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

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2258 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2258

    To amend the indemnification responsibilities applicable to the 
 Secretary of Defense when Department of Defense property at military 
  installations closed pursuant to a base closure law is conveyed to 
 expand such indemnification responsibilities to include all military 
              installations closed since October 24, 1988.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              June 5, 2013

Mr. Young of Indiana (for himself, Ms. McCollum, Mr. Yoder, Mr. Pocan, 
  and Mr. Smith of Nebraska) introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend the indemnification responsibilities applicable to the 
 Secretary of Defense when Department of Defense property at military 
  installations closed pursuant to a base closure law is conveyed to 
 expand such indemnification responsibilities to include all military 
              installations closed since October 24, 1988.

    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 ``Base Redevelopment and 
Indemnification Correction Act''.

SEC. 2. INDEMNIFICATION OF TRANSFEREES OF PROPERTY AT ANY CLOSED 
              MILITARY INSTALLATION.

    Section 330 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 1993 (Public Law 102-484; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (a)(1), by striking ``pursuant to a base 
        closure law'' and inserting ``after October 24, 1988, the date 
        of the enactment of the Defense Authorization Amendments and 
        Base Closure and Realignment Act (Public Law 100-526; 10 U.S.C. 
        2687 note)''; and
            (2) in subsection (f), by striking paragraph (3).
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 99

            CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
               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  IGENE  Biotechnology,  Inc. (the
"Company")  Annual  Report  on Form 10-KSB for the period ended
December 31, 2002,  as  filed  with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Stephen F. Hiu,
President of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant  to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

     (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 results of operations of the Company.


Date: March 26, 2003                   By:  /s/ STEPHEN F. HIU
                                           ___________________
                                                STEPHEN F. HIU
                                                President
AO 398(Rev. 0 1/09) Notice of a Lawsuit and Request to Waive Service of a Summons 

' .,, t ~ 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

JOHN DEBOW 

Plaintiff 

V. 

RIDGWAY ROOF TRUSS CO., 

Defendant 

for the 

Northern District of Florida C) 

)> 

-c? ) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Civil Action No. 1 ·20-cv-58-RH-G~ 

. C 

NOTICE OF A LAWSUIT AND REQUEST TO WAIVE SERVICE OF A SUI\'(MONS c:.J 

:. To: Ridgway Roof Truss Co. c/o Karl The Losen ; ::u 

(Name of the defendant or - if the defendant is a corporation, partnership, or association - an officer or agent authorizfd to r5?ceive service) 

Why are you getting this? l> 

A lawsuit has been filed against you, or the entity you represent, in this court under the nu!W'er shown above. 

A copy of the complaint is attached. u, 

C . 

This is not a summons, or an official notice from the court. It is a request that, to avoid expenses, you waive formal 

service of a summons by signing and returning the enclosed waiver. To avoid these expenses, you must return the signed 

waiver within _:!:il. days (give at least 30 days, or at least 60 days if the defendant is outside any judicial district of the United States) 

from the date shown below, which is the date this notice was sent. Two copies of the waiver form are enclosed, along with 

a stamped, self-addressed envelope or other prepaid means for returning one copy. You may keep the other copy. 

What happens next? 

If you return the signed waiver, I will file it with the court. The action will then proceed as if you had been served 

on the date the waiver is filed, but no summons will be served on you and you will have 60 days from the date this notice 

is sent (see the date below) to answer the complaint (or 90 days if this notice is sent to you outside any judicial district of 

the United States). 

If you do not return the signed waiver within the time indicated, I will arrange to have the summons and complaint 

served on you. And I will ask the court to require you, or the entity you represent, to pay the expenses of making service. 

Please read the enclosed statement about the duty to avoid unnecessary expenses. __ _ 

I certify that this request is being sent to you on the date below. 

