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

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2175 

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to install in the area of the World 

War II Memorial in the District of Columbia a suitable plaque or an 

inscription with the words that President Franklin D. Roosevelt prayed 

with the United States on June 6, 1944, the morning of D-Day. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 23, 2013 

Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to install in the 

area of the World War II Memorial in the District of 

Columbia a suitable plaque or an inscription with the 

words that President Franklin D. Roosevelt prayed with 

the United States on June 6, 1944, the morning of 

D-Day. 

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 ‘‘World War II Memo5 rial Prayer Act of 2013’’. 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2175 IH

1 SEC. 2. PLACEMENT OF PLAQUE OR INSCRIPTION AT 

2 WORLD WAR II MEMORIAL. 

3 The Secretary of the Interior— 

4 (1) shall install in the area of the World War 

5 II Memorial in the District of Columbia a suitable 

6 plaque or an inscription with the words that Presi7 dent Franklin D. Roosevelt prayed with the United 

8 States on June 6, 1944, the morning of D-Day; 

9 (2) shall design, procure, prepare, and install 

10 the plaque or inscription referred to in paragraph 

11 (1); and 

12 (3) may not use Federal funds to prepare or in13 stall the plaque or inscription referred to in para14 graph (1), but may accept and expend private con15 tributions for this purpose. 

16 SEC. 3. COMMEMORATIVE WORKS ACT. 

17 Chapter 89 of title 40, United States Code (com18 monly known as the ‘‘Commemorative Works Act’’), shall 

19 apply to the design and placement of the plaque within 

20 the area of the World War II Memorial. 

Æ 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2967824v.1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION 

HANOVER INSURANCE COMPANY, 

Plaintiff, 

v. CASE NO. 4:20-cv-148-RH-MAF 

FLORIDA COALITION AGAINST 

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, INC., et al., 

Defendants. 

______________________________________/ 

NOTICE OF APPEAL 

TO THE HONORABLE COURT: 

Notice is hereby given that the plaintiff, Hanover Insurance Company 

(“Hanover”), hereby appeals to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh 

Circuit from this Court’s order of dismissal entered on September 1, 2020 [Doc. 

No. 43] and judgment entered on September 1, 2020 [Doc. No. 44]. 

Respectfully submitted, 

HANOVER INSURANCE COMPANY 

By: /s/ Erik J. Tomberg 

ERIK J. TOMBERG, ESQUIRE 

(admitted pro hac vice) 

Case 4:20-cv-00148-RH-MAF Document 51 Filed 09/30/20 Page 1 of 3
- 2 - 

2967824v.1

Wilson Elser Moskowitz 

Edelman & Dicker LLP 

55 West Monroe Street, Suite 3800 

Chicago, IL 60603 

(312) 704-0550 

erik.tomberg@wilsonelser.com

A. DONALD SCOTT, JR., ESQUIRE 

Florida Bar No. 110432 

KATHY ARLINE, ESQUIRE 

Florida Bar No. 92244 

Wilson Elser Moskowitz 

Edelman & Dicker LLP 

111 North Orange Avenue Suite 1200 

Orlando, Florida 32801 

407-203-7599 – Phone 

407-648-1376 – Facsimile 

a.donald.scottjr@wilsonelser.com 

kathy.arline@wilsonelser.com 

Case 4:20-cv-00148-RH-MAF Document 51 Filed 09/30/20 Page 2 of 3
- 3 - 

2967824v.1

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on September 30, 2020, a true and correct copy of the 

foregoing was filed with the Northern District of Florida via CM/ECF and served 

by operation of the court’s electronic filing system upon all registered participants, 

and paper copies will be served via first class mail on those indicated as nonregistered participants. 

/s/ Erik J. Tomberg 

ERIK J. TOMBERG, ESQUIRE 

Case 4:20-cv-00148-RH-MAF Document 51 Filed 09/30/20 Page 3 of 3
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Michael J. Wagner, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of The Parent Company;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrants other
certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure
that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth quarter in the case of an annual
report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control
over financial reporting.



|                    |  |  |  |                        
|------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|                    |  | 
|Date: June 17, 2008 |  |  |  | /s/ Michael J. Wagner  
|                    |  |  |  | Michael J Wagner       
|                    |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer
#### § 28.45 Scope of comparison; requests.

