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

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3248 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                       Calendar No. 381
112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3248

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 16, 2012

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 
                        and Governmental Affairs

                             April 25, 2012

              Reported by Mr. Lieberman, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 112 South 5th Street in Saint Charles, Missouri, as the ``Lance 
            Corporal Drew W. Weaver Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. LANCE CORPORAL DREW W. WEAVER POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 112 South 5th Street in Saint Charles, Missouri, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Lance Corporal Drew W. Weaver Post Office 
Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Lance 
Corporal Drew W. Weaver Post Office Building''.
                                                       Calendar No. 381

112th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 3248

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 112 South 5th Street in Saint Charles, Missouri, as the ``Lance 
            Corporal Drew W. Weaver Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             April 25, 2012

                       Reported without amendment
```
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 186 (Wednesday, September 27, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 44879]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-20611]



========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents 
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed 
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published 
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents. 

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 186 / Wednesday, September 27, 2017 / 
Rules and Regulations

[[Page 44879]]



NATIONAL CAPITAL PLANNING COMMISSION

1 CFR Part 602


Freedom of Information Act Regulations; Correction

AGENCY: National Capital Planning Commission.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC or Commission) 
is correcting a final rule that appeared in the Federal Register on 
September 20, 2017. The document issued FOIA regulations with changes 
necessitated by the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016 (Pub. L. 114-185).

DATES: Effective October 20, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anne R. Schuyler, General Counsel and 
Chief FOIA Officer, 202-482-7223, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#33525d5d561d40505b464a5f5641735d5043501d545c45"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="26474848430855454e535f4a4354664845564508414950">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In FR Doc. 2017-19997 appearing on page 
44036 in the Federal Register on Wednesday, September 20, 2017, the 
following corrections are made:


Sec.  602.14   [Corrected]

0
1. On page 44043, in the second column, the section heading, ``Sec.  
602.15--Fee waiver requirements.'' is corrected to read ``Sec.  
602.14--Fee waiver requirements.''


0
2. On page 44043, in the second column, the first sentence of 602.14(a) 
which reads ``Records responsive to a Request shall be furnished 
without charge or at a reduced charge below that established under 
Sec.  602.14'' is corrected to read as follows: ``Records responsive to 
a Request shall be furnished without charge or at a reduced charge 
below that established under Sec.  602.13.''

    Dated September 21, 2017.
Anne R. Schuyler,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2017-20611 Filed 9-26-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7502-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
<PAGE>

                                    CONSENT

We have issued our report dated March 7, 1997, accompanying the financial 
statements of Innovus Corporation and Subsidiary incorporated by reference or 
included in the Annual Report of Innovus Corporation and Subsidiary on Form 
10-K for the year ended December 31, 1996.  We hereby consent to the 
incorporation by reference of said report in the Registration Statement of 
Innovus Corporation and Subsidiary on Form S-3 (File No. 333-16295 effective 
December 17, 1996).

                                       GRANT THORNTON LLP

Salt Lake City, Utah
April 11, 1997
V 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3281 

For the relief of Ayded Reyes Benitez. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 27, 2011 

Mr. FILNER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

For the relief of Ayded Reyes Benitez. 

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

3 SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR AYDED 

4 REYES BENITEZ. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding subsections (a) 

6 and (b) of section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality 

7 Act, Ayded Reyes Benitez shall be eligible for issuance of 

8 an immigrant visa or for adjustment of status to that of 

9 an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence upon 

10 filing an application for issuance of an immigrant visa 

11 under section 204 of such Act or for adjustment of status 

12 to lawful permanent resident. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3281 IH

1 (b) ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS.—If Ayded Reyes 

2 Benitez enters the United States before the filing deadline 

3 specified in subsection (c), she shall be considered to have 

4 entered and remained lawfully and shall, if otherwise eligi5 ble, be eligible for adjustment of status under section 245 

6 of the Immigration and Nationality Act as of the date of 

7 the enactment of this Act. 

8 (c) DEADLINE FOR APPLICATION AND PAYMENT OF

9 FEES.—Subsections (a) and (b) shall apply only if the ap10 plication for issuance of an immigrant visa or the applica11 tion for adjustment of status is filed with appropriate fees 

12 within 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

13 (d) REDUCTION OF IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBER.— 

14 Upon the granting of an immigrant visa or permanent res15 idence to Ayded Reyes Benitez, the Secretary of State 

16 shall instruct the proper officer to reduce by 1, during the 

17 current or next following fiscal year, the total number of 

18 immigrant visas that are made available to natives of the 

19 country of the alien’s birth under section 203(a) of the 

20 Immigration and Nationality Act or, if applicable, the 

21 total number of immigrant visas that are made available 

22 to natives of the country of the alien’s birth under section 

23 202(e) of such Act. 

24 (e) DENIAL OF PREFERENTIAL IMMIGRATION

25 TREATMENT FOR CERTAIN RELATIVES.—The natural 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 3281 IH

1 parents, brothers, and sisters of Ayded Reyes Benitez 

2 shall not, by virtue of such relationship, be accorded any 

3 right, privilege, or status under the Immigration and Na4 tionality Act. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-7380

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

GREGORY PETER HANSEN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg,

District Judge. (1:01-cr-00090-1; 1:06-cv-00220)

Submitted: December 14, 2006 Decided: December 20, 2006

Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gregory Peter Hansen, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, OFFICE

OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Gregory Peter Hansen seeks to appeal the district court’s

order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion.

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge

issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)

(2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any

assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is

debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by

the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell,

537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Hansen has not

made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
```

