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

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3216 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to establish an ophthalmologic service 

and Director of Ophthalmologic Services in the Veterans Health Administration of the Department of Veterans Affairs. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 14, 2011 

Mr. BENISHEK (for himself and Mr. BILIRAKIS) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to establish an 

ophthalmologic service and Director of Ophthalmologic 

Services in the Veterans Health Administration of the 

Department 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 ‘‘VHA Ophthalmologic 

5 Service Establishment Act of 2011’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 Congress finds the following: 


PWALKER on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3216 IH

1 (1) Ocular injuries during war have steadily in2 creased from 2 percent in the Civil War to 16 per3 cent in Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation 

4 Iraqi Freedom. 

5 (2) The Department of Veterans Affairs has re6 ported 46,000 eye trauma injuries, including mild, 

7 moderate, and severe cases, as of December 2010. 

8 (3) Large numbers of returning veterans suffer 

9 from visual symptoms associated with traumatic 

10 brain injury; in fact, approximately 60 to 70 percent 

11 of severe and moderate traumatic brain injury cases 

12 and 40 percent of mild traumatic brain injury cases 

13 include some form of visual impairment. 

14 (4) The demand and complexity of eye-care 

15 services within the Veterans Health Administration 

16 of the Department of Veterans Affairs has increased 

17 significantly in recent years. 

18 (5) The number of veterans over age 85 is pro19 jected to increase by 173 percent by 2020, and as 

20 the veteran population served by the Department of 

21 Veteran Affairs ages, the demand for eye care is ex22 pected to double, increasing the demand for eye care 

23 services. 


PWALKER on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 3216 IH

1 SEC. 3. ESTABLISHMENT OF OPHTHALMOLOGIC SERVICE 

2 IN VETERANS HEALTH ADMINISTRATION. 

3 (a) ESTABLISHMENT OF OPHTHALMOLOGIC SERV4 ICE.—Section 7305 of title 38, United States Code, is 

5 amended— 

6 (1) by redesignating paragraphs (6) and (7) as 

7 paragraphs (7) and (8), respectively; and 

8 (2) by inserting after paragraph (5) the fol9 lowing new paragraph: 

10 ‘‘(6) An Ophthalmologic Service.’’. 

11 (b) DIRECTOR.—Paragraph (6) of section 7306(a) of 

12 such title is amended by inserting ‘‘a Director of Ophthal13 mologic Service,’’ after ‘‘Podiatric Service,’’. 

14 (c) IMPLEMENTATION.—The Secretary of Veterans 

15 Affairs shall ensure that an individual is serving as the 

16 Director of Ophthalmologic Service under section 

17 7306(a)(6) of such title, as amended by subsection (b), 

18 by not later than the date that is 120 days after the date 

19 of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


PWALKER on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>




<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL  INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE AUDITED
FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS  FOR THE  FISCAL  YEAR ENDED  NOVEMBER  30,  1998,  AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          NOV-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-1998
<CASH>                                              44
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    44
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      44
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,963
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           241
<OTHER-SE>                                    (10,160)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        44
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                14,807
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (14,807)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (14,807)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (14,807)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.01)





</TABLE>
EX-10.19(c)



 Exhibit 10.19(c) 

AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO EXCLUSIVE LICENSE AGREEMENT 

THIS Amendment No.2 to Exclusive License Agreement (“Amendment 2”) is made and entered into this 17th day of November 2014
(“Effective Date of Amendment 2”), by and between the Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research (“Mayo”) having its principal place of business at 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN 55905, and Cenexys, Inc., a Delaware
corporation, having a place of business at 1700 Owen Street, Suite 535 San Francisco, CA 94158 (“Company”), for purposes of confirming the parties’ intent and agreement as set forth herein. 

BACKGROUND 
 Mayo and Company are
parties to an Exclusive License Agreement, with an effective date of the 28th day of June, 2013 (“Agreement”), which confirms the parties’ intent and agreement to grant an exclusive
license to Mayo’s certain patent rights and a nonexclusive license to certain know-how along with the first Amendment to the Agreement. Mayo and Company wish to amend the Agreement as set forth in this
Amendment No. 2, and, accordingly, Mayo and Company agree as follows: 
 AMENDED TERMS 

The first clause of Section 3.1 which reads: 

“In consideration for the rights and licenses granted by Mayo to Company herein and the research development support agreed to by Mayo
under Section 3.11,” 
 is hereby amended to read as follows: 

“As partial consideration for the rights and licenses granted by Mayo to Company herein as of the end of the IP Capture Period,”

 All other terms of the Agreement and the first Amendment shall remain in full force and effect for the term of the Agreement and as set
forth in the Agreement. 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Mayo and Company hereby enter into this Amendment No. 2, effective as of the date first set forth above.

  

													
	Cenexys, Inc.	 		 	 Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research

						
	 By:
	 	 /s/ Nathaniel E. David
	 		 		 	 By:
	 	 /s/ James A. Rogers, III

		 	Nathaniel E. David, Ph.D.	 		 		 		 	 James A. Rogers, III

		 	CEO	 		 		 		 	Assistant Secretary
IIB 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3276 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 29, 2012 

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

Governmental Affairs 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 2810 East Hillsborough Avenue in Tampa, 

Florida, as the ‘‘Reverend Abe Brown Post Office Building’’. 

