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

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2896 Engrossed in House (EH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 2896

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 369 Martin Luther King Jr. Drive in Jersey City, New Jersey, as the 
          ``Judge Shirley A. Tolentino Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. JUDGE SHIRLEY A. TOLENTINO POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 369 Martin Luther King Jr. Drive in Jersey City, New Jersey, 
shall be known and designated as the ``Judge Shirley A. Tolentino 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 ``Judge 
Shirley A. Tolentino Post Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives July 23, 2012.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
112th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 2896

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 369 Martin Luther King Jr. Drive in Jersey City, New Jersey, as the 
          ``Judge Shirley A. Tolentino Post Office Building''.
```
#### NEW YORK & H. R. R. CO. v. ACCUMULATOR CO.

(Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

March 13, 1893.)

Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of Now York.

W. H. Kenyon, for appellant.

Frederick H. Betts, for appellee.

Stricken from the calendar for failure to answer the call of the docket, pursuant to the seventeenth rule.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-6542

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,

v. JULIUS CHRISTOPHER CLAYTOR, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District Judge. (7:05-cr-00007-jct-mfu-1; 7:08-cv-80051-jct-mfu)

Submitted: June 18, 2009 Decided: June 25, 2009

Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Julius Christopher Claytor, Appellant Pro Se. Donald Ray Wolthuis, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Julius Christopher Claytor seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2009) motion, as well as its order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion for reconsideration. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). 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) (2006). 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 Claytor 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 of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Marshall D. BROOKS, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 08-6400.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: June 9, 2008.

Decided: June 27, 2008.

Marshall D. Brooks, Appellant Pro Se. Roderick Charles Young, Office of the United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Marshall D. Brooks seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.

When the United States or its officer or agency is a party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than sixty days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order, Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). This appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” *Browder v. Dir., Dep’t of Corr.,*434 U.S. 257, 264, 98 S.Ct. 556, 54 L.Ed.2d 521 (1978) (quoting *United States v. Robinson,*361 U.S. 220, 229, 80 S.Ct. 282, 4 L.Ed.2d 259 (1960)).

The district court’s order denying Brooks’ § 2255 motion was entered July 11, 2006. Brooks subsequently filed a Motion for Certificate of Appealability in the district court on June 28, 2007.* Even if *281this motion were determined to be the functional equivalent of a notice of appeal, *see Smith v. Barry,*502 U.S. 244, 248-49, 112 S.Ct. 678, 116 L.Ed.2d 678 (1992), we conclude that it would have been untimely filed. Because Brooks failed to file a timely notice of appeal or timely obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we 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.*

*

 For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on Brooks' motion for a *281certificate of appealability is the earliest date it could have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to the court. Fed. R.App. P. 4(c); *Houston v. Lack,*487 U.S. 266, 108 S.Ct. 2379, 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988).
REDUCTION OF VOTING AGE

TWENTY-SIXTH AMENDMENT

SECTIONS 1 AND 2. The right of citizens of the United States,

who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.

The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

THE EIGHTEEN-YEAR-OLD VOTE

In extending the Voting Rights Act of 1965 in 1970,1 Congress

included a provision lowering the age qualification to vote in all elections, federal, state, and local, to 18.2 In a divided decision, the Supreme Court held that Congress was empowered to lower the age

qualification in federal elections, but voided the application of the

provision in all other elections as beyond congressional power.3 Confronted thus with the possibility that they might have to maintain

two sets of registration books and go to the expense of running separate election systems for federal elections and for all other elections, the states were receptive to the proposing of an Amendment

by Congress to establish a minimum age qualification at 18 for all

elections, and ratified it promptly.4

1 79 Stat. 437, as extended and amended by 84 Stat. 314, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1971 et

seq.

2 Title 3, 84 Stat. 318, 42 U.S.C. § 1973bb.

3 Oregon v. Mitchell, 400 U.S. 112 (1970).

4 S. REP. NO. 26, 92d Cong., 1st Sess. (1971); H.R. REP. NO. 37, 92d Cong., 1st

Sess. (1971).

2289
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                         305,555
<SECURITIES>                                 3,739,673
<RECEIVABLES>                                   55,083
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     79,850
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,722,043
<PP&E>                                       3,448,539
<DEPRECIATION>                                 766,125
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,187,636
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,105,508
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        48,532
<OTHER-SE>                                   (745,966)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,187,636
<SALES>                                      1,115,116
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,115,116
<CGS>                                          918,316
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,479,362
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,022,431
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             313,838
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              6,571,453
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          6,571,453
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                750,000
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 7,321,453
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.54
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.54
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS**

 

As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the inclusion of our report dated January 23, 2003 included in Transcend Services,Inc.’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2002, as amended, as well as the incorporation by reference of such report into the Company’s previously filed Registration Statements File Nos. 033-57072, 033-41361,033-37685, 033-59115, 333-32587, 333-16213 and 333-78777. 

 

/s/ Miller Ray & Houser LLP 

 

Atlanta, Georgia 

September 29, 2003
<PAGE>
 
                      SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

                                  FORM 10-Q/A

               QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
                    OF THE SECURITITES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

                    For The Quarter Ended October 31, 1996


                         Commission file number 1-3916
                    

                              THE LEAP GROUP, INC.
