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

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 185 Received in Senate (RDS)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 185

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 28, 2013

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
  To designate the United States courthouse located at 101 East Pecan 
      Street in Sherman, Texas, as the ``Paul Brown United States 
                             Courthouse''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The United States courthouse located at 101 East Pecan Street in 
Sherman, Texas, shall be known and designated as the ``Paul Brown 
United States Courthouse''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the United States courthouse referred to 
in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Paul Brown 
United States Courthouse''.

            Passed the House of Representatives October 22, 2013.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
Exhibit 4(b)



 EXHIBIT 4(b) 
 FORM OF POLICY RIDER 
 (RETURN OF PREMIUM) 








					
	



	 	 	  	Home Office:
4333 Edgewood Road N.E.
Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52499
(319)355-8511


    A Stock Company (Hereafter called the Company, we, our or us) 

GUARANTEED MINIMUM DEATH BENEFIT RIDER 
 If You elect this rider, 100% of Your Policy Value must be in one or more of the designated funds. You can generally transfer between the designated funds as permitted under Your policy; however, You
cannot make transfers as provided for in the base policy to a non-designated fund. 
 The fee for this death benefit rider is 0.15%. This fee
has been included in the mortality and expense risk fee and the administrative charge, shown in Section 2 - Policy Data, of the policy to which this rider is attached. 
 The Guaranteed Minimum Death Benefit provision in the Death Proceeds Section of the policy to which this rider is attached, is amended to include the addition of the following language: 

The amount of this Guaranteed Minimum Death Benefit is equal to 100% of the total premiums paid for this policy, less any Adjusted Withdrawals (as
described below), as of the date of death. 
 A withdrawal will reduce the Guaranteed Minimum Death Benefit by an amount referred to as the
“Adjusted Withdrawal”. The Adjusted Withdrawal may be a different amount than the gross withdrawal. If at the time of the withdrawal, the Policy Value is greater than or equal to the death proceeds, the Adjusted Withdrawal will equal the
gross withdrawal. If at the time of the withdrawal, the Policy Value is less than the death proceeds, the Adjusted Withdrawal will be greater than the gross withdrawal. 
 The Adjusted Withdrawal is equal to the gross withdrawal multiplied by the death proceeds immediately prior to the withdrawal divided by the Policy Value immediately prior to the withdrawal. The formula
is AW = GW x (DP/PV) where: 
  

			
	GW	  	= Gross withdrawal
	DP	  	= Death proceeds prior to the withdrawal = greatest of (PV, CV, or GMDB)
	PV	  	= Policy Value prior to the withdrawal
	GMDB	  	= Guaranteed Minimum Death Benefit prior to the withdrawal
	CV	  	= Cash Value prior to the withdrawal

 The death benefit amount cannot be withdrawn as a lump sum. 

The amount of the death benefit will be included in a report sent to You at least once each year until the Annuity Commencement Date as described in
Section 3, Reports to Owner provision, in the policy. 
 This rider is effective on the Policy Date and can only be terminated when the
policy to which this rider is attached terminates, including when the Policy Value becomes zero, or is annuitized. Once terminated the rider fee will also terminate. This rider is subject to all the terms and conditions of the policy not
inconsistent herewith. In the event of any conflict between the provisions of this rider and provisions of the policy, the provisions of this rider shall prevail over the provisions of the policy. 

Signed for us at our home office. 
  

	
	 






 ICC12 RGMD80513
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 15-2380

___________________________

Felix De La Cruz-Perez

lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner

v.

Loretta E. Lynch, Attorney General of the United States

lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent

____________

Petition for Review of an Order of the

 Board of Immigration Appeals

____________

 Submitted: February 23, 2016

Filed: February 26, 2016

[Unpublished]

____________

Before WOLLMAN, ARNOLD, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

Guatemalan citizen Felix De La Cruz-Perez petitions for review of an order of

the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing his appeal from the decision of an

immigration judge denying him withholding of removal and protection under the
Convention Against Torture. After careful consideration, we conclude that

1

substantial evidence on the record as a whole supports the finding that Cruz-Perez

failed to show (1) a clear probability that his life or freedom would be threatened in

Guatemala on account of any statutorily protected ground, see Davila-Mejia v.