Date: 

Signature of the al/orney or unrepresented party 

Ko,.{\ Tue ~€,'i\__ 

Printed name 

Telephone number 

Case 1:20-cv-00058-RH-GRJ Document 6 Filed 04/01/20 Page 1 of 1
CASE ANNOUNCEMENTS AND ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS

*April 13, 2006*

[Cite as *04/13/2006 Case Announcements,*2006-Ohio-1826.]

MOTION AND PROCEDURAL RULINGS

2005-1562.

#### Natl. City Bank v. Wilkins.

Board of Tax Appeals, No. 2003-A-1328. This cause is pending before the court as an appeal from the Board of Tax Appeals. Upon consideration of appellant’s request for oral argument,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that the request is granted.
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 Shepard Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, in the
capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:

   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.


Date:  August 9, 2006


/s/ Glen Macdonald
---------------------------------------
Glen Macdonald, Principal Financial Officer
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsCharacterization of the Temperature Capabilities of Advanced Disk Alloy ME3The successful development of an advanced powder metallurgy disk alloy, ME3, was initiated in the NASA High Speed Research/Enabling Propulsion Materials (HSR/EPM) Compressor/Turbine Disk program in cooperation with General Electric Engine Company and Pratt & Whitney Aircraft Engines. This alloy was designed using statistical screening and optimization of composition and processing variables to have extended durability at 1200 F in large disks. Disks of this alloy were produced at the conclusion of the program using a realistic scaled-up disk shape and processing to enable demonstration of these properties. The objective of the Ultra-Efficient Engine Technologies disk program was to assess the mechanical properties of these ME3 disks as functions of temperature in order to estimate the maximum temperature capabilities of this advanced alloy. These disks were sectioned, machined into specimens, and extensively tested. Additional sub-scale disks and blanks were processed and selectively tested to explore the effects of several processing variations on mechanical properties. Results indicate the baseline ME3 alloy and process can produce 1300 to 1350 F temperature capabilities, dependent on detailed disk and engine design property requirements.Document ID20020081280Acquisition SourceGlenn Research CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsGabb, Timothy P.*(NASA Glenn Research Center Cleveland, OH United States)*Telesman, Jack*(NASA Glenn Research Center Cleveland, OH United States)*Kantzos, Peter T.*(Ohio Aerospace Inst. Brook Park, OH United States)*OConnor, Kenneth*(NASA Glenn Research Center Cleveland, OH United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 7, 2013Publication DateAugust 1, 2002Subject CategoryAircraft Propulsion And PowerReport/Patent NumberNASA/TM-2002-211796E-13491NAS 1.15:211796Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 714-04-20Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType20020081280.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. CASE NO. 1:88-cr-01007-MP-AK

WILLIE BUD REED, JR.,

Defendant.

________________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 1136, Motion to Reconsider And/Or Alter or

Amend Judgment, filled by Defendant Willie Reed. In his motion, Defendant Reed repeats the

same arguments the Court has already rejected and addresses no new issues, facts, or arguments

that would warrant the requested relief. Therefore, the Court finds no reason to reconsider its

order in Doc. 1133 adopting the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge.

Accordingly, Defendant’s motion to reconsider is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 7th day of December, 2006

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge

Case 1:88-cr-01007-MW-GRJ Document 1141 Filed 12/07/06 Page 1 of 1
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

v. CASE NO. 1:03-cr-00059-MP-AK-1

JEROME WAYNE JOHNSON, 

Defendant.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on defendant’s motion (doc. 251) requesting that his

current, twenty-year, sentence begin nunc pro tunc on June 25, 2003, the date of his previous

five-year sentence in the Middle District of Florida. Defendant alleges that the NDFL conviction

is from the “same course of conduct” as his MDFL conviction. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3 (2)

(determination of “relevant conduct” depends upon whether the acts were part of the same

course of conduct or common scheme or plan as the instant offense). The government has

responded and opposes the instant motion.

Nothing in the current motion supports reconsideration of the conclusion that defendant’s

MDFL conviction was not relevant conduct to his NDFL conviction. (See doc 157 at 43). This

decision was affirmed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. (See doc

188). As such, defendant is not entitled to the requested relief.