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


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 3276 RFS

1 SECTION 1. REVEREND ABE BROWN POST OFFICE BUILD2 ING. 

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

4 Postal Service located at 2810 East Hillsborough Avenue 

5 in Tampa, Florida, shall be known and designated as the 

6 ‘‘Reverend Abe Brown Post Office Building’’. 

7 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg8 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

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

10 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Reverend Abe Brown 

11 Post Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives June 28, 2012. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
NO. 12-23-00150-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

PHYLLIS MARTIN, 

APPELLANT

V.

MARVIN STROMBERG, DDS AND 

LAKE VIEW DENTAL CENTER,

APPELLEES

§

§

§

APPEAL FROM THE 402ND 

DISTRICT COURT

WOOD COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

Appellant, Phyllis Martin, filed an unopposed motion to dismiss this appeal. The motion 

states that the parties reached a mutual agreement. Accordingly, the motion to dismiss is 

granted, and the appeal is dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a). Costs are taxed against the 

party incurring same.

Opinion delivered June 30, 2023.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.
COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT

JUNE 30, 2023

NO. 12-23-00150-CV

PHYLLIS MARTIN,

Appellant

V.

MARVIN STROMBERG, DDS AND LAKE VIEW DENTAL CENTER,

Appellees

Appeal from the 402nd District Court

of Wood County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 2019-292)

THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the unopposed motion of the Appellant to dismiss 

the appeal herein, and the same being considered, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED and 

DECREED by this Court that the motion to dismiss be granted and the appeal be dismissed, and 

that the decision be certified to the court below for observance. Costs are taxed against the party 

incurring same.

By per curiam opinion.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J
Exhibit 4.100





 


Confirmation Letter


 


To:500WAN HK Limited (“500WAN
HK”)


 


Whereas:


 


500WAN HK is the sole shareholder of E-Sun
Sky Computer (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. (“E-Sun Sky Computer”) and holds 100% of the equity interest in E-Sun Sky Computer;


 


E-Sun Sky Computer accepted a Power
of Attorney respectively from Yu Bo (Chinese Identification No.: 420106196805034857) on July 3, 2017 and Zhang Han(Chinese Identification
No.: 422802198708030014) on July 3, 2017 (collectively referred to as the “POA”). Pursuant to the POA,
Yu Bo and Zhang Han respectively delegate and authorize E-Sun Sky Computer to exercise their voting powers and all other
shareholder rights in respect of Shenzhen E-Sun Network Co., Ltd on their behalf (the “Rights”).


 


Now therefore, with respect to the exercise
of the Rights, E-Sun Sky Computer hereby confirms as follows:


 


		1、	E-Sun Sky
Computer hereby confirms that, in exercising the Rights under the POA, it shall obtain the consent from 500WAN
HK in the manner allowed by the PRC Laws.



 


		2、	E-Sun Sky Computer
further confirms that it shall exercise the Rights in accordance with the instructions from the third party designated
by 500WAN HK within the scope allowed by the PRC Laws.



 


		3、	This confirmation
letter shall become effective upon execution, and maintain effective unless the POA is terminated in accordance with the
provisions thereof.



 


		4、	The execution, effectiveness,
construction, performance, amendment and termination of this confirmation letter and the resolution of disputes hereunder shall
be governed by PRC Laws.



 


		5、	This confirmation
letter is written in both Chinese and English language; in case there is any conflict between the Chinese version and the English
version, the Chinese version shall prevail.



 


【Signature
Page Follows】


 


	E-Sun Sky Computer (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd 	 
	 	 
	By:	/s/ Yu Bo	 
	Name:	Yu Bo	 
	Title:	Legal Representative	 
	Date:	2017.7.3
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-7174

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ISAAC J. PEAR, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Solomon Blatt, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CR-92-445, CA-98-1245-2-8) Submitted: February 29, 2000 Decided: August 30, 2000 Before WILKINS and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Isaac J. Pear, Appellant Pro Se. Bruce Howe Hendricks, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:Isaac J. Pear seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 1999). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. Pear failed to show that he was entitled to relief as a result of his counsel’s performance. See Strickland v. Washington , 466 U.S. 668, 686 (1984); Hill v. Lockhart , 474 U.S. 52, 59 (1985). Even assuming there was error in the Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 hearing, such error was harmless. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(h). Finally, the district court did not err in declining to force the Government to file a Fed. R. Crim. P. 35 motion on Pear’s behalf. We dispense with oral argument and deny Pear’s motion for the appointment of counsel at the Government’sexpense because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA F OURTH D ISTRICT

MICHAEL DAVED KASE , Appellant,

v.

JENNIFER DUTRA
, Appellee

.

No. 4D 18

- 3194

[ April 3, 2019 ]

Appeal of a non

- final order from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County ; Catherine M. Brunson, Judge; L.T. Case No. 50

- 2017

- DR

- 010475

- XXX

- MB

. Kathleen A. Daly of the Law Office of Kathleen A. Daly, P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Shenna Stevens of Florida Rural Legal Services, Inc., Riviera Beach, for appe llee.

