contention that his attorney committed ineffective assistance of counsel, because Medrano-Rios failed to exhaust this claim before the BIA. *See Tijani v. Holder,*628 F.3d 1071, 1080 (9th Cir.2010) (“We lack jurisdiction to review legal claims not presented in an alien’s administrative proceedings before the BIA.”).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
balance sheet at March 31, 1999 and the statement of operations for the
three months ended March 31, 1999 and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                              JAN-1-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                       5,586,685
<SECURITIES>                                 1,001,754
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             7,088,903
<PP&E>                                       1,963,386
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,825,092
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,417,812
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,060,736
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        73,043
<OTHER-SE>                                     441,196
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,417,812
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                81,853
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               10,071,304
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 549
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (9,990,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (9,990,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (9,990,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (2.69)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.69)


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                       5,354,321
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                      12,285,052
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                25,000
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 18,875,202
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                    228,566,614
<ALLOWANCE>                                  2,773,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             278,733,207
<DEPOSITS>                                 174,361,238
<SHORT-TERM>                                61,738,568
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          1,891,611
<LONG-TERM>                                 17,708,111
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  1,999,980
<COMMON>                                     2,222,691
<OTHER-SE>                                  18,811,008
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             278,733,207
<INTEREST-LOAN>                             10,428,625
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              926,435
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               414,795
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                            11,769,855
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           3,785,093
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           6,197,032
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        5,572,823
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  390,163
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                             209,489
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              5,042,222
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,436,987
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     510,356
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   926,631
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.39
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.35
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                   4.214
<LOANS-NON>                                  2,945,000
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                               215,723
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                255,771
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             2,741,809
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  449,322
<RECOVERIES>                                    90,350
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            2,773,000
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           323,474
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                      2,449,526
        

</TABLE>
H. Res. 172

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

April 3, 2003.

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule

XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the

Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of

the bill (H.R. 1559) making emergency wartime supplemental

appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2003,

and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be

dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of

the bill are waived. General debate shall be confined to the

bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the

Committee on Appropriations. After general debate the bill

shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute

rule. Points of order against provisions in the bill for failure

to comply with clause 2 of rule XXI are waived. During consideration of the bill for amendment, the Chairman of the

Committee of the Whole may accord priority in recognition

on the basis of whether the Member offering an amendment
2

•HRES 172 EH

has caused it to be printed in the portion of the Congressional Record designated for that purpose in clause 8 of rule

XVIII. Amendments so printed shall be considered as read.

At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment

the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with

such amendments as may have been adopted. The previous

question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and

amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

Attest:

Clerk.
<PAGE>

Exhibit 23


         Consent of Independent Certified Public Accountants

The Trustees
Western Investment Real Estate Trust:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No. 
33-71270) on Form S-3/A, the registration statement (No. 33-27016) on 
Form S-8 and the registration statement (No. 33-60777) on Form S-8 of Western 
Investment Real Estate Trust of our report dated February 3, 1999, except for 
Note 17, which is as of March 1, 1999, relating to the consolidated balance 
sheets of Western Investment Real Estate Trust as of December 31, 1998 and 
1997, and the related consolidated statements of income, shareholders' equity 
and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 
31, 1998, and the related financial statement schedule, which report appears 
in the December 31, 1998, annual report on Form 10-K of Western Investment 
Real Estate Trust.

                                                                    KPMG LLP

San Francisco, California 
February 3, 1999


                                       67
No. 987.

#### Wilson *v.*United States.

See *ante,*p. 823.
----

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania        March 29, 2004
No. 982.

#### Wheat *v.*Texas Land & Mortgage Co., Ltd. et al.

May 6, 1946.

*John T. Barker*and *Frank P. Barker*for petitioner.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO
                                       TO
                       EMPLOYMENT AND CONSULTING AGREEMENT

     This Amendment Number Two to Employment and Consulting Agreement is entered
into as of this 19th day of  November,  1999  between Del Webb  Corporation,  an
Arizona corporation (the "Company") and Philip 1. Dion ("Employee").

                                    RECITALS

     The Company and Employee have  previously  entered into an  Employment  and
Consulting  Agreement dated as of July 10, 1996 which  Employment and Consulting
Agreement was amended by an Amendment  Number One to Employment  and  Consulting
Agreement dated March 9, 1999.