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

 Defendant’s motion for sentence to begin nunc pro tunc on June 25, 2003 (doc. 251) is

DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 2nd day of April, 2013

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge
Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

WILLIE V. CRUZ,

Petitioner,

v. CASE NO. 3:20cv5271-MCR-MJF

SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF

CORRECTIONS,

Respondent.

_______________________________/

O R D E R

This cause comes on for consideration upon the Magistrate Judge’s Report 

and Recommendation dated October 5, 2020. ECF No. 11. The parties were 

provided a copy of the Report and Recommendation and were afforded an 

opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 

636(b)(1). I have made a de novo determination of those portions to which an 

objection was made.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation and all objections thereto 

timely filed, I conclude that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted.

Case 3:20-cv-05271-MCR-MJF Document 13 Filed 11/10/20 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No. 3:20cv5271-MCR-MJF

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 11, is 

adopted and incorporated by reference in this Order.

2. Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 

(Doc. 6) is GRANTED.

3. The petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1), challenging the 

judgment of conviction and sentence in State of Florida v. Willie V. Cruz, Santa Rosa 

County Circuit Court Case No. 2015-CF-447, is DISMISSED WITH 

PREJUDICE as time barred.

4. A certificate of appealability is DENIED.

5. The clerk is directed to close this case file.

DONE AND ORDERED this 9th day of November 2020.

 s/ M. Casey Rodgers

M. CASEY RODGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:20-cv-05271-MCR-MJF Document 13 Filed 11/10/20 Page 2 of 2
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 222 (Thursday, November 18, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 70689]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-29094]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-70,376]


Kaiser Aluminum Fabricated Products, LLC; Kaiser Aluminum-
Greenwood Forge Division; Currently Known As Contech Forgings, LLC; 
Including On-Site Leased Workers From Staff Source, Precept Staffing, 
Esi And Kelly Services Greenwood, South Carolina; Amended Certification 
Regarding Eligibility To Apply or Worker Adjustment Assistance

    In accordance with section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended 
(``Act''), 19 U.S.C. 2273, the Department of Labor issued a 
Certification of Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance 
on October 2, 2009, applicable to workers of Kaiser Aluminum Fabricated 
Products, LLC, Kaiser Aluminum-Greenwood Forge Division, including on-
site leased workers from Staff Source, Precept Staffing and ESA, 
Greenwood, South Carolina. The notice was published in the Federal 
Register on November 17, 2009 (74 FR 59254).
    At the request of the State agency and a company official, the 
Department reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. 
The workers are engaged in the production of aluminum alloy forgings.
    Information shows that on July 28, 2010, Revstone, Contech Division 
purchased Kaiser Aluminum--Greenwood Forge Division of Kaiser Aluminum 
Fabricated Products and is currently known as Contech Forgings LLC. 
Some workers separated from employment at the Kaiser Aluminum--
Greenwood Forge Division of Kaiser Aluminum Fabricated Products, LLC 
had their wages reported under a separate unemployment insurance (UI) 
tax accounts for Contech Forgings LLC.
    Accordingly, the Department is amending this certification to 
properly reflect this matter.
    The intent of the Department's certification is to include all 
workers of the subject firm who were adversely affected as a secondary 
component supplier of aluminum alloy forgings to Chrysler.
    The amended notice applicable to TA-W-70,380 is hereby issued as 
follows:

    All workers of Kaiser Aluminum Fabricated Products, LLC, Kaiser 
Aluminum--Greenwood Forge Division, currently known as Contech 
Forgings, LLC, including on-site leased workers of Staff Source, 
Precept Staffing ESI, and Kelly Services, Greenwood, South Carolina, 
who became totally or partially separated from employment on or 
after May 19, 2008 through October 2, 2011, and all workers in the 
group threatened with total or partial separation from employment on 
date of certification through two years from the date of 
certification, are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under 
Chapter 2 of Title II of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended.

