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

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 549 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                         July 25, 2000.
Whereas August 27, 2000, is the 10th anniversary of the initial activation of 
        National Guard and Reserve personnel for Operation Desert Shield and 
        Operation Desert Storm, the operations of the United States Armed Forces 
        conducted as a consequence of the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq;
Whereas over 267,000 members of the National Guard and Reserve were ordered to 
        active duty during Operation Desert Shield and Operation Desert Storm;
Whereas 106,000 of these members served in the Southwest Asia theater of 
        operations, 16,000 served in a support capacity abroad outside the 
        theater of operations, and 145,000 served in a support capacity in the 
        United States;
Whereas 57 members of the National Guard and Reserve lost their lives in the 
        service of the Nation in Operation Desert Storm; and
Whereas the majority of these members lost their lives in a missile attack on 
        the United States Army barracks at Dhahran, Saudi Arabia: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) recognizes the historical significance of the 10th anniversary 
        of the initial activation of National Guard and Reserve personnel for 
        Operation Desert Shield and Operation Desert Storm;
            (2) honors the service and sacrifice of these citizen soldiers and 
        their families during Operation Desert Shield and Operation Desert 
        Storm;
            (3) recognizes the growing importance of the National Guard and 
        Reserve to the security of the United States; and
            (4) supports ensuring the readiness of the National Guard and 
        Reserve.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
```

EX-33.1
REPORT ON ASSESSMENT OF COMPLIANCE

CoreLogic Commercial Real Estate Services, Inc. (the "Asserting Party"), an
indirect subsidiary of CoreLogic, Inc, is responsible for assessing compliance
as of December 31, 2012, and for the period from January 1, 2012 through
December 31, 2012 (the "Reporting Period") with the servicing criteria set
forth in Title 17, Sections 229.1122(d)(l)(iv), (d)(2)(v), (d)(2)(vi),
(d)(2)(vii), (d)(4)(xi), (d)(4)(xii) and (d)(4)(xiii) of the Code of Federal
Regulations applicable to the Asserting Party (the "Applicable Servicing
Criteria"). The servicing activities covered by this report include all loans
for commercial mortgage loan outsourcing customers for which the Asserting
Party served as the commercial tax service provider (the "Platform").

The Asserting Party has assessed its compliance with the Applicable Servicing
Criteria for the Reporting Period and has concluded that the Asserting Party
has complied, in all material respects, with the Applicable Servicing Criteria
as of December 31, 2012, and for the Reporting Period with respect to the
Platform taken as a whole.

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm,
has issued an attestation report on the assessment of compliance with the
Applicable Servicing Criteria as of December 31, 2012, and for the Reporting
Period.

CORELOGIC COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC.

/s/Vicki Chenault
Vicki Chenault,
Senior Vice President
February 6, 2013

Page 1 of 1
```
### §7432. Departments and professors: titles

(a) The Secretary of the Army may prescribe the titles of each of the departments of instruction and the professors of the Academy. However, the change of the title of a department or officer does not affect the status, rank, or eligibility for promotion or retirement of, or otherwise prejudice, a professor at the Academy.

(b) Upon becoming the senior professor in a department, a permanent professor thereby becomes the head of that department.

(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 238, §4332; renumbered §7432, Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, §808(c)(1), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1839.)

| Revised section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 4332(a)4332(b) | 10:1061a.10:1087 (proviso). | Dec. 14, 1942, ch. 729, 56 Stat. 1049.June 26, 1946, ch. 495, §1 (proviso), 60 Stat. 312. |

4332(b)

10:1087 (proviso).

June 26, 1946, ch. 495, §1 (proviso), 60 Stat. 312.

In subsection (a), the words "now or after December 14, 1942, established at" are omitted as surplusage. The word "precedence" is omitted as covered by the word "rank". The words "pay, allowances" are omitted, since they are determined by the grade held. The words "from time to time", "shall be known", and "operate in any case or on any account" are omitted as surplusage.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 7432 was renumbered section 8732 of this title.

