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

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1926

To amend the National Narcotics Leadership Act of 1988 to extend and

authorize appropriations for the Office of National Drug Control Policy.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 29, 1993

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

Committee on Government Operations

A BILL

To amend the National Narcotics Leadership Act of 1988

to extend and authorize appropriations for the Office

of National Drug Control Policy.

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 ‘‘National Narcotics

5 Leadership Act Amendments Act of 1993’’.

6 SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG CON7 TROL POLICY.

8 Section 1009 of the National Narcotics Leadership

9 Act of 1988 (21 U.S.C. 1506) is amended to read as fol10 lows:
2

•HR 1926 IH

1 ‘‘SEC. 1009. TERMINATION OF OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG

2 CONTROL POLICY.

3 ‘‘This subtitle and the amendments made by this sub4 title, are repealed on September 31, 1998.’’.

5 SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

6 Section 1011 of the National Narcotics Leadership

7 Act of 1988 (21 U.S.C. 1508) is amended to read as fol8 lows:

9 ‘‘SEC. 1011. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

10 ‘‘For the purpose of carrying out this subtitle, there

11 are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be

12 necessary for fiscal year 1994, and for each of the 4 suc13 ceeding fiscal years, to remain available until expended.’’.

Æ
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

MICHAEL S. LANCE, 

Appellant, 

v. Case No. 5D22-2874 

LT Case Nos. 2014-CF-504-B 

2014-CF-946-A 

STATE OF FLORIDA, 

Appellee. 

________________________________/

Decision filed March 7, 2023

3.850 Appeal from the Circuit Court 

for Seminole County, 

William S. Orth, Judge.

Michael S. Lance, Raiford, pro se.

No Appearance for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

JAY, HARRIS and SOUD, JJ., concur.
Exhibit
10.2


SECOND
AMENDMENT TO

WJ COMMUNICATIONS, INC.

2001 EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN


This
Second Amendment to the WJ Communications, Inc. (the “Company”) 2001 Employee
Stock Purchase Plan, (the “Stock Purchase Plan”), is made pursuant to Section X
of the Stock Purchase Plan.


Recitals:


WHEREAS, the
2001 Employee Stock Purchase Plan was originally adopted by the Company and
approved by the stockholders in 2001;


WHEREAS, the
2001 Employee Stock Purchase Plan was first amended by the board of directors on
November 1, 2001 to clarify certain terms of the Stock Purchase Plan to reflect
the administrators interpretation of such terms and the prior administration of
the Stock Purchase Plan; to revise the offering period; to clarify the timing
of payroll deductions; to define the Purchase Date as the last day of each
offering period and to add provisions to delegate to the Company’s executive
committee the authority to amend the Stock Purchase Plan, which modifications
were not deemed necessary to submit to stockholders for approval; and


WHEREAS, in
2006 in connection with the Company’s annual meeting, the Board of Directors
determined a second amendment to the Stock Purchase Plan to increase the shares
available under the Stock Purchase Plan from 1,500,000 to 2,250,000;


WHEREAS, the
Second Amendment was approved by the Company stockholders at the Company’s
annual meeting on July 20, 2006.


NOW
THEREFORE:


The
section III, titled “STOCK SUBJECT TO PLAN” of the Stock Purchase Plan is
hereby amended to delete “1,500,000” and insert “2,250,000” in its place to
reflect an increase in the shares reserved for use under the Stock Purchase
Plan.


All other terms
and conditions of the Stock Purchase Plan, as amended remain in full force and
effect.


The Second
Amendment to the Stock Purchase Plan was approved by the Board of Directors on
June 1, 2006 and submitted to, and approved by, the Company’s stockholders in
connection with the Company’s July 20, 2006 annual meeting.
# Fourth Co urt of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

March 14, 2019

No. 04

- 18

- 00345

- CR

Comfort Delando ROBERTS,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 186th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2016CR11457

Honorable Jefferson Moore, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Appellant’s motion to file a second amended reply brief is GRANTED. Appellant’s

second amended reply brief was filed on March 11, 2019

.

_________________________________ Irene Rios , Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the s eal of the said

court on this 14th day of M arch, 2019

.

___________________________________ KEITH E. HOTTLE

, Clerk of Court
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION



Certification of President



I, Wm. Lee Popham, President, certify that:



1.

