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

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4952 

To increase the annual limitation on purchases by individuals of Series I 

United States savings bonds during periods of high inflation. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 27, 2022 

Mrs. FISCHER (for herself and Mr. WARNER) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To increase the annual limitation on purchases by individuals 

of Series I United States savings bonds during periods 

of high inflation. 

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 ‘‘Savings Security Act 

5 of 2022’’. 

6 SEC. 2. INCREASE IN LIMITATION ON PURCHASE OF SERIES 

7 I UNITED STATES SAVINGS BONDS. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 3105 of title 31, United 

9 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol10 lowing: 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4952 IS

1 ‘‘(f)(1) For purposes of subsection (c)(7), during any 

2 applicable year, the maximum amount of Series I United 

3 States savings bonds issued during such year that may 

4 be held by an applicable individual shall not exceed 

5 $30,000. 

6 ‘‘(2)(A) For purposes of this subsection, the term ‘ap7 plicable year’ means any calendar year during which the 

8 average of the annualized changes in the Consumer Price 

9 Index for All Urban Consumers during any 6-month pe10 riod ending during such year is greater than 3.5 percent. 

11 ‘‘(B) Not later than 30 days after the Secretary de12 termines that the requirement under subparagraph (A) 

13 has been satisfied with respect to any calendar year, the 

14 Secretary shall provide public notice that paragraph (1) 

15 applies with respect to such year. 

16 ‘‘(3) For purposes of this subsection, the term ‘appli17 cable individual’ means an individual who provides the 

18 Secretary with— 

19 ‘‘(A) the TIN (as defined in section 

20 7701(a)(41) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986) 

21 of such individual; or 

22 ‘‘(B) the social security number issued to such 

23 individual by the Social Security Administration. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 4952 IS

1 ‘‘(4) This subsection shall not apply with respect to 

2 any Series I United States savings bond that is made 

3 available in paper form.’’. 

4 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

5 this section shall apply to any calendar year beginning 

6 after the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
#### Dukes, *alias*Shack, *v.*The State.

November 15, 1910.

Indictment for murder. 'Before Judge Edwards. Polk superior court. June 27, 1910.

*I. Felion Mundy,*for plaintiff in error. *II. A. Hall, aUorneygeneral,*and *W. K. Fielder, solicitor-general,*contra.

Lumpkin, J.

1. There was no abuse' of discretion in refusing to grant a continuance.

2. The newly discovered evidence was not such as to require a new trial.

3. The verdict was supported by the evidence, and there was no abuse of discretion in overruling the motion for a new trial.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
EX-10.18





 Exhibit 10.18 

Integration Appliance, Inc. 

SECOND AMENDMENT TO CONSULTING AGREEMENT 

This Second Amendment to Consulting Agreement (the “Amendment”) is made as of January 1, 2019 (the “Amendment
Effective Date”), and amends the Consulting Agreement dated March 1, 2016, as amended April 28, 2017 (as amended, the “Agreement”), by and between Integration Appliance, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the
“Company”), and Ralph Baxter (the “Consultant”). 
 Company and Consultant desire to further amend the
Consulting Agreement to extend the term of the Agreement. Except as expressly set forth in this Amendment, the Consulting Agreement remains in full force and effect in accordance with its terms. Capitalized terms not otherwise defined in this
Amendment shall have the meanings provided in the Consulting Agreement. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: 

 

	 	1.	 Term. The parties agree to extend the term of the Agreement for one (1) year. Therefore,
Section 6(c) of the Agreement shall be deleted in its entirety and replaced as follows: 


 “(c)
Expiration. Unless terminated earlier, this Agreement will expire on December 31, 2019.” 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties
have signed this Second Amendment to Consulting Agreement as of the Amendment Effective Date. 
  