[United States Government Policy and Supporting Positions (Plum Book), 1996]
[Independent Agencies and Government Corporations]
[Japan-United States Friendship Commission]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

The Plum Book (United States Government Policy
        and Supporting Positions): 1996 EditionBRANCH: EXECUTIVEJAPAN-UNITED STATES FRIENDSHIP COMMISSIONLocationPosition TitleName of IncumbentPay PlanType of Appt.Level Grade or PayTenureExpiresWashington, DCExecutive DirectorEric J. GangloffESCA............................
```
CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF ALEXANDRIA

#### Commonwealth of Virginia v. Christie

May 14, 1986

Case No. M-7575

By JUDGE ALFRED D. SWERSKY

Defendant has moved to dismiss this case or in the alternative to suppress the result of an analysis of her breath based upon her request for counsel at the time of her arrest. The motion must be denied.

In *Coleman*v. Commonwealth, 212 Va. 684, 187 S.E.2d 172 (1972), a case similar on its facts to this one, the Supreme Court decided there was no constitutional right to consult an attorney prior to deciding whether to take a blood test. *See also Law*v. *City of*Danville, 212 Va. 702, 187 S.E.2d 197 (1972).
CIRCUIT COURT OF ARLINGTON COUNTY

#### Sarris et al. v. Arlington County Board et al.

April 6, 1982

Case No. (Chancery) 32297

By JUDGE CHARLES H. DUFF

I have carefully reviewed the authorities cited at able argument of the motions last week.

It is my opinion that certiorari will not lie to review a legislative act of the governing body of a county. In approving or denying a special exception to the zoning ordinance by way of a use permit, the defendant County Board clearly was discharging a legislative function. See in this connection *Byrum*v. *Orange*County, 217 Va. 37 (1976), *Bollinger*v. *Roanoke*County, 217 Va. 185 (1976), and *Civic Association*v. *Chesterfield County,*215 Va. 399 (1974).

Also, the West Virginia decision of *Garrison*v. *City of Fairmont,*145 S.E.2d 397, is apropos. The Court therein held that certiorari would not lie to review a purely legislative and not a judicial or quasi-judicial act. Thus, it is my opinion that certiorari is not the appropriate vehicle to test the propriety of the Board’s action as alleged in the Petition.

The petitioners will, however, be granted leave of fifteen days from this date to file an Amended Petition for a declaratory judgment if they be so advised.
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-23-00176-CV

MICHAEL NEUMAN, INDIVIDUALLY AND DERIVATIVELY ON BEHALF

OF ROCKPORT AREA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS, INC.

v.

KEITH HAMILTON, GEMMA ANTHONY, AND JENNIFER BRADSHAW, 

AS EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

OF THE ROCKPORT AREA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS, INC.

On Appeal from the

36th District Court of Aransas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 22-0279

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED. Costs of the appeal are adjudged 

against appellant.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

February 29, 2024
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3066 

To preserve the companionship services exemption for minimum wage and 

overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 23, 2011 

Mr. TERRY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To preserve the companionship services exemption for minimum wage and overtime pay under the Fair Labor 

Standards Act of 1938. 

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 ‘‘Companionship Ex5 emption Protection Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PRESERVATION OF THE COMPANIONSHIP SERVICES 

7 EXEMPTION. 

8 Paragraph (15) of section 13(a) of the Fair Labor 

9 Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 213(a)(15)) is amend10 ed— 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3066 IH

1 (1) by inserting ‘‘(including third party non2 medical in-home care such as companionship, light 

3 housekeeping, meal preparation, errands, assistance 

4 to appointments, laundry, medication reminders, 

5 bathing, and assistance with incontinence and 

6 grooming)’’ after ‘‘companionship services’’; and 

7 (2) by striking ‘‘(as such terms are defined and 

8 delimited by regulations of the Secretary)’’. 

Æ 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3008 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3008

    To amend title II of the Social Security Act to provide for the 
 reissuance of Social Security account numbers to children in cases in 
which the confidentiality of the number has been compromised by reason 
                               of theft.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 22, 2011

 Mr. Marchant introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend title II of the Social Security Act to provide for the 
 reissuance of Social Security account numbers to children in cases in 
which the confidentiality of the number has been compromised by reason 
                               of theft.

    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 ``Social Security Child Protection Act 
of 2011''.

SEC. 2. REISSUANCE OF SOCIAL SECURITY ACCOUNT NUMBERS TO YOUNG CHILDREN 
              IN CASES WHERE CONFIDENTIALITY HAS BEEN COMPROMISED BY 
              REASON OF THEFT.

    Section 205(c)(2)(B) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
405(c)(2)(B)) is amended--
            (1) by redesignating clause (iii) as clause (iv); and
            (2) by inserting after clause (ii) the following new 
        clause:
    ``(iii) In any case in which a Social Security account number has 
been issued to a child pursuant to subclause (IV) or (V) of clause (i) 
and it is demonstrated to the Commissioner of Social Security by a 
parent or guardian of the child that, in the course of transmission of 
documentation of such number to the child, the confidentiality of such 
number has been compromised by reason of theft of such documentation, 
the Commissioner shall issue a new Social Security account number to 
such child and make note in the records maintained with respect to such 
child of the pertinent information received by the Commissioner 
regarding the theft of the documentation of the original number.''.
                                 <all>
```
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3024 

