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

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2540 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2540

   To extend the temporary suspension of duty on certain cathode ray 
                                 tubes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 23, 2005

 Mr. Hayworth introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To extend the temporary suspension of duty on certain cathode ray 
                                 tubes.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN CATHODE RAY TUBES.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.85.41 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to certain cathode ray tubes) 
is amended by striking ``12/31/2006'' and inserting ``12/31/2010''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### Theodore Heos, an Infant, by Peter Heos, His Guardian ad Litem, et al., Appellants, v. Irving Ladner, Doing Business as Highway Auto Renting Company, Respondent, et al., Defendants.

Appeal by plaintiffs from an order referring respondent’s motion to vacate a judgment against him entered December 7, 1936, and the body execution issued thereunder in favor of Peter Heos, to an Official Referee to hear and determine, and from an order denying the motion of his administratrix to resettle the aforesaid order so as to recite all the papers used on the original motion and to change the relief granted in an insubstantial particular. Appeal by plaintiff Theodore Heos from the orders dismissed, without costs. That plaintiff is not a party to the present applications. As to the other appellant, orders affirmed, with one bill of $10 costs and disbursements. The question of the power of the Special Term to refer the motion to an Official Referee to hear and determine was withdrawn on the argument of the appeal. There is no error in the orders in other respects. Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Adel, MacCrate and Beldock, JJ., concur. [See *post,*p. 740 ; 283 App. Div. 670.]
#### John Kramb, Respondent, Appellant, v. Julia Haring and Others, Appellants, Respondents.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Held, while the statement of the witness Fischer should have been received as bearing upon the credibility of his testimony, we think the substance of it was elicited upon cross-examination so far as material, and that no prejudicial error was committed in rejecting it. All concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2435 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2435

             To extend the suspension of duty on Baytron M.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 18, 2005

  Mr. Murphy introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
             To extend the suspension of duty on Baytron M.

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

SECTION 1. BAYTRON M.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.29.87 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to 3,4-Ethylenedioxythiophene) 
is amended by striking ``12/31/2006'' and inserting ``12/31/2009''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
NewJersey Business & Industry Association Michele N. Siekerka President

The Honorable Anthony R. Foxx Secretary ofTransportation US Department ofTransportation 1200 New Jersey Ave SE Washington, DC 20590 The Honorable John F. Kerry Secretary ofState US Department of State 2201 CStreet NW Washington, DC 20520 The Honorable Penny Pritzker Secretary of Commerce US Department of Commerce 1401 Constitution Ave., NW Washington, D.C. 20230

# BIA

Dear Secretary Kerry, Secretary Pritzker, and Secretary Foxx, May 15,2015

I'm writing to you today to bring your attention to an important step we can take to level the playing field for American businesses and maintain the environment offair market competition in aviation established by Open Skies policy that has been crucial for America's success. As President and CEO ofthe New Jersey Business and Industry Association that represents 20,000 New Jersey compan ies, I am acutely aware ofthe considerable benefits Open Skies policy has brought my state, in addition to the U.S. economy as a whole
. The competitive atmosphere created by Open Skies improved service, lowered fares and increased air travel and commerce throughout the country. Over the past decade, Qatar Airways, Etihad Airways and Emirates Airline have received at least $42 billion in government subsidies, interest-free "loans," free land, and other unfair benefits in direct violation of U.S. Open Skies policy. I am reaching out to ask that the U.S. government open consultations with Qatar and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) in orderto address the massive, market-distorting subsidies that those nations provide their state-owned airlines. The tens of billions of dollars in subsidies are distorting the free market framework established by Open Skies and they will ultimately have a negative economic impact here in the United States ifwe allow them to continue. The uneven playing field created by these massive subsidies is forcing U.S. carriers like Delta, Un ited and American Airlines out of an increasing number of international routes which, if

10 W est Laf ayette Street, Trenton, NJ 08608

- 2002 • 609-393-7707 • \Vww.njbia.org

### allowed to continue, will lead the disappearance ofthousands ofAmerican jobs
. In fact, according to a white paper released by the Partnership for Open 

### & Fair Skies, each route that is lost to Qatar, Etihad or Emirates will result in an average net loss of 821 good U.S
.jobs
.These are jobs that we can ill afford to lose and they should not be lost as a result of unfair competition from foreign carriers. I am not seeking to end the Open Skies agreements with Qatar and the UAE, nor am I raising concerns with regard to any ofthe more than one hundred other Open Skies agreements. I am simply requesting that the U.S. government open consultations with Qatar and the UAE, which are provided for within the Open Skies agreements themselves and hold offon the addition of new routes. Sincerely,
### §300aa–31. Citizen's actions

#### (a) General rule

Except as provided in subsection (b), any person may commence in a district court of the United States a civil action on such person's own behalf against the Secretary where there is alleged a failure of the Secretary to perform any act or duty under this part.

#### (b) Notice

No action may be commenced under subsection (a) before the date which is 60 days after the person bringing the action has given written notice of intent to commence such action to the Secretary.