									
	INTEGRATION APPLIANCE, INC.	 		 		 	CONSULTANT
					
	 By:
	 	 /s/ Stephen Robertson
	 		 		 	 /s/ Ralph Baxter

					
	 Name:
	 	Stephen Robertson	 		 	Name:	 	Ralph Baxter
					
	 Title:
	 	Chief Financial Officer
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 828

 813

 817

 835

 852

 839

 824

 827

 864

 865

 832

 832

 854

 842

 764

 791

 856

 786

 844

 842

 738

 830

 835

 839

 770

 744

 732

 810

 832

 829

 796

 721

 709

 710

 748

 746

 818

 689

 696

 756

 755

 706

 750

 826

 700

 707

 717

 734

 735

 734

 723

 691

 733

 737

 756

 710

 701

 690

 696

 813

 700

 729

 780

 740

 739

 810

 817

 830

 737

 736

 838

 828

 738

 808

 840

 758

 740

 757

 782

 764

 782

 767

 713

 797

 804

 818

 736

 722

 711

 754

 822

 757

 753

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

DECEMBER 2003 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: January 15, 2004

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

30 DAY

ACCUM

MEAN

30 DAY

AVG 

MEAN

 20,590

 20,723

 20,843

 21,049

 21,248

 21,437

 21,551

 21,636

 21,841

 22,066

 22,173

 22,326

 22,466

 22,498

 22,508

 22,564

 22,638

 22,671

 22,726

 22,780

 22,804

 22,922

 23,000

 23,116

 23,164

 23,160

 23,104

 23,132

 23,233

 23,225

 23,198

 686

 691

 695

 702

 708

 715

 718

 721

 728

 736

 739

 744

 749

 750

 750

 752

 755

 756

 758

 759

 760

 764

 767

 771

 772

 772

 770

 771

 774

 774

 773

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

30 DAY ACCUM MEAN and 30 DAY AVG MEAN columns are 30 day runnings, except for April 1 and September 1, 

 where they do not go back 30 days.

VERNALIS ON THE SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-6816

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

CHRISTOPHER THOMAS BLEVINS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees,

Chief District Judge. (CR-94-17-V, CA-97-65-5-1V)

Submitted: November 5, 1998 Decided: November 19, 1998

Before ERVIN, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Susan Graham James, Montgomery, Alabama, for Appellant. Douglas

Scott Broyles, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte,

North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Christopher Blevins seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 &

Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s

opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning

of the district court. United States v. Blevins, No. CR-94-17-V;

CA-97-65-5-1V (W.D.N.C. May 19, 1998). 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
----

----

I Communications

Conseil

----

Information concernant la prorogation de l'accord international de 1994 sur les bois tropicaux

(2005/C 237/01)

Lors de sa 34e session (tenue à Panama du 12 au 16 mai 2003), le Conseil international des bois tropicaux a décidé, conformément à l'article 46, paragraphe 2, de l'accord international de 1994 sur les bois tropicaux (1), de proroger l'accord pour une période de trois ans allant du 1er janvier 2004 au 31 décembre 2006.

----

(1)JO L 208 du 17.8.1996, p. 1.

----

Commission

----

Taux de change de l'euro (1)

26 septembre 2005

(2005/C 237/02)

1 euro= 

----

(1)

Source: taux de change de référence publié par la Banque centrale européenne.

----

----

Modalités de transmission électronique des notifications d'aide d'État, notamment les adresses, ainsi que toutes les dispositions nécessaires pour assurer la protection des données confidentielles

Article 3, paragraphe 6, du règlement (CE) no 794/2004 de la Commission du 21 avril 2004 concernant la mise en œuvre du règlement (CE) no 659/1999 du Conseil portant modalités d'application de l'article 93 du traité CE

(2005/C 237/03)

(Texte présentant de l'intérêt pour l'EEE)

----

----

Notification préalable d'une opération de concentration

(Affaire COMP/M.3984 — Bain Fund Group/FCI)

Cas susceptible d'être traité selon la procédure simplifiée

(2005/C 237/04)

(Texte présentant de l'intérêt pour l'EEE)

----

(1)JO L 24 du 29.1.2004, p. 1.

(2)JO C 56 du 5.3.2005, p. 32.

----

----

Non-opposition à une concentration notifiée

(Affaire COMP/M.3921 — Advent/Herlitz)

(2005/C 237/05)

(Texte présentant de l'intérêt pour l'EEE)

Le 19 septembre 2005, la Commission a décidé de ne pas s'opposer à la concentration notifiée susmentionnée et de la déclarer compatible avec le marché commun. Cette décision est basée sur l'article 6, paragraphe 1, point b), du règlement (CE) no 139/2004 du Conseil. Le texte intégral de la décision est disponible seulement en allemand et sera rendu public après suppression des secrets d'affaires qu'il puisse contenir. Il sera disponible:

----

Rectificatifs

----

Rectificatif à l'appel à propositions (No VIII-2006/01) — Ligne budgétaire 4020 «Financement des partis politiques européens»

(«Journal officiel de l'Union européenne» C 141 du 10 juin 2005)

(2005/C 237/06)

Page 22, point 4.3, lettre e):

au lieu de:

«Versement d'un préfinancement de 80 % (15 jours après la signature de la convention).»

lire:

«Versement d'un préfinancement de 50 % (15 jours après la signature de la convention).»

