alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 3927.40 Effective date of leases.

Leases are dated and effective the first day of the month following the date the BLM signs it. However, upon receiving a prior written request, the BLM may make the effective date of the lease the first day of the month in which the BLM signs it.
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4538 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4538

   To amend section 248 of title 18, United States Code, to provide 
  adequate penalties and remedies for attacks on facilities providing 
    counseling about abortion alternatives and attacks on places of 
                           religious worship.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 14, 2022

  Mr. Hawley introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend section 248 of title 18, United States Code, to provide 
  adequate penalties and remedies for attacks on facilities providing 
    counseling about abortion alternatives and attacks on places of 
                           religious worship.

    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 ``Pregnancy Resource Center Defense 
Act''.

SEC. 2. ATTACKS ON FACILITIES PROVIDING COUNSELING ABOUT ABORTION 
              ALTERNATIVES AND PLACES OF RELIGIOUS WORSHIP.

    (a) Criminal Penalties.--Section 248(b)(1) of title 18, United 
States Code, is amended by inserting ``, except that for a first 
offense, if the conduct involved a facility described in subsection 
(a)(3) that exclusively provides abortion-alternative services or 
involved a place of religious worship and did not involve exclusively a 
nonviolent physical obstruction, the length of imprisonment shall be 
not more than 3 years'' after ``or both''.
    (b) Civil Remedies.--Section 248(c) of title 18, United States 
Code, is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (1)(B), in the second sentence, by 
        inserting ``, or $20,000 per violation for conduct involving a 
        facility described in subsection (a)(3) that exclusively 
        provides abortion-alternative services or involving a place of 
        religious worship'' after ``per violation''; and
            (2) in paragraph (2)(B)(i), by inserting ``, $25,000 for a 
        first violation, if the violation involved a facility described 
        in subsection (a)(3) that exclusively provides abortion-
        alternative services or involved a place of religious worship 
        and did not involve exclusively a nonviolent physical 
        obstruction,'' after ``physical obstruction''.

SEC. 3. DESTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS, VEHICLES, AND PROPERTY.