Mukasey, 531 F.3d 624, 627, 629 (8th Cir. 2008); or (2) that it is more likely than not

that he would be tortured if he were removed to Guatemala, see De Castro-Gutierrez

v. Holder, 713 F.3d 375, 381-82 (8th Cir. 2013). Accordingly, we deny the petition

for review. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

The ruling regarding denial of asylum is not before us. See Goromou v. 1

Holder, 721 F.3d 569, 576 (8th Cir. 2013).

-2-
#### § 2500.044 Indirect costs.

Indirect cost rates for grants and cooperative agreements shall be determined in accordance with the applicable assistance regulations and cost principles, unless superseded by another authority.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh

Elizabeth M. Welch,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 May 19, 2021 b0512

Order 

Clerk

May 19, 2021

161681

PETER J. SABAN,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 161681

COA: 347844

Macomb CC: 2018-002886-NO

HENRY FORD HEALTH SYSTEM and 

HENRY FORD MACOMB HOSPITAL 

CORPORATION,

Defendants-Appellees.

_____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 30, 2020 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 4:20-cv-45-AW-MAF

ARIES OBA EL,

Defendant.

_______________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

I have considered the magistrate judge’s March 13, 2020 Report and 

Recommendation. ECF No. 4. No objections have been filed. I have determined the 

Report and Recommendation should be adopted. This case is DISMISSED, and the 

clerk will close the file. 

SO ORDERED on April 23, 2020. 

s/ Allen Winsor

United States District Judge

Case 4:20-cv-00045-AW-MAF Document 6 Filed 04/23/20 Page 1 of 1
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 Ithaka Acquisition Corp. (the
Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2006 (the Report), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I Eric Hecht, President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify 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/ Eric Hecht                               |  |  |  | Dated: November 13, 2006
|    |  | Eric Hecht                                   |  |  |  |                         
|    |  | President and Chief Financial Officer        |  |  |  |                         
|    |  | (Principal Accounting and Financial Officer) |  |  |  |
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

January 24, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

132060 & (28) Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Stephen J. Markman, Plaintiff-Appellee, Justices 

v SC: 132060 

 COA: 268470 
 Wayne CC: 81-003916

FONZA JACKSON,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 16, 2006 

order of the Court of Appeals and the motion to remand are considered. We DIRECT the 

Wayne County Prosecuting Attorney to answer the application for leave to appeal within 

28 days after the date of this order, limited to the issue whether an appeal was taken from 

the May 29, 1981 order of the Wayne County Juvenile Court waiving its jurisdiction over 

defendant to the Detroit Recorder’s Court, and if no such appeal was taken, whether 

appointed appellate counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to pursue the 

appeal. 

The application for leave to appeal remains pending. 

s0117 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

January 24, 2007 

 Clerk
#### § 201.22 Date of test.

(a) The label shall show the month and year in which the germination test was completed. No more than 5 calendar months shall have elapsed between the last day of the month in which the germination test was completed and the date of transportation or delivery for transportation in interstate commerce, except for seed in hermetically sealed containers as provided in § 201.36c in which case no more than 24 calendar months shall have elapsed between the last day of the month in which the germination test was completed prior to packaging and the date of transportation or delivery for transportation in interstate commerce.

(b) In the case of a seed mixture, it is only necessary to state the calendar month and year of such test for the kind or variety or type of agricultural seed contained in such mixture which has the oldest calendar month and year test date among the test conducted on all the kinds or varieties or types of agricultural seed contained in such mixture.