#### Amendments

2018—Pub. L. 115–232 renumbered section 4332 of this title as this section.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 2018 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 115–232 effective Feb. 1, 2019, with provision for the coordination of amendments and special rule for certain redesignations, see section 800 of Pub. L. 115–232, set out as a note preceding section 3001 of this title.
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation 

76-46 

April 2, 1976 

REFERENCE: 

 [*1] 208 Mergers, Consolidations and other Transfers of Plan Assets

4043(b)(8) Reportable Events. Mergers, Consolidations & other Transfers of Plan Assets 

OPINION: 

 This has reference to your March 5, 1976 letter. You state that your client proposes to transfer the funding of a

pension plan from a deposit administration group annuity to a trust fund administered by a bank. Neither the benefits

nor contributions are to be curtailed. You contemplate alternative dispositions of the funds now on deposit with an

insurer. We understand that the first alternative would channel future contributions to a trust fund, thereby allowing the

funds now on deposit to remain with the insurer until exhausted by payment of annuities under the Plan. The second

alternative would transfer all funding from the insurer to the bank holding the trust fund. 

You have asked whether either of these alternative dispositions constitutes a reportable event under Section

4043(b)(8) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, which states that a reportable event occurs, as

provided in Section 208, when a plan merges, consolidates, or transfers its assets or liabilities to another plan. You

suggest that these alternatives [*2] would not constitute transfers from one plan to another and, therefors, Section 208

does not apply. We concur. Section 208 does not apply when a plan changes its funding mechanism. It applies only

to transactions between or among plans. 

Henry Rose 

General Counsel
EXHIBIT 32.1


                                  CERTIFICATION

            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

             (SUBSECTIONS (A) AND (B) OF SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF

                          TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE)





     Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a)
and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of
the undersigned officers of InkSure Technologies Inc., a Delaware corporation
(the "Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:


     The Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2004 (the "Form
10-QSB") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in
the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.





     Dated: November 10, 2004                    /S/ Yaron Meerfeld
                                                 ------------------
                                       Yaron Meerfeld, Chief Executive Officer



     Dated: November 10, 2004                    /S/ Eyal Bigon
                                                 --------------
                                         Eyal Bigon, Chief Financial Officer



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
### Capital Stock of Federal Land Bank Associations
# C_2006305EN.01001801.xml

| 14.12.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 305/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 305/18

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4239 — Plastic Omnium/Inopart)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2006/C 305/09)

On 27 October 2006, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32006M4239. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu) |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32006M4239. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu)

---
### [§2446b. Renumbered §4402]
#### § 212.5 Authority and responsibility of the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM).

The OSM is the regulatory authority for surface coal mining and reclamation operations on Indian lands pursuant to the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C. 1201 *et seq.*). The relevant regulations for surface coal mining and reclamation operations are found in 30 CFR part 750. Those regulations apply to mining and reclamation on leases issued under this part.
### SCPR-18-0000013

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI # I

IN RE DAVID K. KUWAHARA, Petitioner.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

ORDER GRANTING PETITION TO RESIGN AND SURRENDER LICENSE ( B y : R e c k t e n w a l d , C

. J

. , N a k a y a m a , M c K e n n a , P o l l a c k , a n d W i l s o n , J J

. )



### Upon consideration of Petitioner David K. Kuwahara’s petition to resign and surrender his license to practice law in the State of Hawai # i, filed pursuant to Rule 1.10 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai # i (RSCH), and of the affidavits and exhibits in support thereof, we conclude Petitioner Kuwahara has fully complied with the requirements of RSCH Rule 1.10. Therefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition is granted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to RSCH Rule 1.10(g), that the Petitioner shall comply with the notice, affidavit, and record requirements of RSCH Rules 2.16(a), (b), (d), and (g).

IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that the Clerk shall remove the name of Petitioner David K. Kuwahara, attorney number 3841, from the roll of attorneys of the State of Hawai # i, effective with the filing of this order.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai # i, February 6, 2018. /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack /s/ Michael D. Wilson Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPR-18-0000013 06-FEB-2018 12:09 PM
Attention: United States Secretary of Tran sportation

Mr. Anthony R. Foxx

US Department of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Ave, SE

Washington, DC 20590

United States

Re: Exemption Request Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act

and Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations from 14

CFR 45.23(b); 14 CFR Part 21; 14 CFR 61.113 (a) & (b);

91.7 (a); 91.9 (b) (2); 91.103 (b); 91.109; 91.119; 91.121;

91.151 (a); 91.203 (a) & (b); 91.409 (a) (2); 91.417 (a) & (b)

Dear Mr. Secretary,

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and

Reform Act of 2012 (the Reform Act) and 14 CFR Part 11,

The Edit Haus., a Georgia Limited Liability

Corporation, and James C Suss, a licensed REALTOR in the State of

Georgia with Harry Norman, Realtors, and owner of The Edit Haus LLC

, and operator of Sm all Unmanned Aircraft Systems (“sUASs”)

equipped to conduct aerial photography for the education

of real estate professionals and real estate marketing purposes,

hereby applies for an exemption from the listed Federal Aviation

Regulations (“FARs”) to a llow commercial operation of its

sUASs, so long as such operations are conducted within and

under the conditions outlined herein or as may be

established by the FAA as required by Section 333.

As described more fully below, the requested exemption

woul d permit the operation of small, unmanned and relatively

inexpensive sUAS under controlled conditions in airspace

that is 1) limited 2) predetermined and 3) controlled as to

access. Approval of this exemption would thereby fulfill the

Secretary of Tran sportation’s (the responsibilities to

“...establish requirements for the safe operation of such

aircraft systems in the national airspace system.” Section

333 (c) of the Reform Act.
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation 

86-15 

June 30, 1986 

REFERENCE: 

 [*1] 4021 Plans Covered 

OPINION: 

This is in response to your request for our determination as to whether the * * * Pension Plan (the "Plan") was

required to pay premiums under Title IV of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended

("ERISA"), 29 U.S.C. § § 1301 et seq., for the years it has operated. Your inquiry focuses on the fact that the Plan, a

tax-qualified defined benefit pension plan, is fully insured. 

ERISA Section 4021, 29 U.S.C. § 1321, defines the scope of the mandatory termination insurance program, which

extends to any employee pension benefit plan that meets specified tax-qualification requirements. While there are a

number of statutory exceptions to this compulsory coverage, see ERISA Section 4021(b), 29 U.S.C. § 1321(b), there

is no such exception for fully insured plans. Moreover, ERISA Section 4007(a), 29 U.S.C. § 1307(a), requiring "the

plan administrator of each plan . . ." to pay Title IV premiums, similarly makes no such exception. Accordingly, the Plan

was required to pay Title IV premiums for the years it has operated. See generally PBGC opinion Letters 74-16, 75-2,

75-12, and 75-48 (copies enclosed). 

I hope that the foregoing discussion [*2] adequately responds to your request. If you have any questions, please

feel free to call Harold Ashner of my staff at (202) 956-5023. 

Edward R. Mackiewicz 

General Counsel
Searched for **https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/files/nativedocuments/M-617.pdf**

 

19961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021202220232024

*Note:* This calendar view maps the number of captures of **https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/files/nativedocuments/M-617.pdf**, *not* how many times the site was actually updated.

Look Up URL in general Internet Archive web collection.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 439 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                        March 15, 2000.
    Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker 
may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare the House resolved into the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the 
bill (H.R. 3843) to reauthorize programs to assist small business concerns, and 
for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All 
points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. General debate 
shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and 
controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Small 
Business. After general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under 
the five-minute rule. Each section of the bill shall be considered as read. 
During consideration of the bill for amendment, the Chairman of the Committee of 
the Whole may accord priority in recognition on the basis of whether the Member 
offering an amendment has caused it to be printed in the portion of the 
Congressional Record designated for that purpose in clause 8 of rule XVIII. 
Amendments so printed shall be considered as read. The Chairman of the Committee 
of the Whole may: (1) postpone until a time during further consideration in the 
Committee of the Whole a request for a recorded vote on any amendment; and (2) 
reduce to five minutes the minimum time for electronic voting on any postponed 
question that follows another electronic vote without intervening business, 
provided that the minimum time for electronic voting on the first in any series 
of questions shall be 15 minutes. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill 
for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with 
such amendments as may have been adopted. The previous question shall be 
considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage 
without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without 
instructions.
    Sec. 2. House Resolution 432 is laid on the table.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
IV

House Calendar No. 279

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 583

[Report No. 106–873]

Providing for consideration of the Senate amendments to the bill (H.R.