    Section 844(i) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by 
inserting ``or if the building is a facility described in section 
248(a)(3) that exclusively provides abortion-alternative services or is 
a place of religious worship,'' before ``shall be imprisoned for not 
less than 7 years''.
                                 <all>
```
§ 3809.434 How does this subpart apply to pending modifications for new or existing facilities? ( a ) This subpart applies to modifications pending before BLM on January 20, 2001 to construct a new facility, such as a waste rock repository, leach pad, drill site, or access road; or to modify an existing mine facility such as expansion of a waste rock repository or leach pad.
( b ) All provisions of this subpart, except plan content (§ 3809.401) and performance standards (§§ 3809.415 and 3809.420) apply to any modification of a plan of operations that was pending on January 20, 2001. See § 3809.505 for applicability of financial guarantee requirements.
( c ) If your unapproved modification of a plan of operations is pending on January 20, 2001, then the plan content requirements (§ 3809.1-5) and the performance standards (§§ 3809.1-3(d) and 3809.2-2) that were in effect immediately before January 20, 2001 apply to your modification of a plan of operations. (See 43 CFR parts 1000-end, revised as of Oct. 1, 2000).
( d ) If you want this subpart to apply to your pending modification of a plan of operations, where not otherwise required, you may choose to have this subpart apply.
§ 4.1010 Who may represent a party, and what requirements apply to a representative? ( a ) *Individuals.* A party who is an individual may either act as his or her own representative in the hearing process under this subpart or authorize an attorney to act as his or her representative.
( b ) *Organizations.* A party that is an organization or other entity may authorize one of the following to act as its representative: ( 1 ) An attorney;
( 2 ) A partner, if the entity is a partnership;
( 3 ) An officer or full-time employee, if the entity is a corporation, association, or unincorporated organization;
( 4 ) A receiver, administrator, executor, or similar fiduciary, if the entity is a receivership, trust, or estate; or
( 5 ) An elected or appointed official or an employee, if the entity is a federal, state, tribal, county, district, territorial, or local government or component.
( c ) *OFA.* OFA's representative will be an attorney from the Office of the Solicitor.
( d ) *Appearance.* A representative must file a notice of appearance. The notice must: ( 1 ) Meet the form and content requirements for documents under § 4.1011;
( 2 ) Include the name and address of the person on whose behalf the appearance is made;
( 3 ) If the representative is an attorney (except for an attorney with the Office of the Solicitor), include a statement that he or she is a member in good standing of the bar of the highest court of a state, the District of Columbia, or any territory or commonwealth of the United States (identifying which one); and
( 4 ) If the representative is not an attorney, include a statement explaining his or her authority to represent the entity.
( e ) *Disqualification.* The ALJ may disqualify any representative for misconduct or other good cause.
§ 3904.13 Acceptable forms of bonds. ( a ) The BLM will accept either a personal bond or a surety bond. Personal bonds are pledges of any of the following: ( 1 ) Cash;
( 2 ) Cashier's check;
( 3 ) Certified check; or
( 4 ) Negotiable U.S. Treasury bonds equal in value to the bond amount. Treasury bonds must give the Secretary authority to sell the securities in the case of failure to comply with the conditions and obligations of the exploration license or lease.
( b ) Surety bonds must be issued by qualified surety companies approved by the Department of the Treasury. A list of qualified sureties is available at any BLM state office.
§ 3809.553 May I post a financial guarantee for a part of my operations? ( a ) Yes, BLM may authorize you to provide a financial guarantee covering a part of your operations if— ( 1 ) Your operations do not go beyond what is specifically covered by the partial financial guarantee; and
( 2 ) The partial financial guarantee covers all reclamation costs within the incremental area of operations.
( b ) BLM will review the amount and terms of the financial guarantee for each increment of your operations at least annually.
Exhibit 31.1

SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION

I, Nigel Rulewski , certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Innovate Oncology,
Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly
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 registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
exchange act rules 13a-14 and 15d-14 for the registrant and have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, 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 registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the
Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):

a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal control
which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's
auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls.

6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal
controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of my most recent evaluation, including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.



                             Date: August 22, 2005

                             By: /s/ Nigel Rulewski
                             -----------------------------
                             Nigel Rulewski
                             CEO, President & Director
                             (Principal Executive Officer)

                                       19
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 20-21859-CIV-ALTONAGA/Goodman

In the Matter of the Complaint for Exoneration 

from or Limitation of Liability by Jose Garcia, 

as owner of the 2019 40’ Beneteau Motor Yacht 

bearing Hull Identification No. BENER159L819.

Petitioner.

_________________________________________/

ORDER ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSING CASE

The Court has been advised that the parties have amicably settled this matter. 