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Admiral Financial Corp.;



2.

Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;



3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4.

The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the small business issuer and have:



(a)

Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c)

Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and



5.

The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



(a)

All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b)

Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting.



Dated: May 10, 2011



/s/ Wm. Lee Popham

Wm. Lee Popham, President
FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

SUNSHINE ACT NOTICE

BAC 6735-01

March 23, 2017

TIME AND DATE: 10:00 a.m., Thursday, April 13, 2017

PLACE: The Richard V. Backley Hearing Room, Room 511N, 1331 

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20004 (enter from 

F Street entrance)

STATUS: Open 

MATTERS TO BE 

CONSIDERED: The Commission will consider and act upon the following in open 

session: Secretary of Labor v. Arnold Stone, Inc., Docket No. 

CENT 2016-95-M (Issues include whether the Judge erred in 

concluding that a violation involving a loader with a defective 

safety lockout did not result from an unwarrantable failure to 

comply.)

Any person attending this meeting who requires special 

accessibility features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign language 

interpreters, must inform the Commission in advance of those 

needs. Subject to 29 C.F.R. § 2706.150(a)(3) and § 2706.160(d).

CONTACT PERSON 

FOR MORE INFO: Emogene Johnson (202) 434-9935 / (202) 708-9300 for TDD

Relay / 1-800-877-8339 for toll free.

PHONE NUMBER

FOR LISTENING TO

ARGUMENT: 1-(866) 867-4769

Passcode: 129-339

__________________________________

Sarah L. Stewart

Deputy General Counsel
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Company's consolidated balance sheet and consolidated statement of operations
and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such consolidated financial
statements together with the related footnotes thereto.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
<CURRENCY> US DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                            2634
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     1307
<ALLOWANCES>                                       276
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  7797
<PP&E>                                           27236
<DEPRECIATION>                                    1096
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   33937
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             6456
<BONDS>                                          27162
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       (659)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     33937
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 20752
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    23342
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    83
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                5152
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (7622)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (7622)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (7622)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                 Exhibit 21.1


                            Subsidiaries of the Company



Wholly-Owned Corporate Subsidiaries of the Company:

     BPP/Crenshaw-Imperial, Inc. (Delaware) (Consolidated)
     BPP/Golden State Acquisitions, Inc. (Delaware) (Consolidated)
     BPP/Mountaingate, Inc. (Delaware) (Consolidated)
     BPP/Northwest Acquisitions, Inc. (Delaware) (Consolidated)
     BPP/Puente Hills, Inc. (Delaware) (Consolidated)
     BPP/Riley, Inc. (California) (Consolidated)
     BPP/Simi Valley, Inc. (Delaware) (Consolidated)
     BPP/Valley Central, Inc. (Delaware) (Consolidated)
     Burnham Pacific L.P., Inc. (Delaware) (Consolidated)

Partnerships in which the Company holds interests:

     BPP/Cameron Park L.P. (California) (Consolidated)
     BPP/Crenshaw-Imperial, L.P. (Delaware) (Consolidated)
     BPP/East Palo Alto L.P. (California) (Consolidated)
     BPP/Hilltop L.P. (California) (Consolidated)
     BPP/Marin L.P. (California) (Consolidated)
     BPP/Mission Viejo, L.P. (California) (Consolidated)
     BPP/Mountaingate, L.P. (Delaware) (Consolidated)
     BPP/Pleasant Hill L.P. (California) (Consolidated)
     BPP/Richmond L.P. (California) (Consolidated)
     BPP/Riley L.P. (California) (Consolidated)
     BPP/Simi Valley, L.P. (Delaware) (Consolidated)
     BPP/Valley Central L.P. (California) (Consolidated)
     BPP/Van Ness L.P. (California) (Consolidated)
     Burnham Pacific Operating Partnership, L.P. (Delaware) (Consolidated)
     La Mancha Partners L.P. (California) (Consolidated)

Limited Liability Companies in which the Company holds an interest:

     BPP/Golden State Acquisitions, LLC (Delaware) (Consolidated)
     BPP/Northwest Acquisitions, LLC (Delaware) (Consolidated)
     BPP/Puente Hills, LLC (Delaware) (Consolidated)
     Ladera Center Associates, LLC (Delaware) (Unconsolidated)
     Margarita Plaza Associates, LLC (Delaware) (Unconsolidated)
Exhibit 23.1

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement Forms
S-8 (No. 33-99216 and 333-62207) and Forms S-3 (Nos. 33-88670, 33-93812 and
333-42543) of Chelsea GCA Realty, Inc. and Form S-3 (No. 333-36487) of Chelsea
GCA Realty, Inc. and Chelsea GCA Realty Partnership, L.P. and in the related
Prospectus of our report dated February 2, 2000, with respect to the
consolidated financial statements and schedule of Chelsea GCA Realty, Inc.
included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1999.