A comparison of cotton samples with a type may be requested with respect to grade, or to staple, including any of the component qualities embodied in the grade, or to all these factors. The classification of the type and the samples in accordance with the official cotton standards of the United States may also be requested. The applicant must specify in a written request the scope of service desired.

[52 FR 30882, Aug. 18, 1987]
**Name Distributions in the Social Security Area, August 1997**
***by Michael W. Shackleford, A.S.A.***

Between 1954 and 1984 the Social Security Administration occasionally published a listing of surnames and their popularity in the *Report of Distribution of Surnames in the Social Security Number File*.  This note expands on that projectby presenting the most popular given names.

The source file is a one percent sample of Social Security Number card applications.  The selection criteria is based on the last four digits of the Social Security Number, which are random and not correlated with a particular geographical region.  In cases where multiple cards were issued to the same person, a reason for this might be a lost card or a name change, the name on the last application was used.  This file is not limited to persons born in the United States but is representative of all Social Security Number card holders.

For purposes of this document, names have not been edited or grouped together according to spelling variations of the same name.  People quoting from this document are urged to explicitly acknowledge this qualification.

Three tabulations are presented in this note.The first two are an historical perspective on the three most frequent names for bothsexes for every year of birth from 1900 to 1997.  The third is the 40 most frequent names for boys and girls born in 1996, the most recent year that full data is available.

In addition the following tabulations are available on the Office of the Chief Actuary's web site.  

-  Top 10 given names, by year of birth (1880-1919), and sex.
-  Top 10 given names, by year of birth (1920-1959), and sex.
-  Top 10 given names, by year of birth (1960-1997), and sex.
-  Large list of names for girls born in 1996.
-  Large list of names for boys born in 1996.
-  Large list of names for girls born in 1997.
-  Large list of names for boys born in 1997.

----

Table 1 displays the three most frequent male given names for each year of birth from 1900 to 1997.  The number to the right of each name indicates the frequency in the sample per 1,000 births of the same gender.

----

Table 2 displays the three most frequent female given names for each year of birth from 1900 to 1997.  The number to the right of each name indicates the frequency in the sample per 1,000 births of the same gender.

----

Table 3 lists the 40 most popular given names for the year of birth of 1996.  The sample consists of 19,662 girls and 20,264 boys.  The numbers on the left represent rank.  The number to the right of each name represents the frequency per 1,000 births of the same gender.  Several times in this table there were ties in popularity order.  In these cases the order and frequency are given for the first name and left blank in subsequent names.

----

For additional lists go to thePopular Baby Names page.

Notes published in the 1990s
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 211 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 211

To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to waive the requirement 
  for proof of citizenship during the first year of life for children 
        born in the United States to a Medicaid-eligible mother.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 2013

 Mr. Serrano introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to waive the requirement 
  for proof of citizenship during the first year of life for children 
        born in the United States to a Medicaid-eligible mother.

    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 ``Medicaid Newborn Coverage Act of 
2013''.

SEC. 2. WAIVER OF REQUIREMENT OF PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP DURING FIRST YEAR 
              OF LIFE FOR CHILDREN BORN IN THE UNITED STATES TO A 
              MEDICAID-ELIGIBLE MOTHER.

    (a) In General.--Section 1903(x)(2) of the Social Security Act (42 
U.S.C. 1396b(x)(2)) is amended--
            (1) by redesignating subparagraphs (D) and (E) as 
        subparagraphs (E) and (F), respectively; and
            (2) by inserting after subparagraph (C) the following new 
        subparagraph:
            ``(D) and is a child born to a woman eligible for and 
        receiving medical assistance under this title on the date of 
        the child's birth, without regard to the child's basis of 
        eligibility for medical assistance, but only with respect to 
        medical assistance for items and services furnished during the 
        child's first year of life;''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall take 
effect on the date of the enactment of this Act and section 
1903(x)(2)(D) of the Social Security Act, as inserted by subsection 
(a)(2), shall apply to children born on or after the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-6872

BERLINDA L. CRADDOCK, a/k/a Jackie Paige,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director of the Virginia