Accordingly, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. The above-styled action is administratively CLOSED without prejudice to the parties 

to file a stipulation for dismissal with the Court within sixty (60) days of the date of this Order. 

2. If the parties fail to complete the expected settlement, either party may request the 

Court to reopen the case.

3. The Clerk shall CLOSE this case for administrative purposes only. Any pending 

motions are DENIED AS MOOT.

DONE AND ORDERED in Miami, Florida, this 12th day of November, 2020.

 _______________________________

 CECILIA M. ALTONAGA

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

cc: counsel of record

Case 1:20-cv-21859-CMA Document 133 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/12/2020 Page 1 of 1
#### J. C. FAIRLEY et al., Plaintiffs, v. Joe T. PATTERSON et al., Defendants.

Civ. A. No. 2205H.

United States District Court S. D. Mississippi, Hattiesburg Division.

Oct. 4, 1967.

L. Lackey Rowe, Jr., Jackson, Miss., for plaintiffs.

William A. Allain, Asst. State Atty. Gen., Jackson, Miss., R. A. Gray, Jr., Hattiesburg, Miss., for defendants.

ORDER

DAN M. RUSSELL, Jr., District Judge.

This cause came on for hearing on the complaint, the answer and argument of counsel, it being stipulated in open court that this hearing would be considered as a final hearing on the merits, and all parties having announced that no factual issues are involved and no testimony or evidence was to be offered, the sole question for determination being whether or not Section 2870 of the Mississippi Code of 1942, as amended by the legislature at the regular session of 1966, comes within the purview of or is covered by *165Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, being now Section 1973c of Title 42, U.S.C.

It is the opinion of the Court that said Section 2870, as amended by the legislature of Mississippi at its regular session of 1966, does not come within the purview of and is not covered by Title 42, Section 1973c U.S.C., and that plaintiffs are entitled to no relief in this action.

It is, therefore, ordered and adjudged that the injunction prayed for in this action be, and the same is, hereby, denied and the Complaint is dismissed at the cost of plaintiffs.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF VICE PRESIDENT, FINANCE
                         CALLISTO PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
                FORM 10-KSB FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2003
                 PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         I am the Vice President, Finance of Callisto Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a
Delaware corporation (the "Company"). I am delivering this certificate in
connection with the Form 10-KSB of the Company for the year ended December 31,
2003 and filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("Form 10-KSB").

         Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I hereby certify that, to the best of my
knowledge, the Form 10-KSB fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information
contained in the Form 10-KSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: April 14, 2004
                                             /s/ Bernard Denoyer
                                            -------------------------
                                            Bernard Denoyer
                                            Vice President, Finance
### §714f. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 98–481, §8, Oct. 17, 1984, 98 Stat. 2254, which authorized the Secretary of the Interior to promulgate regulations necessary to carry out the provisions of this subchapter, was omitted from the Code as being of special and not general application.
114 STAT. 356 PUBLIC LAW 106–223—JUNE 20, 2000

Public Law 106–223

106th Congress

An Act

To authorize the award of the Medal of Honor to Ed W. Freeman, James K.

Okubo, and Andrew J. Smith.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. AUTHORITY TO AWARD MEDAL OF HONOR TO ED W. FREEMAN, JAMES K. OKUBO, AND ANDREW J. SMITH.

(a) INAPPLICABILITY OF TIME LIMITATIONS.—Notwithstanding

the time limitations in section 3744(b) of title 10, United States

Code, or any other time limitation, the President may award the

Medal of Honor under section 3741 of such title to the persons

specified in subsection (b) for the acts specified in that subsection,

the award of the Medal of Honor to such persons having been

determined by the Secretary of the Army to be warranted in accordance with section 1130 of such title.

(b) PERSONS ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE THE MEDAL OF HONOR.—

The persons referred to in subsection (a) are the following:

(1) Ed W. Freeman, for conspicuous acts of gallantry and

intrepidity at the risk of his life and beyond the call of duty

on November 14, 1965, as flight leader and second-in-command

of a helicopter lift unit at landing zone X–Ray in the Battle

of the Ia Drang Valley, Republic of Vietnam, during the

Vietnam War, while serving in the grade of Captain in Alpha

Company, 229th Assault Helicopter Battalion, 101st Cavalry

Division (Airmobile).

(2) James K. Okubo, for conspicuous acts of gallantry and

intrepidity at the risk of his life and beyond the call of duty

on October 28 and 29, and November 4, 1944, at Foret

Domaniale de Champ, near Biffontaine, France, during World

War II, while serving as an Army medic in the grade of Technician Fifth Grade in the medical detachment, 442d Regimental

Combat Team.

(3) Andrew J. Smith, for conspicuous acts of gallantry

and intrepidity at the risk of his life and beyond the call

of duty on November 30, 1864, in the Battle of Honey Hill,

South Carolina, during the Civil War, while serving as a corporal in the 55th Massachusetts Voluntary Infantry Regiment.

(c) POSTHUMOUS AWARD.—The Medal of Honor may be awarded

under this section posthumously, as provided in section 3752 of

title 10, United States Code.

June 20, 2000

[S. 2722]

PUBLIC LAW 106–223—JUNE 20, 2000 114 STAT. 357

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—S. 2722:

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 146 (2000):

June 13, considered and passed Senate.

June 15, considered and passed House.