(c) The following kinds shall be tested within the indicated time before interstate shipment:

| Agricultural seeds and mixtures thereof | Months from test date to shipment |
| --- | --- |
| Bentgrass, Colonial | 15 |
| Bentgrass, Creeping | 15 |
| Bluegrass, Kentucky | 15 |
| Fescue, Chewings | 15 |
| Fescue, Hard | 15 |
| Fescue, Red | 15 |
| Fescue, Tall | 15 |
| Ryegrass, Annual | 15 |
| Ryegrass, Perennial | 15 |

[5 FR 31, Jan. 4, 1940, as amended at 32 FR 12779, Sept. 6, 1967; 49 FR 1172, Jan. 10, 1984; 59 FR 64491, Dec. 14, 1994]
§ 205.668 Noncompliance procedures under State organic programs. ( a ) A State organic program's governing State official must promptly notify the Secretary of commencement of any noncompliance proceeding against a certified operation and forward to the Secretary a copy of each notice issued.
( b ) A noncompliance proceeding, brought by a State organic program's governing State official against a certified operation, shall be appealable pursuant to the appeal procedures of the State organic program. There shall be no subsequent rights of appeal to the Secretary. Final decisions of a State may be appealed to the United States District Court for the district in which such certified operation is located.
( c ) A State organic program's governing State official may review and investigate complaints of noncompliance with the Act or regulations concerning accreditation of certifying agents operating in the State. When such review or investigation reveals any noncompliance, the State organic program's governing State official shall send a written report of noncompliance to the Program Manager. The report shall provide a description of each noncompliance and the facts upon which the noncompliance is based.
#### §§ 2003.23-2003.25 [Reserved]
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

KATORIA GREENE,

Petitioner,

v. 4:20cv46–WS/EMT

WARDEN FCI TALLAHASSEE,

Respondent.

 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Before the court is the magistrate judge's report and recommendation (ECF

No. 5) docketed April 17, 2020. The magistrate judge recommends that this case be

dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with a court order. The petitioner

has filed no objections to the report and recommendation.

Upon review of the record, this court has determined that the

recommendation should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. The magistrate judge's report and recommendation (ECF No. 5) is adopted

and incorporated by reference in this order of the court.

Case 4:20-cv-00046-WS-EMT Document 6 Filed 05/22/20 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

2. This action are hereby DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to

comply with a court order. 

3. The clerk shall enter judgment stating: "All claims are DISMISSED

without prejudice."

DONE AND ORDERED this 22nd day of May , 2020.

s/ William Stafford 

WILLIAM STAFFORD

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:20-cv-00046-WS-EMT Document 6 Filed 05/22/20 Page 2 of 2
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter C of Chapter II

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to subchapter C appear by Amdt. 381, 65 FR 64586, Oct. 30, 2000.

###### Editorial Note on Part 271

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 271 appear at 78 FR 11972, Feb. 21, 2013.