     The Company and Employee now desire by this Amendment Number Two to further
amend the Employment and Consulting Agreement as set forth below:

     NOW  THEREFORE,   Company  and  Employee  agree  that  the  Employment  and
Consulting Agreement is amended as follows:

     1.   Pursuant to Paragraph 4(b) of the Employment and Consulting Agreement,
          Employee is a Beneficiary under Company's  Deferred  Compensation Plan
          (the  "Plan").  Under  the terms of the  Plan,  Employee  will have an
          accrued benefit as of November 30, 1999 of $1,432,209. Employee hereby
          agrees to forfeit and -forego  one-half (1/2) of this benefit,  or the
          sum of $716,105, effective immediately, and in consideration therefor,
          the Company  agrees to pay the maximum sum of  $1,715,277  in five (5)
          equal annual  payments,  in accordance  with the terms of that certain
          Split-Dollar  Agreement  between Company and the Dion 1999 Irrevocable
          Trust went (the "Trust") of even date herewith, in the form of Exhibit
          "W' attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, with respect
          to the purchase of life insurance by the Trust on Employee's life.

     2.   Except as amended by this  Amendment  Number Two, the  Employment  and
          Consulting Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

     IN WITNESS  WHEREOF,  this  Amendment  Number Two has been  executed by the
parties as of the date first above written.

DEL WEBB CORPORATION

By: /s/ Robertson C. Jones              /s/ Philip J. Dion
    -------------------------------     ----------------------------------------
Its Sr. Vice President                  Philip J. Dion
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**Certification of Executive VicePresident and Chief Financial Officer**

**Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. of Section 1350,as Created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

The undersigned officerof Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certifies, to suchofficer’s knowledge, that:

 

(i)            the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q ofthe Company for the quarter ended March 31, 2006 (the “Report”) fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d),as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

(ii)           the information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 

 

Date:       May 10, 2006
| By:   | **/s/ Charles P. Slacik**                               |
|-----------------|---------------------------------------------------------|
|            | Charles P. Slacik                                       |
|            | Executive Vice President – Chief Financial Officer |
|            | (Principal Financial Officer)                           |

 

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany theReport pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, and is not being filed for purposesof Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and isnot to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whethermade before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporationlanguage in such filing.

 

----
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Michael Wilson, Appellant.

[853 NYS2d 773]

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, following a nonjury trial, of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (Penal Law § 265.02 [former (4)]). Contrary to the contention of defendant, Supreme Court properly refused to suppress the gun that he threw behind a couch as the police pursued him into the residence of an acquaintance. “[A] ‘defendant’s flight may be considered in conjunction with other attendant circumstances’ in determining whether reasonable suspicion justifying a seizure exists” *(People v Pines,*99 NY2d 525, 527 [2002], quoting *People v Martinez,*80 NY2d 444, 447-448 [1992]). Here, a police officer’s observation of a gun in defendant’s waistband in conjunction with defendant’s flight provided “reasonable suspicion that defendant may have been engaged in criminal activity justifying police pursuit” *(People v Cruz,*14 AD3d 730, 732 [2005], *lv denied*4 NY3d 852 [2005]). Defendant’s abandonment of the weapon during the *1225ensuing police pursuit provided the police with probable cause to arrest defendant *(see People v Wilson,*5 AD3d 408, 409 [2004], *lv denied*2 NY3d 809 [2004]).

We reject defendant’s further contention that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence *(see generally People v Bleakley,*69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). Finally, we reject the contention of defendant that the court erred in denying his pro se motion to set aside the verdict pursuant to CPL 330.30 without conducting a hearing. In seeking that relief, defendant contended that the People failed to produce *Brady*material and that he was denied the right to effective assistance of counsel based on defense counsel’s failure to seek discovery of that alleged *Brady*material. “[O]nly a claim of error that is properly preserved for appellate review will provide a basis to modify the verdict” *(People v Thomas,*242 AD2d 281 [1997], *lv denied*90 NY2d 1014 [1997]), and defendant’s contention with respect to the People’s failure to produce *Brady*material is not preserved for our review *(see People v Thomas,*8 AD3d 303 [2004], *lv denied*3 NY3d 682 [2004]). Defendant’s contention with respect to ineffective assistance of counsel involves matters outside the record on appeal, and thus the proper procedural vehicle for raising that claim is by way of a motion pursuant to CPL 440.10 *(see People v Johnson,*24 AD3d 1257 [2005], *lv denied*6 NY3d 814 [2006]). Present—Hurlbutt, J.P., Smith, Centra, Green and Gorski, JJ.