Æ

(d) PRIOR AWARD.—The Medal of Honor may be awarded under

this section for service for which a Silver Star, or other award,

has been awarded.

Approved June 20, 2000.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 7
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                         3,671,600
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                        2,389,300
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                          2,409,900
<EQUITIES>                                      66,500
<MORTGAGE>                                      65,900
<REAL-ESTATE>                                   39,000
<TOTAL-INVEST>                               6,529,500
<CASH>                                          39,600
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                                   0
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                         211,900
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,304,500
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                      0
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                                  0
<POLICY-OTHER>                                 589,500
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                        5,469,500
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                 70,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          225,000<F1>
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        43,200
<OTHER-SE>                                     441,600
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,304,500
<PREMIUMS>                                      52,700
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                            242,700
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                                 200
<OTHER-INCOME>                                   5,300
<BENEFITS>                                     189,400
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                     16,200
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                            35,500
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 52,100
<INCOME-TAX>                                    16,400
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             35,700
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    35,700
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.80
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.80
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                       0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                  0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                      0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0
<FN>
<F1>Mandatorily Redeemable Preferred Securities of subsidiary trusts
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 11**  **- 6592** 

CURTIS D. SHULER , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. RICHARD NEELY, Superintendent, Lanesboro Correctional Institution; C. W. CLARK, Supervisor, Food Management, Lanesboro Correctional Institution; J. BENNETT, Supervisor, Programs, Lanesboro Correctional Institution , Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina , at Charlotte

. Robert J. Conrad, Jr. , C hief District Judge. ( 3:11

- cv
- 00182

- RJC )

Submitted : August 25, 2011 Decided: August 30, 2011

Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and KEENAN , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Curtis D. Shuler, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opini ons are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Curtis D. Shuler appeals the district court ’ s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (200 6 ) complaint under 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915A(b) (200 6 ). We have reviewed the record and conclude
there is no revers ible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court. See Shuler v. Neely , No.

3:11

- cv
- 00182

- RJC (W.D.N.C. Apr. 19, 2011) . We dispense with
oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the materials before the court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-1909 

PATRICE KEPTCHUME TCHIENGANG,

Petitioner,

versus

ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration

Appeals. (A97-194-215)

Submitted: April 13, 2005 Decided: April 27, 2005

Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joshua A. Moses, JOSHUA MOSES & ASSOCIATES, Silver Spring,

Maryland, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney

General, Blair T. O’Connor, Senior Litigation Counsel, Shahira M.

Tadross, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for

Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Patrice Keptchume Tchiengang, a native and citizen of

Cameroon, petitions for review of a final order of the Board of

Immigration Appeals (Board) affirming without opinion the

immigration judge’s denial of his motion to reopen removal

proceedings. This court’s review of the denial of a motion to

reopen is extremely deferential, and the decision will not be

reversed absent abuse of discretion. Stewart v. INS, 181 F.3d 587,

595 (4th Cir. 1999). Motions to reopen are disfavored. INS v.

Doherty, 502 U.S. 314, 323 (1992). We find no abuse of discretion

in the immigration judge’s conclusion that Tchiengang failed to

establish exceptional circumstances warranting reopening. See 8

U.S.C. § 1229a(b)(5)(C)(i), (e)(1) (2000). Accordingly, we deny

the petition for review. 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.

PETITION DENIED
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-19-00529-CV

Isabel MARTINEZ,

Appellant

v.

Ana LITOFSKY and Michael Litofsky,

Appellees

From the County Court at Law No. 10, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2019CV05367

Honorable John Francis Davis, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARION, JUSTICE MARTINEZ, AND JUSTICE ALVAREZ

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED FOR 

WANT OF PROSECUTION. It is ORDERED that no costs be assessed against appellant in 

relation to this appeal because she qualifies as indigent under TEX. R. APP. P. 20.

SIGNED October 23, 2019.

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice