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

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1967 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1967

 To amend the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 to 
   expand the cause of action relating to the pattern or practice of 
 conduct by a governmental authority that deprives a person of rights 
  protected by the Constitution to such conduct relating to adults as 
                           well as juveniles.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 14, 2013

   Mr. Deutch (for himself and Mr. Scott of Virginia) introduced the 
  following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 to 
   expand the cause of action relating to the pattern or practice of 
 conduct by a governmental authority that deprives a person of rights 
  protected by the Constitution to such conduct relating to adults as 
                           well as juveniles.

    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 ``Right to Counsel and Taxpayer 
Protection Act''.

SEC. 2. PATTERN OR PRACTICE LITIGATION.

    (a) In General.--Section 210401(a) of the Violent Crime Control and 
Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 14141(a)) is amended--
            (1) after ``responsibility for the administration of'', by 
        striking ``juvenile justice'' and inserting ``criminal justice, 
        juvenile justice,'' ; and
            (2) after ``or the incarceration of'', by striking 
        ``juveniles'' and inserting ``persons (including juveniles)''.
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--Section 210401(b) of the Violent Crime 
Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 14141(b)) is amended 
by striking ``paragraph (1)'' and inserting ``subsection (a)''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 13.1

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 Annual Report of China Natural Resources, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Li Feilie, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 result of operations of the Company.



/s/ Li Feilie

Li Feilie

Chief Executive Officer

June 26, 2009

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement 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.
##### 



EXHIBIT 32
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. §1350 AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 Date: March 29, 2006
    
    /s/ Paul A. KrugerPaul A. Kruger, Chief Executive OfficerDate: March 29, 2006
    
    /s/ Brian CarterBrian Carter, Chief Financial Officer
 58
(115 App. Div. 654)

#### In re TRELEASE et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

November 16, 1906.)

1. Executors—Legatees—Payment to Themselves.

Where testator left personalty to his wife, who was also appointed executrix, to have the income for life, with “the right to use the principal if she should need it,” she was entitled as executrix to pay to herself as legatee the personalty bequeathed to her, to invest' the same, and use the income and the principal, if she needed it; the residuary legatees being only entitled to the remainder.

[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 22, Cent Dig. Executors and Adtministrators, §§ 1164, 1245.]

*2.*Wills—Trusts—Legatees.

Where testator left personalty to his wife, who was also an executrix, to have the income for life, with the right to use the principal, if she should need it, the wife during her life was trustee of the remainder of the principal of the fund for the residuary legatees.

3. Executors—Coexecutors—Custody of Funds.

Where testator bequeathed certain personalty to his wife, who was also an executrix, to have the income for life, with the right *to*use the principal, if she needed it, the wife was entitled to the exclusive custody of the fund as against her coexecutor.

Appeal from Surrogate’s Court, King County.

Judicial settlement of the accounts of Walter K. Trelease and another, as executors of the will of Francis A. Trelease, deceased. From an order (96 N. Y. Supp. 318) settling the accounts, certain residuary legatees appeal. Affirmed.

Argued before HIRSCHBERG, P. J., and WOODWARD, GAYNOR, RICH, and MILLER, JJ.

Robert M. Boyd, Jr., for appellant.

Frederick M. Harris, for respondent.

GAYNOR, J.

It is not easy to see what grievance the appellants assert or why they appeal. They are the residuary legatees of the testator, and one of them is coexecutor of the testator’s will. By his will the testator left an amount of personalty to his wife, this executrix, to have the income for her life, and with “the right to use the principal if she shall need it.” In administering the estate she has paid over to herself $1,600 under this bequest, and in her account credits herself as executrix therewith, the words bejng, “I have paid to myself as legatee of said deceased under and by virtue of said will the sum of,” etc.

This is correct. She has a right under the will to receive the personalty bequeathed to her as aforesaid, and invest it and use the income, and also to use the principal if she needs it. On her death the residuary legatees will be entitled to any of it that remains. Meanwhile she is their trustee of the fund. Rose v. Hatch, 125 N. Y. 427, 26 N. E. 467; Leggett v. Stevens, 185 N. Y. 70, 77 N. E. 874.

*1052There is also an appeal from an order of the Surrogate denying a motion of the co-executor that he have joint custody of the fund with the executrix. She is given full possession and control by the will in the way above stated and is entitled to it.