940) to designate the Lackawanna Valley National Heritage Area, and

for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 20, 2000

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered

to be printed

RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of the Senate amendments to

the bill (H.R. 940) to designate the Lackawanna Valley

National Heritage Area, and for other purposes.

1 Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it

2 shall be in order to take from the Speaker’s table the bill

3 (H.R. 940) to designate the Lackawanna Valley National

4 Heritage Area, and for other purposes, with Senate

5 amendments thereto, and to consider in the House, with6 out intervention of any point of order, a single motion of-
2

HRES 583 RH

1 fered by the chairman of the Committee on Resources or

2 his designee that the House concur in the Senate amend3 ments. The Senate amendments and the motion shall be

4 considered as read. The motion shall be debatable for one

5 hour equally divided and controlled by the chairman and

6 ranking minority member of the Committee on Resources.

7 The previous question shall be considered as ordered on

8 the motion to final adoption without intervening motion

9 or demand for division of the question.

House Calendar No. 279

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 583

[Report No. 106–873]

RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of the Senate amendments to the bill (H.R. 940) to designate the

Lackawanna Valley National Heritage Area, andfor other purposes.

SEPTEMBER 20, 2000

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Benny Hakaj, Appellant.

[823 NYS2d 750]

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Steven L. Barrett, J.), rendered on or about May 1, 2003, unanimously affirmed. No opinion. Order filed. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Friedman, Sullivan, Catterson and Malone, JJ.
#### IN RE ELE, INC.

No. 93A90

Case below: 97 N.C.App. 253

Petition by Bertie County pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 and Appellate Rule 16(b) as to additional issues dismissed 5 April 1990.
#### § 39.100 What is the Indian School Equalization Formula?

The Indian School Equalization Formula (ISEF) was established to allocate Indian School Equalization Program (ISEP) funds. OIEP applies ISEF to determine funding allocation for Bureau-funded schools as described in §§ 39.204 through 39.206.
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connectionwith the Quarterly Report of 24/7 Real Media, Inc. (the “**Company**”) on Form 10-Q for the periodended September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “**Report**”),I, Jonathan K. Hsu, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of theCompany, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuantto Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1) The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2) The information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresult of operations of the Company.

 

 
| November 9, 2005 |                                                |
|-----------------------|-----------------------------------------------------|
|                  |                                                |
|                  |                                                |
|                  | /s/ Jonathan K. Hsu                                 |   |
|                  | Executive Vice President and Chief FinancialOfficer |
|                  | (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)        |

 

 

*A signed original of this written statementrequired by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will beretained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commissionor its staff upon request.*

 

----
§ 38.1 Scope. ( a ) *Primary scope.* This part applies to all individuals appointed or converted to contract education positions as defined in § 38.3 in the Bureau of Indian Affairs after November 1, 1979. This part applies to elementary and secondary school positions and agency education positions.
( b ) *Secondary scope.* Section 38.13 applies to employees with continuing tenure in both the competitive and excepted service who encumber education positions.
( c ) *Other.* Where 25 CFR part 38 and a negotiated labor relations agreement conflict, the negotiated agreement will govern.
§ 309.16 What are examples of regalia that are Indian products? ( a ) Regalia are ceremonial clothing, modern items with a traditional theme, and accessories with historical significance made or significantly decorated by an Indian, including, but not limited to, that worn to perform traditional dances, participate in traditional socials, used for dance competitions, and worn on special occasions of tribal significance. If these items are made or significantly decorated by an Indian, they are Indian products.
( b ) Specific examples include, but are not limited to: hide leggings, buckskin dresses, breech cloths, dance shawls, frontlets, shell dresses, button blankets, feather bustles, porcupine roaches, beaded pipe bags, nickel silver stamped armbands, quilled breast plates, coup sticks, horse sticks, shields, headdresses, dance fans, and rattles.
[68 FR 35170, June 12, 2003]