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 7
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                           156,862
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                      86,718
<MORTGAGE>                                           0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                 253,580
<CASH>                                          10,157
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                              16,805
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                               0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 323,676
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                111,612
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                             43,986
<POLICY-OTHER>                                       0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                                0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         7,630
<OTHER-SE>                                     144,840
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   323,676
<PREMIUMS>                                      10,512
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                              2,873
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                               6,309
<OTHER-INCOME>                                     867
<BENEFITS>                                       9,485
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                          0
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                             2,517
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  7,032
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,463
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,569
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,569
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    36.03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    32.45
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                       0<F1>
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                  0<F1>
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0<F1>
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0<F1>
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0<F1>
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                      0<F1>
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0<F1>
<FN>
<F1>Not available for quarterly interim financial statements.
</FN>
        

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


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                  JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                    MAR-31-1996
<CASH>                          0
<SECURITIES>                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                   0
<ALLOWANCES>                    0
<INVENTORY>                     0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                0
<PP&E>                          0
<DEPRECIATION>                  0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           0
<BONDS>                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>           0
<PREFERRED>                     0
<COMMON>                        1000
<OTHER-SE>                      (1000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    0
<SALES>                         0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                0
<CGS>                           0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 0
<INCOME-TAX>                    0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             0
<DISCONTINUED>                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                 0
<CHANGES>                       0
<NET-INCOME>                    0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                   0
<EPS-DILUTED>                   0
                                

</TABLE>
### §2034. Dower or curtesy interests

The value of the gross estate shall include the value of all property to the extent of any interest therein of the surviving spouse, existing at the time of the decedent's death as dower or curtesy, or by virtue of a statute creating an estate in lieu of dower or curtesy.

(Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 381; Pub. L. 87–834, §18(a)(2)(B), Oct. 16, 1962, 76 Stat. 1052.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1962—Pub. L. 87–834 struck out provisions which excepted real property situated outside of the United States.

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

#### Effective Date of 1962 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 87–834 applicable to estates of decedents dying after Oct. 16, 1962, except as otherwise provided, see section 18(b) of Pub. L. 87–834, set out as a note under section 2031 of this title.
Exhibit 99.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                 SECTION 906 OF THE SARABANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In  connection  with the  Quarterly  report of Vianet  Technologies,  Inc.  (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2002 as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Victor Goetz,  Chief Financial Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18
U.S.C. section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

         (3)      The Report fully  complies  with the  requirements  of section
                  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and

         (4)      The information  contained in the Report fairly  presents,  in
                  all material respects,  the financial  condition and result of
                  operations of the Company.



/s/ Victor E. Goetz
------------------------

Victor E. Goetz
Chief Financial Officer
November 19, 2002
(No. 734

Claimant awarded $1,214.75.)

#### Natures Rival Company, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Opinion filed May 1, 1925.*

Franchise *tax*— when *refund will he awarded.*This case is controlled by the decision of the court in the case of *Herenden Milling Go.*v. *State, supra.*

Moran, Paltzer & O ’Donnell, *for claimant.*

Oscar E. Carlstrom, Attorney General; Edward C. Fitch, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

Mr. Justice Leech

delivered the opinion of the court:

This is a claim for the refund of franchise taxes erroneously paid to the Secretary of State of the State of Illinois, by *137above named claimant, in the years 1921 and 1922, total excess paid by claimant amounting to $1,214.75.

The demurrer filed by the Attorney General of the State of Illinois, is, as a matter of law, sustained.

On the grounds of equity and social justice, we award claimant the sum of $1,214.75.
#### Saulsbury *et al. v.*Central of Georgia Railway Co. *et al.*

September 29, 1910.

Complaint for land. Before Judge Hodges. Bibb superior court- February 17, 1909.