The decree and order should be affirmed with costs. All concur.
**Exhibit 32.1**

**AFFINITY GROUP HOLDING, INC.**

**STATEMENT PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

I,Michael A. Schneider, President and Chief Executive Officer of Affinity GroupHolding, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), hereby certify asfollows:

1.                                       This statement is provided pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350 in connection with the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2006 (the “Periodic Report”);

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

3.                                       The information contained in the PeriodicReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company as of dates and for the periods indicatedtherein.

Date:  November 3, 2006
|        | /s/ Michael A. Schneider              |
|--------|---------------------------------------|
|   | Michael A. Schneider                  |
|   | President and Chief Executive Officer |

 

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906, or suchother document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting thesignature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of thewritten statement as required by Section 906, has been provided to AffinityGroup Holding, Inc. and will be retained by Affinity Group Holding, Inc. andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

32

----
Exhibit
10.40


 


THIRD
AMENDMENT TO THE


MIRANT
SERVICES


SUPPLEMENTAL
BENEFIT PLAN


 


WHEREAS,
Mirant Services, LLC (the “Company”) heretofore adopted the Mirant Services
Supplemental Benefit Plan (the “Plan”), effective January 1, 2001 to provide
certain retirement and other deferred compensation benefits primarily for a
select group of management or highly compensated employees; and


 


WHEREAS,
pursuant to Section 6.2 of the Plan, the Board of Managers of the Company (the “Board”)
has the authority to amend the Plan; and


 


WHEREAS,
the Board has delegated its authority to amend the Plan, provided such
amendment does not have a material effect on the cost of the Plan, to the
Americas Benefits Committee (the “Committee”); and


 


WHEREAS,
the Committee desires to remove all references to a “Change in Control” from
the Plan effective as of August 27, 2004; and


 


WHEREAS,
the Committee has determined that the above amendment would not have a material
effect on the cost of the Plan.


 


NOW,
THEREFORE, the Committee hereby amends the Plan as follows,
to be effective as of August 27, 2004:


 


I.


 


Section
2.5 of the Plan is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:


 


“2.5         [Deleted]”


 


II.


 


Section
5.8 of the Plan is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:


 


“5.8         [Deleted]”


 


III.


 


Section
6.2 of the Plan is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:


 


“6.2         Amendment and Termination.  The Plan may be amended or terminated at any
time by the Board of Managers, provided that no amendment or termination shall
cause a forfeiture or reduction in any benefits accrued as of the date of such
amendment or termination. The Plan may 


 





















 


also be amended by the
Committee (a) if such amendment does not involve a substantial increase in cost
to the Employing Companies, or (b) as may be necessary, proper, or desirable in
order to comply with laws or regulations enacted or promulgated by any federal
or state governmental authority.”


 


IV.


 


All parts
of the Plan not inconsistent here with are hereby ratified and confirmed.


 


IN WITNESS
WHEREOF, Mirant Services, LLC, through its duly authorized
officer pursuant to a unanimous consent of the Committee dated September 29,
2004, has adopted this Third Amendment to the Mirant Services Supplemental
Benefit Plan on this 29th day of September, 2004, to be effective August 27,
2004.


 


	
   

  	
  MIRANT SERVICES, LLC:

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Vance
  N. Booker

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  SVP,
  Administration

  



 


2
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas October 10, 2022 No. 04-22-00465-CV IN THE INTEREST OF J.A.J., N.Z.J., AND N.V.J. , Children From the 150th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2021-PA-00188 Honorable Raul Perales, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R This is an accelerated appeal from an order terminating appellant’s parental rights. Appellee’s brief originally was due on October 10, 2022. On October 10, 2022, appellee filed a first request for an extension, asking for an additional twenty days in which to file the brief and stating “[a]ppellee will request no further extensions.” The Texas Rules of Judicial Administration require this court to “ensure that the appeal is brought to final disposition . . . [w]ithin 180 days of the date the notice of appeal is filed.” Tex. R. Jud. Adm. 6.2(a). This accelerated appeal has been pending since the notice of appeal was filed in the trial court on July 28, 2022. The request is GRANTED; however, given the constraints governing disposition of this appeal, no further extensions of time will be granted absent extenuating circumstances. Appellee is ORDERED to file its brief no later than October 31, 2022

. It is so ORDERED on October 10, 2022. PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO:__________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, CLERK OF COURT
Editorial Note on Part 1942
Editorial Notes: Nomenclature changes to part 1942 appear at 80 FR 9878, Feb. 24, 2015.

§ 1942.114 Security. Specific requirements for security for each loan will be included in the letter of conditions. Loans must be secured by the best security position practicable, in a manner which will adequately protect the interest of RD during the repayment period of the loan, and in accordance with the following; ( a ) Security must include one of the following: ( 1 ) A pledge of revenue and a lien on all real estate and major equipment purchased or developed with the Agency loan; or
( 2 ) General obligation bonds or bonds pledging other taxes.
( b ) Additional security may be required as determined necessary by the loan approval official. In determining the need for additional security the loan approval official should carefully consider: ( 1 ) The estimated market value of real estate and equipment security.
( 2 ) The adequacy and dependability of the applicant's revenues, based on the applicant's financial records, the project financial feasibility report, and the project budgets.
( 3 ) The degree of community commitment to the project, as evidenced by items such as active broad based membership, aggressive leadership, broad based fund drives, or contributions by local public bodies.
( c ) Additional security may include, but is not limited to, the following: ( 1 ) Liens on additional real estate or equipment.
( 2 ) A pledge of revenues from additional sources.
( 3 ) An assignment of assured income in accordance with § 1942.17(g)(3)(iii)(A)( 1 ) of subpart A of this part 1942.
( d ) Review and approval or concurrence in the State Office is required if the security will not include a pledge of taxes and the applicant cannot provide evidence of the financially successful operation of a similar facility for the 5 years immediately prior to loan application.
( e ) Review and concurrence in the National Office is required if the security will not include a pledge of taxes, the applicant cannot provide evidence of the financially successful operation of a similar facility for the 5 years immediately prior to loan application, and the amount of the loan will exceed $250,000.
( f ) Loans under this subpart are subject to the provisions of § 1942.17(g)(1) of subpart A of this part 1942, regarding security for projects utilizing joint financing.
[52 FR 43726, Nov. 16, 1987; 52 FR 47097, Dec. 11, 1987]
#### § 27.13 Micronaire determination request incidental to classification request.

The classification request may include a request for Micronaire determination.
98-1953.

#### State v. Simmons.

Franklin App. No. 97APA10-1310. On motion for leave to file delayed appeal. Motion denied.

Moyer, C.J., and Pfeifer, J., dissent.
#### § 201.35 Blank spaces.

Blank spaces on the label shall be deemed to imply the word “None,” when such interpretation is reasonable.

[5 FR 32, Jan. 4, 1940]
Inventory Expert Service A division of the American
C hemica

l Socie

t y

P hone: 800-6 3 1- 1 884

,6 1 4-447

-3870 Fax

:6 1 4-44 7-3 747 E- mai l :an swers@cas.org Web

: www

.cas.org/pro

d ucts/ cl ie n t/ INVENTORY EXPERT SERVICE REPORT IES-ORDER NUMBER: 189182 REGISTRY NUMBER: 1337404-11-1 CA INDEX NAME Siloxanes and Silicones, di-Me, hydrogen

-terminated, polymers with hydroxy- and [(trimethylsilyl)oxy]

-terminated bicyclo[2

.2.l)hept-2-yl hexyl silsesquioxanes-di-Me,

Me vinyl siloxanes polymers Please print the above CA Index Name on the appropriate page of your PMN. **~**If this box is che c ked, CAS has made correction(s) marked in red to **~**your IES order

.Please make the same correction(s)
to your PMN before submitting it to the EPA. CAS 2540 Olentangy River Road P.O. Box 3343 Columbus, Ohio 432
1 0-0334 USA
#### LATHROP, SHEA *&*HENWOOD CO. v. PITTSBURG, S. *&*N. R. CO. et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

June 1, 1906.)

Action by the Lathrop, Shea & Henwood Company against the Pittsburg, Shawmut & Northern Railroad Company and others.

No opinion. Motion to dismiss appeal granted, with $10 costs, unless the appellant shall, within 30 days from the date of service of a copy of this order, together with notice of entry thereof, file and serve the printed papers on appeal, as provided by rule 41; in which event said motion is denied, without costs.
Second Department,

September, 1977

(September 21, 1977)*

#### In the Matter of Hendrickson Bros., Inc., Appellant, v County of Suffolk et al., Respondents.

*

 Not published with other decisions of September, 1977, 59 AD2d 598. [Rep.