#### § 271.8 Information collection/recordkeeping—OMB assigned control numbers.

| 7 CFR section where requirements are described | Current OMB control No. |
| --- | --- |
| 272.1(f) | 0584-0010 |
| | 0584-0025 |
| | 0584-0034 |
| | 0584-0037 |
| | 0584-0064 |
| | 0584-0069 |
| | 0584-0074 |
| | 0584-0080 |
| | 0584-0081 |
| | 0584-0083 |
| | 0584-0299 |
| | 0584-0303 |
| | 0584-0336 |
| | 0584-0339 |
| 272.2(d) | 0584-0064 |
| 272.2(a), (c), (d), (e), (f) | 0584-0083 |
| 272.5(c) | 0584-0083 |
| 272.3(a), (b), (c) | 0584-0083 |
| 272.6(g), (h) | 0584-0025 |
| 273.2(a), (b), (c), (e), (f), (h) | 0584-0064 |
| 273.5(b) | 0584-0064 |
| 273.7(a), (d), (e) | 0584-0339 |
| 273.7(c) | 0584-0083 |
| | 0584-0339 |
| 273.8(b), (e ) | 0584-0064 |
| 273.9(d) | 0584-0496 |
| 273.9(d) (c) | 0584-0064 |
| 273.10(e), (g)(1) | 0584-0064 |
| 273.11(b) | 0584-0496 |
| 273.11(i)(1)-(4) | 0584-0080 |
| | 0584-0081 |
| 273.11(i)(5) | 0584-0081 |
| 273.11(i)(6) | 0584-0080 |
| | 0584-0081 |
| 273.12(a), (b), (c), (d) | 0584-0064 |
| 273.13(a), (b) | 0584-0064 |
| 273.14(b) | 0584-0064 |
| 273.16(a), (b), (d), (e), (f), (g), (h), (i) | 0584-0064 |
| 273.18(h) | 0584-0069 |
| 273.21(h) | 0584-0064 |
| 273.24(f) | 0584-0479 |
| 274.3(d) | 0584-0069 |
| | 0584-0080 |
| 274.4(a) | 0584-0080 |
| 274.4(b) | 0584-0080 |
| | 0584-0081 |
| 274.6(a), (b) and (e) | 0584-0080 |
| | 0584-0081 |
| 275.2(a) | 0584-0010 |
| | 0584-0303 |
| 275.4(a) | 0584-0010 |
| | 0584-0303 |
| 275.4(b) | 0584-0010 |
| 275.4(c) | 0584-0034 |
| | 0584-0074 |
| | 0584-0299 |
| 275.5(a), (b) | 0584-0010 |
| 275.6(b) | 0584-0010 |
| 275.8(a) | 0584-0010 |
| 275.9(b), (g) | 0584-0010 |
| 275.10(a) | 0584-0074 |
| | 0584-0299 |
| | 0584-0303 |
| 275.11(a) | 0584-0303 |
| 275.12(b), (c), (d), (e) | 0584-0074 |
| 275.12(f), (g) | 0584-0299 |
| 275.13(b), (d), (e) | 0584-0034 |
| 275.14(c), (d) | 0584-0034 |
| | 0584-0074 |
| | 0584-0299 |
| 275.16(b), (c), (d) | 0584-0010 |
| 275.17(a), (b) | 0584-0010 |
| 275.18(a), (b) | 0584-0010 |
| 275.19(a), (b), (c) | 0584-0010 |
| 275.20(a) | 0584-0010 |
| 275.21(b) | 0584-0034 |
| | 0584-0074 |
| | 0584-0299 |
| 275.21(c), (d), (e) | 0584-0034 |
| 275.22(a), (b) | 0584-0010 |
| 275.23 | 0584-0010 |
| | 0584-0034 |
| | 0584-0074 |
| | 0584-0299 |
| 277.18(a), (c), (d), (f), (i) | 0584-0083 |
| 278.1(a), (b), (l) | 0584-0008 |
| 278.5(c), (d), (f) | 0584-0008 |
| 278.6(b) | 0584-0008 |
| 278.7(b), (c) | 0584-0008 |
| 278.8(a) | 0584-0008 |
| 280.7(c), (d), (g) | 0584-0336 |
| 280.9(b) | 0584-0037 |
| 280.10(a) | 0584-0336 |

[82 FR 2034, Jan. 6, 2017]
98-1749.

#### Harper v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth.

In Habeas Corpus. *Sua sponte,*cause dismissed.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2147 

To provide grants to enhance the most effective freezing methods to improve 

access to affordable and locally produced specialty crops. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 23, 2013 

Mr. CARSON of Indiana introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Agriculture 

A BILL 

To provide grants to enhance the most effective freezing 

methods to improve access to affordable and locally produced specialty crops. 