                                        Ernst & Young LLP

New York, New York
March 9, 2000
#### Harold L. ARMSTRONG, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. R. BARNES, Warden, High Desert State Prison; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 13-16806.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 20, 2016.*

Filed Jan. 27, 2016.

Harold L. Armstrong, Susanville, CA, pro se.

Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM**

California state prisoner Harold L. Armstrong, Sr., appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) alleging deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs and disability discrimination. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, *Resnick v. Hayes,*213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Armstrong’s Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claim because Armstrong failed to allege facts sufficient to show that any defendant disregarded an excessive risk to Armstrong’s health. *See Toguchi v. Chung,*391 F.3d 1051, 1057-58 (9th Cir.2004) (a prison official is deliberately indifferent only if he or she knows of and disregards an excessive risk to an inmate’s health; neither a prisoner’s difference of opinion concerning the course of treatment nor mere negligence in treating a medical condition amounts to deliberate indifference).

The district court properly dismissed Armstrong’s claim that prison officials violated the ADA because Armstrong failed to allege facts sufficient to show that prison officials discriminated against him because of a disability. *See Simmons v. Navajo Cty., Ariz.,*609 F.3d 1011, 1022 (9th Cir.2010) (“The ADA prohibits discrimination because of disability, not inadequate treatment for disability.”).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Armstrong’s requests for appointment of counsel because Armstrong failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances. *See Palmer v. Valdez,*560 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir.2009) (setting forth standard of review and “exceptional circumstances” requirement).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 29 (Monday, February 12, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 9827]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-3450]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal; Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP96-383-019]


Dominion Transmission, Inc.; Notice of Tariff Filing

February 6, 2001.
    Take notice that on January 31, 2001, Dominion Transmission, Inc. 
(DTI) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Third Revised 
Volume No. 1, Second Revised Sheet No. 1400, with an effective date of 
February 1, 2001.
    DTI states that the tariff sheet disclosing a recently negotiated 
transaction. DTI states that the tariff sheet relates to a specific 
negotiated rate transaction between DTI and Sithe Power Marketing, LP. 
The transaction provides Sithe Power Marketing, LP with FT service and 
conforms to the forms of service agreement contained in DTI's tariff. 
The term of the agreement is February 1, 2001, through January 31, 
2002.
    DTI states that copies of its letter of transmittal and enclosures 
have been served upon DTI's customers and interested state commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in 
accordance with section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must 
file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance). 
Comments and protests may be filed electronically via the internet in 
lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on 
the Commission's web site at http://www.ferc.fed.us/efi/doorbell.htm.

David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-3450 Filed 2-9-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-27-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-27-1998
<CASH>                                           2,532
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,614
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (250)
<INVENTORY>                                      3,830
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                10,128
<PP&E>                                           4,427
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (3,379)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  11,226
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,743
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            74
<OTHER-SE>                                       8,326
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    11,226
<SALES>                                         16,975
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                16,975
<CGS>                                            9,595
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    9,595
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                11,582
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (116)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,879)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,879)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,879)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.54)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.54)
        


</TABLE>
Motion Granted; Order filed November 13, 2014

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 14

- 00225

- CR

____________ SAMUEL ALEJANDRO GAR ZA , Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 338th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1270337



### ORDER
Appellant’s court

- appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Appellant has filed a motion for access to review the record and file a pro se brief. See Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967); Gainous
v. State , 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). The motion is granted.
Accordingly, we hereby direct the Judge of the 338th District Court to afford appella nt an opportunity to view the trial record in accordance with local procedure; that the clerk of that court furnish the record to appellant on or before December 1 , 2014 ; thatthe clerk of that court certify to this court the date on which delivery of the record to

appellant is made; and that appellant file his pro se brief with this court within thirty days
of that date.

PER CURIAM