             (EXACT NAME OF REGISTRANT AS SPECIFIED IN ITS CHARTER)


          DELAWARE                                    36-4079500
(STATE OR OTHER JURISDICTION OF                    (I.R.S. EMPLOYER
INCORPORATION OR ORGANIZATION)                     IDENTIFICATION NO.)


        22 WEST HUBBARD STREET, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60610, (312) 494-0300
  (ADDRESS, INCLUDING ZIP CODE, AND TELEPHONE NUMBER, INCLUDING AREA CODE, OF
                   REGISTRANT'S PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICES)

                                      N/A
                                      ---
(FORMER NAME, FORMER ADDRESS & FORMER FISCAL YEAR, IF CHANGED SINCE LAST REPORT)


INDICATE BY CHECK MARK WHETHER THE REGISTRANT (1) HAS FILED ALL REPORTS REQUIRED
TO BE FILED BY SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 DURING
THE PRECEDING 12 MONTHS (OR FOR SUCH SHORTER PERIODS AS THE REGISTRANT WAS
REQUIRED TO FILE SUCH REPORTS), AND (2) HAS BEEN SUBJECT TO SUCH FILING
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PAST 90 DAYS.         YES       X        NO        
                                                 -----------       -----------

The Registrant first became subject to such filing requirements on September 26,
  1996, and has filed its Form 10-Q for the quarter ended October 31, 1996 on 
                         December 13, 1996 via EDGAR.


                     APPLICABLE ONLY TO CORPORATE ISSUERS:

INDICATE THE NUMBER OF SHARES OUTSTANDING OF EACH OF THE ISSUER'S CLASSES OF
COMMON STOCK, AS OF THE LATEST PRACTICAL DATE.

                                            OUTSTANDING SHARES AT
                  CLASS                        JANUARY 3, 1997
     ------------------------------         ---------------------

     COMMON STOCK - $0.01 PAR VALUE                13,600,000


The undersigned Registrant hereby amends the following exhibits of its Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended October 31, 1996 as set forth below:

1.  Exhibit 4.1  Credit Agreement, dated October 7, 1996, between The Leap 
                 Group, Inc. and the Union Bank of Switzerland.
2.  Exhibit 27   Financial Data Schedule for the Nine Months Ended October 31, 
                 1996

                                       1
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.6


                       AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT



     THIS AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (the "Amendment") amended that 
certain Employment Agreement dated as of May 28, 1997 (the "Employment 
Agreement") between HEALTHCARE RECOVERIES, INC. ("HCRI"), a Delaware 
corporation, and Patrick B. McGinnis, a resident of Louisville, Jefferson 
County, Kentucky, and the duly elected Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive 
Officer and President of HCRI.

     The parties agree as follows:

Section 5(a) of the Employment Agreement is hereby amended by deleting the last 
sentence and substituting the following sentence in place thereof:

Such annual salary will be subject to annual adjustments by any increases given 
in the normal course of business.

Except as expressly modified herein, the terms and conditions set forth in the 
Employment Agreement shall continue in full force and effect and shall be 
incorporated herein.

     IN WITNESS HEREOF, each party has executed this Amendment individually or 
by its duly authorized representative as of February 16, 1999.

HEALTHCARE RECOVERIES, INC.



By  /s/ Douglas R. Sharps
    ----------------------------------
    Douglas R. Sharps
    Executive Vice President Finance &
    Administration




    /s/ Patrick B. McGinnis 
    ----------------------------------
    Patrick B. McGinnis
    Chairman, Chief Executive Officer &
    President
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements of
Healthcare Recoveries, Inc. (the "Company") on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-41557,
333-41559, and 333-41561) of our report dated February 17, 1998, on our audits
of the financial statements of the Company as of December 31, 1997 and 1996 and
for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 1997, which report
is included in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of
1934.


/s/ COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.

Louisville, Kentucky
February 17, 1998
ex10_45.htm


EXHIBIT 10.45







FIRST AMENDMENT TO CHANGE IN CONTROL AGREEMENT







Amendment (this “Amendment”) to the change in control agreement (the “Agreement”) dated as of ________ __, ____, by and between USEC Inc. (the “Company”) and ________ (the “Executive”).  This Amendment is made as of _____________ __, 2010.







The Agreement provides for a reduction in Severance Benefits (as defined in the Agreement) in the event that (and only to the extent that) Severance Benefits would be otherwise subject to golden parachute excise taxes.  The parties wish to clarify more completely the order in which Severance Benefits would be reduced if necessary.