#### (c) Costs of litigation

The court, in issuing any final order in any action under this section, may award costs of litigation (including reasonable attorney and expert witness fees) to any plaintiff who substantially prevails on one or more significant issues in the action.

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title XXI, §2131, as added Pub. L. 99–660, title III, §311(a), Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3778; amended Pub. L. 100–203, title IV, §4305, Dec. 22, 1987, 101 Stat. 1330–224.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1987—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 100–203, which directed that subsec. (c) be amended by substituting "to any plaintiff who substantially prevails on one or more significant issues in the action" for "to any party, whenever the court determines that such award is appropriate", was executed by making the substitution for "to any party, whenever the court determines such award is appropriate", to reflect the probable intent of Congress.

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

#### Effective Date

Subpart effective Dec. 22, 1987, see section 323 of Pub. L. 99–660, set out as a note under section 300aa–1 of this title.
Exhibit 32.2


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

     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Imperial Petroleum Recovery
Corporation; (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended July 31, 2005
(the "Report"), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof, I, Edward C. Gaiennie, Chairman of the Board of the Company and
Principal Accounting Officer, hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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


By: /s/ Edward C. Gaiennie                                    May 16, 2006
    ----------------------
    Edward C. Gaiennie
    Chief Financial Officer and Principal
    Accounting Officer


                                       25
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-38285) of Vision Twenty-One, Inc. and
Subsidiaries of our report dated July 1, 1997, except as to Note 10, which is as
of August 19, 1997 relating to the consolidated financial statements of BBG-COA,
Inc., which appears in the Report on Form 10-Q of Vision Twenty-One, Inc. and
Subsidiaries for the quarter ended September 30, 1997.




/s/ PRICE WATERHOUSE LLP

Fort Lauderdale, Florida
November 13, 1997
§ 504.1 Scope and purpose. ( a ) These regulations in this subpart establish policy, assign responsibilities and prescribe procedures with respect to: ( 1 ) The production or disclosure of official information or records by BBG employees, and
( 2 ) The testimony of current and former BBG employees, relating to official information, official duties, or the BBG's records, in connection with federal or state litigation in which the BBG is not a party.
( b ) The BBG intends these provisions to: ( 1 ) Conserve the time of BBG employees for conducting official business;
( 2 ) Minimize the involvement of BBG employees in issues unrelated to BBG's mission;
( 3 ) Maintain the impartiality of BBG employees in disputes between private litigants; and
( 4 ) Protect sensitive, confidential information and the deliberative processes of the BBG.
( c ) In providing for these requirements, the BBG does not waive the sovereign immunity of the United States.
( d ) This part provides guidance for the internal operations of BBG. It does not create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, that a party may rely upon in any legal proceeding against the United States.
Home Deadliest Most Expensive Blowouts Collapse Sunk Rigs Hurricanes Rig List Guestboo

Sea Quest

1. Sea 

2. Sea Que

Ni

3. Sea Qu

4. Sea Que

scu

Rig: Sea Quest Semi-sub

Date: 17 January 1980

Location: Warri, Nigeria

Operator: Texaco

Summary

One of the first rigs to work in the UK sector, the Sea Quest was built by Belfast-based

Harland and Wolff and launched 07 January 1967. Originally built as the Sedco 135C, the 

rig was renamed Sea Quest and worked in the late 1960s for Amoco. It made the first 

commercial oil find in the North Sea when the Arbroath Field was discovered in 1969 and 

went on to drill the massive Montrose and Forties Fields.

After working for a decade in the North Sea, the rig was renamed Sedco 135C in 1977 and 

towed to the west coast of Africa. For the next three years, the rig worked offshore Nigeria 

until 17 January 1980, when the well blew out while drilling for Texaco in the Warri area. 

The crew were evacuated, after which the blowout caught fire causing extensive fire

damage to the Sea Quest. The decision was made to dispose of the rig and it was towed

out to sea then scuttled and sunk in deep water.

Sources:

Ian Anderson & Dennis O'Mara: BBC's Your Place or Mine

Driller's Log

Photos 

1. Dukes Wood Oil Museum

2-4. Driller's Log

[ Home | Deadliest | Most Expensive | Blowouts | Collapse | Sunk Rigs | Hurricanes | Rig List | Links

Sea Quest Blowout - Oil Rig Disasters - Offshore Drilling Accidents Page 1 of 1

http://home.versatel.nl/the_sims/rig/seaquest.htm 11/29/2011
### §3931. Congressional statement of purpose

The Congress finds that the volume of housing being produced for families and individuals of low or moderate income must be increased to meet the national goal of a decent home and a suitable living environment for every American family, and declares that it is the policy of the United States to encourage the widest possible participation by private enterprise in the provision of housing for low or moderate income families. The Congress has therefore determined that one or more private organizations should be created to encourage maximum participation by private investors in programs and projects to provide low and moderate income housing.

(Pub. L. 90–448, title IX, §901, Aug. 1, 1968, 82 Stat. 547.)
EXHIBIT 32.1

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

In connection  with the Quarterly  Report of Advanced Optics  Electronics,  Inc.
(the  "Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the six months ended June 30, 2005 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
I, Leslie Robins, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to
18 U.S.C.  ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that:

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

      2.    The  information  contained in the Report  fairly  presents,  in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Company.