Motion by respondents for reargument of the appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated March 9, 1977, or for resettlement of this court’s order dated June 13, 1977 [58 AD2d 602], Motion denied. On the court’s own motion, the decision and order both dated June 13, 1977 are recalled and vacated and the following decision is substituted therefor: "In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, *inter alia,*to recover, in accordance with section 105 of the General Municipal Law, a bid bond submitted in connection with a bid on a public sewer project, petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated March 9, 1977, which dismissed the petition. Judgment reversed, on the law, with $50 costs and disbursements. Respondents’ time to answer is extended for 20 days after service of a copy of the order entered on this decision (CPLR 7804, subd [f]). The petition states a cause of action (see *White v Corlies,*46 NY 467; *Cortland Asbestos Prods. v J. & K. Plumbing & Heating Co.,*33 AD2d 11; *Moody Eng. Co. v Board of Educ.,*205 App Div 522).” Martuscello, J. P., Cohalan, Damiani and Titone, JJ., concur.
#### § 201.11a Hybrid.

If any one kind or kind and variety of seed present in excess of 5 percent is “hybrid” seed, it shall be designated “hybrid” on the label. The percentage that is hybrid shall be at least 95 percent of the percentage of pure seed shown unless the percentage of pure seed which is hybrid seed is shown separately. If two or more kinds or varieties are present in excess of 5 percent and are named on the label, each that is hybrid shall be designated as hybrid on the label. Any one kind or kind and variety that has pure seed which is less than 95 percent but more than 75 percent hybrid seed as a result of incompletely controlled pollination in a cross shall be labeled to show (a) the percentage of pure seed that is hybrid seed or (b) a statement such as “Contains from 75 percent to 95 percent hybrid seed.” No one kind or variety of seed shall be labeled as hybrid if the pure seed contains less than 75 percent hybrid seed.

[33 FR 10840, July 31, 1968]
```

[108th Congress Public Law 300]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

[DOCID: f:publ300.108]

[[Page 118 STAT. 1101]]

Public Law 108-300
108th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
 73 South Euclid Avenue in Montauk, New York, as the ``Perry B. Duryea, 
        Jr. Post Office''. <<NOTE: Aug. 9, 2004 -  [H.R. 4427]>> 

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 73 South 
Euclid Avenue in Montauk, New York, shall be known and designated as the 
``Perry B. Duryea, Jr. Post Office''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Perry B. Duryea, Jr. Post 
Office''.

    Approved August 9, 2004.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 4427:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD,
                                                        Vol. 150 (2004):
            July 6, considered and passed House.
            July 22, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, for thepurposes of section 1350 of chapter 63 of title 18 of the United StatesCode, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, in his capacity as an officer of Bidz.com, Inc. (“Bidz.com”), that,to his knowledge, the Quarterly Report of Bidz.com on Form 10-Q for theperiod ended March 31, 2006 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in suchreport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operation of Bidz.com.

 

 
| Date:  | May 15,  2006 | By     |   | /s/ David  Zinberg       |   |
|--------|--------------------|--------|--------|--------------------------|--------|
|   |               |   |   | David Zinberg            |   |
|   |               |   |   | Chief Executive  Officer |   |
|   |               |   |   |                     |   |
| Date:  | May 15,  2006 | By     |   | /s/ Lawrence  Kong       |   |
|   |               |   |   | Lawrence Kong            |   |
|   |               |   |   | Chief Financial  Officer |   |

 

----
Exhibit
10.1


 


 


 


Director Compensation Table


 


 


 


	
  Elements of Compensation

  	
   

  	
  Current Director

  Compensation

  	
   

  	
  Approved by

  Board of

  Directors

  	
   

  
	
  Annual Retainer

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  20,000

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  40,000

  	
   

  
	
  Board Meeting Attendance Fee

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  1,500

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  1,500

  	
   

  
	
  Committee Chairman Retainer

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  5,000

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  10,000

  	
   

  
	
  Committee Meeting Attendance Fee

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  1,000

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  1,000

  	
   

  
	
  Restricted Stock Grant ($ Value Equivalent)

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  50,000

  	
   

  	
  $

  	
  70,000

  	
   

  



 


Fees and grants to be paid at annual meeting,
May 18, 2005