To create a special class of H–2A workers who may be admitted to work 

as sheepherders or dairy workers, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 22, 2011 

Mr. HANNA (for himself and Ms. HOCHUL) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To create a special class of H–2A workers who may be 

admitted to work as sheepherders or dairy workers, 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, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Access to Agricultural 

5 Labor Act of 2011’’. 

6 SEC. 2. NONIMMIGRANT STATUS FOR DAIRY WORKERS AND 

7 SHEEPHERDERS. 

8 Section 101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(a) of the Immigration and 

9 Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(a)) is 

10 amended by inserting after ‘‘abandoning’’ the following: 


PWALKER on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3024 IH

1 ‘‘who is coming temporarily to the United States to per2 form agricultural labor or services as a sheepherder or 

3 dairy worker, or’’. 

4 SEC. 3. SPECIAL RULE FOR PERIOD OF ADMISSION OF H–2A 

5 NONIMMIGRANTS EMPLOYED AS SHEEP6 HERDERS OR DAIRY WORKERS. 

7 Section 218(h) of the Immigration and Nationality 

8 Act (8 U.S.C. 1188(h)) is amended by adding at the end 

9 of the following: 

10 ‘‘(3) In the case of an alien admitted as an H– 

11 2A worker for employment as a sheepherder of dairy 

12 worker— 

13 ‘‘(A) the initial period of admission shall 

14 be for a period of 3 years; 

15 ‘‘(B) the period of admission may be ex16 tended for additional periods of 3 years; and 

17 ‘‘(C) no period of absence from the United 

18 States may be required as a condition of ap19 proval of an extension under subparagraph 

20 (B).’’. 

Æ 


PWALKER on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### Maureen BRYANT, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK; Howard Bierman; Bierman, Geesing & Ward, LLC, Defendants—Appellees.

No. 08-1148.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: June 19, 2008.

Decided: June 23, 2008.

Maureen Bryant, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Robertson, Long & Neyhart, P.C., Blacksburg, Virginia, for Appellees.

*261Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Maureen Bryant appeals the district court’s order dismissing her civil action for breach of contract, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and conspiracy regarding foreclosure proceedings. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *Bryant v. Washington Mutual Bank,*524 F.Supp.2d 753 (W.D.Va.2007). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-1507

TIMOTHY LARRIMORE, Plaintiff - Appellant,

v. EXXON MOBIL OIL CORPORATION, Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at New Bern. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (7:06-cv-00008-FL)

Submitted: October 20, 2008 Decided: December 2, 2008

Before MICHAEL, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Timothy Larrimore, Appellant Pro Se. Alex John Hagan, ELLIS & WINTERS, LLP, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Timothy Larrimore appeals from the district court = s order imposing sanctions and a prefiling injunction. We review the imposition of a prefiling injunction for abuse of

discretion. Cromer v. Kraft Foods N. Am., Inc. , 390 F.3d 812, 817 (4th Cir. 2004). Federal courts may issue prefiling injunctions when vexatious conduct hinders the court from fulfilling its constitutional duty. Id. ; Procup v. Strickland , 792 F.2d 1069, 1073-74 (11th Cir. 1986) (en banc). Before enjoining the filing of further actions, however, the district court must afford the litigant notice and an opportunity to be

heard. Cromer , 390 F.3d at 819; In re Oliver , 682 F.2d 443, 446 (3d Cir. 1982). Here, the district court sua sponte issued the injunction. Because the court imposed the injunction without affording Larrimore an opportunity to be heard, we vacate the order and remand for further proceedings. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

VACATED AND REMANDED
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Roberto Ardila, Appellant.

[609 NYS2d 876]

—Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Chemung County (Danaher, Jr., J.), rendered September 29, 1992, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted promoting prison contraband in the first degree.

We initially reject defendant’s contentions with respect to the plea proceedings. As requested, an interpreter was present during these proceedings who was to be used, as defendant agreed, only to translate when defendant had difficulty in understanding what was happening. At no point during his plea, however, did defendant indicate that he needed assistance and, in fact, he specifically stated that he understood everything. We also find no evidence of a conflict of interest involving defendant’s attorney. Finally, as a second felony offender, defendant received the most lenient sentence authorized by statute. Any remaining contentions have been considered and found lacking in merit.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, White, Weiss and Casey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.