P ER C URIAM

. Affirmed . See Moriarty v. Moriarty , 192 So. 3d 680 (Fla. 4 th DCA 2016).

T

AYLOR , D AMOORGIAN and C ONNER , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Balance Sheet at December 31, 1999 and the Statement of Operations for
the Year Ended December 31, 1999 and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          35,345
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  120,934
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               156,279
<PP&E>                                       4,413,783
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,055,706
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 514,356
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               72
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     514,284
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   514,386
<SALES>                                        734,011
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               735,235
<CGS>                                          484,476
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  484,476
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               107,072
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                143,687
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            143,687
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   143,687
<EPS-BASIC>                                      11.60
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    11.60


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

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM AUDITED
BALANCE SHEET AND INCOME STATEMENT AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         115,222
<SECURITIES>                                    54,706
<RECEIVABLES>                                   53,387
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               237,663
<PP&E>                                          27,090
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 422,894
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           85,149
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             8
<OTHER-SE>                                     337,737
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   337,745
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               228,567
<CGS>                                           31,777
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  225,576
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  8,439
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,753
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,704
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.03



</TABLE>
Contract
for Electronic System Development


 


Project:
Development of CBM System for HIEMS-DF Engine


Price:
234,000,000 WON


Period:
March 1st 2017 ~ January 31st 2019 (23 Months)


Payment
Terms


 


	Deposit	 	When Contracted	 	₩	66,000,000	 	 	 	28	%
	First Middle Payment	 	2017 September	 	₩	75,000,000	 	 	 	32	%
	2nd Middle Payment	 	2018 April	 	₩	69,750,000	 	 	 	30	%
	Rest	 	2019 January	 	₩	23,250,000	 	 	 	10	%



 


Installation
Location: Hyundai Heavy Industries


 


Hyundai
Heavy Industries Co., Ltd. (“The Customer”) and e-MARINE Inc. (“The Provider”) agree to execute all matters
written in the Contract and each party keeps a signed copy.


 


March
29th 2017


 


The
Customer


 


Hyundai
Heavy Industries Co., Ltd.


1000,
Bangeojinsunhwando-ro, Dong-gu, Ulsan, Republic of Korea


 


The
Provider


 


e-MARINE
Inc.


15-14,
Samsan-ro 308beon-gil, Nam-gu, Ulsan, Republic of Korea
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 1**  **1 -**  **6039**

ROBERT LEE JENKINS, a/k/a Robert L. Jenkins ,
P laintiff

- Appellant ,

v.
SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; GREGORY KNOWLIN, Warden, Turbeville Correctional I nstitution; SHERRI SCOTT, Sergeant TCI; NURSE GARRETT, TCI; ANGELA R. BROWN, Hearing Officer, TCI , Defendant s - Appellee s .

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

. Richard Mark Gergel , District Judge. ( 8 : 09

- cv - 0 3293

- RMG )

Submitted : February 28 , 2011 Decided: March 9, 2011

Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and KING and DIAZ, Circuit Judges

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Robert Lee Jenkins , Appellant Pro Se. James M. Davis, Jr., DAVIDSON & LINDEMANN, PA, Columbia, South Carolina , for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Robert Lee Jenkins, a state prisoner, appeals the district court’s order adopting the recommendation o f the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Jenkins v. South Carolina D ep’t of

Corr

. , No. 8:09

- cv - 03293

- RMG (D.S.C. Dec. 23, 2010). 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
Dismi ssed and Opinion Filed Sep tember 27, 2021

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 20

- 00954

- CV

ABDUL MATEEN MODI , Appellant

V.

AFSHEEN IMRAN , Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 003

- 03597

- 2019

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Molberg, Nowell, and Goldstein

Opinion by Justice Molberg

Appellant’s brief in this case is overdue. By postcard dated September 1,

2021, we notified appellant the time for filing his brief had expired. We directed

appellant to file a brief and an extension motion within ten days. We cautioned

appellant that f

ailure to file his brief by that time would result in the dismissal of this

appeal without further notice. To date, appellant has not filed a brief, filed an

extension motion, or otherwise corresponded with the Court regarding the status of

this appeal.

A ccordingly, we dismiss this appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 38.8(a)(1); 42.3(b),

(c).– 2

–

200954f.p05 /Ken Molberg/ /

KEN MOLBERG

JUSTICE– 3

– 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

ABDUL MATEEN MODI, Appellant

No. 05

- 20

- 00954

- CV V.

AFSHEEN IMRAN, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3, Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 003

- 03597

- 2019. Opinion delivered by Justice Molberg. Justices Nowell and Goldstein participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is

DISMISSED

.

Judgment entered this 27 th day of September

, 2021

.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

DARRYL N. SMITH

, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

, Appellee

.

No. 4D 19

- 282

[ May 2, 2019 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for

the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; Michael A. Usan

, Judge; L.T. Case No. 10

- 6067CF10A

.

Darryl N. Smith, Polk City, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

M AY

, D AMOORGIAN and L EVINE

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.