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 ‘‘Preserving Healthy 

5 Food for the Hungry Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. QUICK FREEZE AND FLASH FREEZE LOCAL 

7 PRODUCE GRANTS. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 231 of the Agricultural 

9 Risk Protection Act of 2000 (7 U.S.C. 1632a) is amend10 ed— 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2147 IH

1 (1) in subsection (b)(7)(B), by inserting ‘‘and 

2 subsection (f)’’ after ‘‘subsection’’; 

3 (2) in subsection (e)(2), by inserting ‘‘, except 

4 pursuant to subsection (f)’’ before the period; and 

5 (3) by adding at the end the following: 

6 ‘‘(f) QUICK FREEZE AND FLASH FREEZE LOCAL

7 PRODUCE GRANTS.— 

8 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to the availability 

9 of appropriations to carry out this section, the Sec10 retary shall make grants to institutions eligible to 

11 receive funds under the Act of July 2, 1862 (12 

12 Stat. 503–505, as amended; 7 U.S.C. 301–305, 307 

13 and 308), or the Act of August 30, 1890 (26 Stat. 

14 417–419, as amended; 7 U.S.C. 321–326 and 328) 

15 that applies therefor, to assist persons in preserving 

16 the quality and shelf-life of fruit and vegetable crops 

17 produced by the persons on qualified land, through 

18 the use of mobile and fixed flash freezing and quick 

19 freezing units and other units utilizing freezing 

20 methods which produce the same result, in accord21 ance with any applicable Federal, State, or local 

22 food safety law, regulation, or ordinance. 

23 ‘‘(2) DEFINITIONS.—In this paragraph: 

24 ‘‘(A) QUALIFIED LAND.—The term ‘quali25 fied land’ means, with respect to a person, any 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 2147 IH

1 plot of land owned or operated by the person, 

2 the annual gross sales from the specialty crops 

3 produced on which are not more than 

4 $249,000. 

5 ‘‘(B) SPECIALTY CROP.—The term ‘spe6 cialty crop’ has the meaning provided in section 

7 3(1) of the Specialty Crops Competitiveness Act 

8 of 2004.’’. 

9 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

10 subsection (a) shall take effect on the date that is 1 year 

11 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
• D uU V" <•»- ^ ' 

iM^fl^i^ETTERS OPSUPPORT; : 

QFnCE OF IKC UAVOn 

JONATHA N WEINZAPF6 L 

August 25, 2010 

CITYOFEVANSVILLE 

ONE N.W. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. BLVD. • ROOM 302 

EVANSVILLE. INDIAN A 47708-1S33 

(812) 4 38-4962 -FAX (812) 436-4966 • TOD/TTV (612) 436-4928 

Mnww.EvansvitoGov org 

C D 

> 

3 s ^ 

oo 

The Honorable Ray LaHood 

Secretary of Transportation 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

400 7'^Sueet.SW 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

Dear Secretary LaHood: 

Evansville Regional Airport (the Airport) plays a key role in connecting Southern Indiana and 

Northwest Kentucky to the rest of the nation. For too long, the Airport has been saddled with 

high average airfares, suppressing travel and forcing businesses to look elsewhere when thinking 

about expansion. 

Evansville has the highest average fares in the Great Lakes region - averaging S225 each way or 

$450 round trip as of the year ended first quarter 2010 - and is the single most expensive 

medium-sized market to fly into or out of in the entire Great Lakes region. And it could get 

worse this fall, as Delta Air Lines, following its merger with Northwest, has announced it will 

leave the Evansville-Memphis market. This loss of seats will exacerbate the fare pressure in the 

Evansville market. 

Evansville Regional Airport must do something to bring lower fares to the region. 

Low fare leader AirTran has expressed interest in serving Evansville. But in order for AirTran to 

take a risk in launching service to a new city in the current economic environment, it will require 

a revenue guarantee to offset potential losses during the start-up phase. 

As such, I support the Airport's application for a Small Community Air Service Development 

Grant from the U.S. Department of Transportation. 

Sincerely, 

Jonathan Weinza' 

Mayor 

Evansville Regional Airport - Small Community Air Service Development Grant - August 2010 24