Therefore, the parties intending to be legally bound hereby agree as follows:







1.           Section 6(c) of the Agreement is amended to read in its entirety as follows:







“(c)  Notwithstanding any contrary provision of this Agreement, the Severance Benefits shall be reduced to the extent necessary so that no portion of such Severance Benefits shall be subject to the Excise Taxes, but only if the sum of (A) the net amount of such Severance Benefits, without reduction (but after imposition of the total amount of taxes under federal, state and local law) plus (B) the amount of the Excise Tax Payment in respect of such excess plus any interest or penalties payable by the Executive with respect to such excess (but after imposition of the total amount of taxes under federal, state and local law applicable to such additional payment) exceeds the net amount of such Severance Benefits, as so reduced (and after imposition of the total amount of taxes under federal, state and local law on such amounts or benefits).  Any reduction pursuant to this paragraph shall be made by agreement of the parties first from payments and benefits that are exempt from Code Section 409A, and only thereafter from benefits that are subject to Code Section 409A. To the extent any reduction of Severance Benefits pursuant to this paragraph is to be made from payments and benefits that are subject to Code Section 409A, such reduction shall first apply to in-kind benefits (or reimbursements) beginning with the benefits (or reimbursements) to be paid latest in time; second, to payments in the form of Shares, beginning with Shares to be delivered latest in time; third, with respect to cash payments, beginning with the cash payments to be made latest in time; provided that if two or more payments or benefits in the same category (in-kind benefits (or reimbursements), Shares, or cash) would be payable at the same time, the parties shall agree on the order in which the reduction shall occur.” 







2.           The Agreement, as amended by this Amendment, shall remain in full force and effect.






  





  











  













IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the parties hereto has caused this Amendment to be duly executed and delivered as of the date first above written.







USEC INC.












By: ____________________________________


Name:


Title:












AGREED AND ACCEPTED:












_____________________________


By:
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2854 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2854

  To repeal the rule relating to the notification of employee rights 
                under the National Labor Relations Act.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 7, 2011

Mr. DesJarlais introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                Committee on Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To repeal the rule relating to the notification of employee rights 
                under the National Labor Relations Act.

    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 ``Employer Free Choice Act''.

SEC. 2. REPEAL OF RULE RELATING TO THE NOTIFICATION OF EMPLOYEE RIGHTS 
              UNDER THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS ACT.

    (a) Repeal.--The final rule (including any supplement or revision 
to such rule) on ``Notification of Employee Rights under the National 
Labor Relations Act'' published by the National Labor Relations Board 
in the Federal Register on August 30, 2011 (76 Fed. Reg. 54006 et 
seq.), is repealed.
    (b) Rules Requiring Notification of Employee Rights Under NLRA 
Prohibited.--The National Labor Relations Board shall not promulgate or 
enforce any rule that requires employers to post notices informing 
their employees of their rights as employees under the National Labor 
Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 151 et seq.) on or after the date of enactment 
of this section.
    (c) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this Act shall be construed 
to prohibit an employer from voluntarily posting a notice informing the 
employees of the employer of their rights as employees under the 
National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 151 et seq.).
                                 <all>
```
```

[United States Government Policy and Supporting Positions (Plum Book), 1996]
[Independent Agencies and Government Corporations]
[Committee for Purchase from People Who are Blind or Severely Disabled]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

The Plum Book (United States Government Policy
        and Supporting Positions): 1996 EditionBRANCH: EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR 
        SEVERELY DISABLEDLocationPosition TitleName of IncumbentPay PlanType of Appt.Level Grade or PayTenureExpiresWashington, DCExecutive DirectorBeverly L. MilkmanESCA............................Washington, DCChairGary J. KrumpWCPA............................Washington, DCVice-ChairEvelyne R. VillinesPDPA$4435 years04/26/1998Washington, DCMemberHugh L. BrennanWCPA............................Washington, DCMemberCarole A. DortchWCPA............................Washington, DCMemberDeborah G. GroeberPDPA$4435 years12/21/2000Washington, DCMemberIra L. HobbsWCPA............................Washington, DCMemberKenneth J. OscarWCPA............................Washington, DCMemberLeRoy F. SaundersPDPA$4435 years12/21/1999Washington, DCMemberFredric K. SchroederWCPA............................Washington, DCMemberSteven B. SchwalbWCPA............................Washington, DCMemberSuzanne B. SeidenWCPA............................Washington, DCMemberDonald H. WedewerPDPA$4435 years12/21/1996
```
**Exhibit 13(a)**
**906 CERTIFICATION**Thecertification set forth below is being submitted in connection withthe Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year endedDecember 31, 2007 (the “**Report**”) for thepurpose of complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b)of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “**ExchangeAct**”) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 ofTitle 18 of the United States Code.AndrewCosslett, the Chief Executive Officer and Richard Solomons, theFinance Director of InterContinental Hotels Group PLC, eachcertifies that, to the best of his knowledge:
  1. the Report fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and
  2. the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operationsof InterContinental Hotels Group PLC.        Date: March 28, 2008 By:  /s/Andrew Cosslett    Name:  Andrew Cosslett    Title:  Chief Executive Officer            By:  /s/Richard Solomons    Name:  Richard Solomons    Title:  Finance Director