*Spencer B. Atkinson, E. T. Brown, 0. A. Park, Joseph E. Eall,*and *Warren Roberts,*for plaintiffs. *J. E. Eall, Wimberly & Jordan,*and *Miller, Jones & Miller,*for defendants.

Beck, J.

1. Whether or not the preliminary proof shows that sufficient diligence had been exercised, in searching for a paper to account for its loss, and to authorize the introduction of secondary evidence of its contents,, rests to a considerable degree in the sound discretion of the eburt.

2. There having in this case been no abuse of discretion in holding that a sufficient foundation had not been laid for the introduction of secondary evidence, and in rejecting the same, the ruling will not be reversed. Nor will the judgment of the court granting a nonsuit, which necessarily followed the rejection of the secondary evidence referred to, be disturbed.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur, except Atlvmson, J., disqualified.*
### §1806. Eligibility studies

#### (a) Development of plans, procedures, and criteria

The Secretary is authorized to enter into an agreement with the Secretary of Education to assist the Bureau of Indian Affairs in developing plans, procedures, and criteria for conducting the eligibility studies required by this section. Such agreement shall provide for continuing technical assistance in the conduct of such studies.

#### (b) Initiation by Secretary; grant applications and budgets

The Secretary, within thirty days after a request by any Indian tribe, shall initiate a 1 eligibility study to determine whether there is justification to encourage and maintain a tribally controlled college or university, and, upon a positive determination, shall aid in the preparation of grant applications and related budgets which will insure successful operation of such an institution. Such a positive determination shall be effective for the fiscal year succeeding the fiscal year in which such determination is made.

#### (c) Source of appropriations

Funds to carry out the purposes of this section for any fiscal year may be drawn from either—

(1) general administrative appropriations to the Secretary made after October 17, 1978 for such fiscal year; or

(2) not more than 5 per centum of the funds appropriated to carry out section 1807 of this title for such fiscal year.

(Pub. L. 95–471, title I, §106, formerly §105, Oct. 17, 1978, 92 Stat. 1326; renumbered §106 and amended Pub. L. 98–192, §§4(a)(1), (b)(1), 6(a), Dec. 1, 1983, 97 Stat. 1336, 1337; Pub. L. 105–244, title IX, §901(b)(5), Oct. 7, 1998, 112 Stat. 1828.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1998—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 105–244 substituted "college or university" for "community college".

1983—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 98–192, §6(a)(2), (3), substituted "eligibility" for "feasibility" and "Secretary of Education" for "Assistant Secretary of Education of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare".

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 98–192, §6(a)(2), (4), inserted provision that such positive determination be effective for fiscal year succeeding fiscal year in which such determination is made, and substituted "eligibility" for "feasibility".

Subsec. (c)(2). Pub. L. 98–192, §§4(b)(1), 6(a)(5), substituted "5 per centum" for "10 per centum" and made a technical amendment to reference to section 1807 of this title to reflect renumbering of that section.

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

#### Effective Date of 1998 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 105–244 effective Oct. 1, 1998, except as otherwise provided in Pub. L. 105–244, see section 3 of Pub. L. 105–244, set out as a note under section 1001 of Title 20, Education.

1 So in original. Probably should be "an".
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-40226

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

EDUVAR ROJAS-MURGA,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:12-CR-896-1

Before DAVIS, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Eduvar Rojas-Murga

has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders

v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th

Cir. 2011). Rojas-Murga has filed a response and has moved for substitution of

counsel or leave to proceed pro se. The record is insufficiently developed to allow

consideration at this time of Rojas-Murga’s claim of ineffective assistance of

counsel; such a claim generally “cannot be resolved on direct appeal when the

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

December 17, 2013

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

 Case: 13-40226 Document: 00512473864 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/17/2013
No. 13-40226

claim has not been raised before the district court since no opportunity existed

to develop the record on the merits of the allegations.” United States v.

Cantwell, 470 F.3d 1087, 1091 (5th Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks and

citation omitted). We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of

the record reflected therein, as well as Rojas-Murga’s response. We concur with

counsel’s assessment thatthe appeal presentsno nonfrivolous issue for appellate

review. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is

excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 

See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. Rojas-Murga’s motion for substitution of counsel or leave

to proceed pro se is DENIED.

2

 Case: 13-40226 Document: 00512473864 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/17/2013