                                                     /s/ Leslie Robins
                                                     -----------------------
                                                     Chief Executive Officer
                                                     August 13, 2005

A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, an other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version 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.
#### LAIKHRAM DINGOOR *v.*RICHARD STROFFOLINO, JR.

(AC 25386)

Schaller, Flynn and Gruendel, Js.

Submitted on briefs April 1

officially released May 3, 2005

Per Curiam.

The judgment is affirmed.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4213 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to require judges of the United 

States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims to reside within fifty miles 

of the District of Columbia, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 19, 2012 

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

Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to require judges 

of the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans 

Claims to reside within fifty miles of the District of 

Columbia, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. REQUIREMENT THAT JUDGES ON UNITED 

4 STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS 

5 CLAIMS RESIDE WITHIN FIFTY MILES OF DIS6 TRICT OF COLUMBIA. 

7 (a) RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT.— 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4213 IH

1 (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 7255 of title 38, 

2 United States Code, is amended to read as follows: 

3 ‘‘§ 7255. Offices, duty stations, and residences 

4 ‘‘(a) PRINCIPAL OFFICE.—The principal office of the 

5 Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims shall be in the 

6 Washington, D.C., metropolitan area, but the Court may 

7 sit at any place within the United States. 

8 ‘‘(b) OFFICIAL DUTY STATIONS.—(1) Except as pro9 vided in paragraph (2), the official duty station of each 

10 judge while in active service shall be the principal office 

11 of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. 

12 ‘‘(2) The place where a recall-eligible retired judge 

13 maintains the actual abode in which such judge custom14 arily lives shall be considered the recall-eligible retired 

15 judge’s official duty station. 

16 ‘‘(c) RESIDENCES.—(1) Except as provided in para17 graph (2), after appointment and while in active service, 

18 each judge of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims 

19 shall reside within 50 miles of the District of Columbia. 

20 ‘‘(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to recall-eligible 

21 retired judges of the Court of Appeals for Veterans 

22 Claims.’’. 

23 (2) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sec24 tions at the beginning of chapter 72 of such title is 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 4213 IH

1 amended by striking the item relating to section 

2 7255 and inserting the following new item: 

‘‘7255. Offices, duty stations, and residences.’’. 

3 (b) REMOVAL.—Section 7253(f)(1) of such title is 

4 amended by striking ‘‘or engaging in the practice of law’’ 

5 and inserting ‘‘engaging in the practice of law, or violating 

6 section 7255(c) of this title’’. 

7 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.— 

8 (1) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (c) of section 

9 7255 of such title, as added by subsection (a), and 

10 the amendment made by subsection (b) shall take ef11 fect on the date that is 180 days after the date of 

12 the enactment of this Act. 

13 (2) APPLICABILITY.—The amendment made by 

14 subsection (b) shall apply with respect to judges con15 firmed on or after January 1, 2012. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### Martin R. Sletten, an Infant, by His Guardian ad Litem, Alvin B. Sletten, et al., Respondents-Appellants, v. State of New York, Appellant-Respondent.

— The State appeals from a judgment of the Court of Claims, which awards damages to each of the claimants for personal injuries sustained because of an alleged defect in a State highway which caused the automobile in which they were riding to go out of control and strike a tree. The claimants cross-appeal on the ground of inadequacy and because interest from the date of the decision to the date of the entry of judgment was not included in the judgment. The accident occurred in the village of Fishkill, N. Y., at or near the point where Jackson Street intersects State highway 52. The trial court has found that claimants’ car was forced to bear to the right because of two oncoming vehicles, one attempting to pass the other, and that in so doing the right front wheel of claimants’ car entered a rut at the edge of the concrete pavement, throwing the car out of control and causing it to strike a tree. The court has also found that the rut was two feet long and six inches deep and had existed for about two months prior to the accident, and that this defective condition of the shoulder was the proximate cause of the accident. There is sufficient evidence in the record to sustain these findings. Although the injuries were very serious, the awards were substantial, and we do not deem them inadequate. The decision of the court was made on April 28, 1952, and the judgment was not entered by the Clerk of the Court of Claims until May 21, 1952, and did not include interest during the interval. Pursuant to section 480 of the Civil Practice Act, claimants are entitled to interest from the date of the decision, and it should have been included in the judgment. Judgment modified to include interest from April 28, 1952, to the date of entry, and as so modified, on the law and facts, affirmed, with costs. Foster, P. J., Bergan, Coon, Halpern and Imrie, JJ., concur.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Robert Maher, Appellant.

Motion by appellant to dispense with printing granted. The appeal will be heard on the original papers (including the typed minutes) and on appellant’s typewritten brief. The appellant is directed to file six copies of his typewritten brief and to serve one copy on the District Attorney. The appellant’s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged to the February Term, commencing January 30, 1961; the appeal is ordered on the calendar for said term. Motion for assignment of counsel granted. Herbert Simon, Esq., 2 Lafayette St., New York, New York, is assigned as counsel to prosecute this appeal. Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Christ, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.