    Signed at Washington, DC this 10th day of November 2010.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2010-29094 Filed 11-17-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

MICHAEL LAWRENCE CASSIDY,

Petitioner,

v. 4:20cv131–WS/HTC

RICKY D. DIXON,

Respondent.

 

ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

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

No. 50) docketed December 22, 2021. The magistrate judge recommends that

Petitioner’s motion (ECF No. 43) for certificate of appealability be granted. No

objections to the report and recommendation have been filed.

Having considered the record, the court finds that the magistrate judge’s

report and recommendation is due to be adopted.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. The magistrate judge's report and recommendation (ECF No. 50) is

hereby ADOPTED and incorporated by reference into this order.

Case 4:20-cv-00131-WS-HTC Document 53 Filed 02/07/22 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

2. Petitioner’s motion (ECF No. 43) for certificate of appealability is

GRANTED. 

3. A certificate of appealability is GRANTED as to (1) whether the state

court’s order dated October 10, 2017, was a nunc pro tunc order under state law;

and (2) whether the state court’s vacating of one count of a multi-count judgment

created a new judgment under 2244(d) and 2254, thereby restarting the 1 year

federal clock.

DONE AND ORDERED this 7th day of February , 2022.

s/ William Stafford 

WILLIAM STAFFORD

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 4:20-cv-00131-WS-HTC Document 53 Filed 02/07/22 Page 2 of 2
| (1)   | The      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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      Registrant. |
|-----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|            /s/      Dr. Ralph S. Cunningham |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Name:                                                                                              | Dr.      Ralph S. Cunningham |
| Title:                                                                                             | Chief      Executive Officer of EPE Holdings, LLC |
|                                                                                               | on      behalf of Enterprise GP HoldingsL.P. |
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2223 Engrossed in House (EH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 2223

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 220 Elm Avenue in Munising, Michigan, as the ``Elizabeth L. Kinnunen 
                        Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. ELIZABETH L. KINNUNEN POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 220 Elm Avenue in Munising, Michigan, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Elizabeth L. Kinnunen Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Elizabeth 
L. Kinnunen Post Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives July 14, 2014.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
113th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 2223

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 220 Elm Avenue in Munising, Michigan, as the ``Elizabeth L. Kinnunen 
                        Post Office Building''.
```
Exhibit 32.2


              SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


In connection with the Annual Report of ASA International Ltd. (the "Company")
on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned
Terrence C. McCarthy, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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 results of operations of the Company.



Date:    October 1, 2004                            /s/ Terrence C. McCarthy
                                                    --------------------------
                                                    Terrence C. McCarthy
                                                    Chief Financial Officer
§ 1970.104 Finding of No Significant Impact. The Agency may issue a FONSI or a revised FONSI only if the EA or supplemental EA supports the finding that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the human environment. If the EA does not support a FONSI, the Agency will follow the requirements of subpart D of this part before taking action on the proposal. ( a ) A FONSI must include: ( 1 ) A summary of the supporting EA consisting of a brief description of the proposed action, the alternatives considered, and the proposal's impacts;
( 2 ) A notation of any other EAs or EISs that are being or will be prepared and that are related to the EA;
( 3 ) A brief discussion of why there would be no significant impacts;
( 4 ) Any mitigation essential to finding that the impacts of the proposed action would not be significant;
( 5 ) The date issued; and
( 6 ) The signature of the appropriate Agency approval official.
( b ) The Agency must ensure that the applicant has committed to any mitigation that is necessary to support a FONSI and possesses the authority and ability to fulfill those commitments. The Agency must ensure that mitigation, and, if appropriate, a mitigation plan that is necessary to support a FONSI, is made a condition of financial assistance.
( c ) The Agency must make a FONSI available to the public as provided at 40 CFR 1501.4(e) and 1506.6.
( d ) The Agency may revise a FONSI at any time provided that the revision is supported by an EA or a supplemental EA. A revised FONSI is subject to all provisions of this section.