Department of Corrections,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry C. Morgan, Jr., District

Judge. (CA-95-448-2)

Submitted: November 21, 1996 Decided: December 4, 1996

Before HALL, WILKINS, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Berlinda L. Craddock, Appellant Pro Se. Linwood Theodore Wells,

Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal from the district court's order dismissing without prejudice her petition filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 2254 (1994), amended by Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty

Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214. The district

court's dismissal without prejudice is not appealable. See Domino

Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers' Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-

67 (4th Cir. 1993). A dismissal without prejudice could be final if

"no amendment [to the petition] could cure defects in the plaintiff's case." Id. at 1067. In ascertaining whether a dismissal

without prejudice is reviewable in this court, the court must

determine "whether the [petitioner] could save his action by merely

amending the [petition]." Id. at 1066-67.

Because Appellant could have amended her petition to raise

only the exhausted claims and thereby cured the defects in her

petition, the dismissal order is not appealable. Accordingly, we

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal for lack

of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
<PAGE>

                                   EXHIBIT 24
                                POWER OF ATTORNEY

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that each person whose signature appears below
constitutes and appoints Kevin J. Tierney and John-Paul DeRosa his true and
lawful attorney-in-fact and agent, with full powers of substitution and
resubstitution, for him and in his name, place and stead, in any and all
capacities to sign the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ending December
31, 1995 of UNUM Corporation pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and
any or all amendments thereto, and to file the same, with all exhibits thereto,
and other documents in connection therewith, with the Securities and Exchange
Commission, granting unto said attorney-in-fact and agent full power and
authority to do and perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary
to be done in and about the premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as he
might or could do in person, and hereby ratifies and confirms all his said
attorneys-in-fact and agents, each acting alone, or his substitute or
substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue thereof.

Witness our signatures on the date set forth below:


          Signature                     Title               Date
          ---------                     -----               ----



     /s/  Gayle O. Averyt               Director       March 22, 1996
          Gayle O. Averyt


     /s/  Robert E. Dillon, Jr.         Director       March 22, 1996
          Robert E. Dillon, Jr.


     /s/  Gwain H. Gillespie            Director       March 22, 1996
          Gwain H. Gillespie


     /s/  Ronald E. Goldsberry          Director       March 22, 1996
          Ronald E. Goldsberry


     /s/  Donald W. Harward             Director       March 22, 1996
          Donald W. Harward

<PAGE>

          Signature                     Title               Date
          ---------                     -----               ----




     /s/  George J. Mitchell            Director       March 22, 1996
          George J. Mitchell


     /s/  Cynthia A. Montgomery         Director       March 22, 1996
          Cynthia A. Montgomery


     /s/  James L. Moody, Jr.           Director       March 22, 1996
          James L. Moody, Jr.


     /s/  Lawrence R. Pugh              Director       March 22, 1996
          Lawrence R. Pugh


     /s/  Lois Dickson Rice             Director       March 22, 1996
          Lois Dickson Rice


                                        Director       March 22, 1996
          John W. Rowe
###### Editorial Note on Part 1924

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1924 appear at 80 FR 9870, Feb. 24, 2015.

#### § 1924.150 OMB Control Number.

The reporting requirements contained in this subpart have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and have been assigned OMB control number 0575-0164. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to vary from 5 minutes to 10 minutes per response, with an average of .13 hours per response, including time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to the Department of Agriculture, Clearance Officer, OIRM, Ag Box 7630, Washington, DC 20250; and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (OMB #0575-0164), Washington, DC 20503.
In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 14-749V

Filed: June 16, 2015

Not for Publication

*************************************

SUSAN CHARBONNEAU, *

*

Petitioner, * 

*

* Damages decision based on stipulation; 

v. * influenza (flu) vaccine; shoulder injury

*

SECRETARY OF HEALTH *

AND HUMAN SERVICES, *

 *

 Respondent. *

*

*************************************

Amber D. Wilson, Washington, DC, for petitioner.

Justine E. Walters, Washington, DC, for respondent.

MILLMAN, Special Master

DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES1

On June 15, 2015, the parties filed the attached stipulation in which they agreed to settle 

this case and described the settlement terms. Petitioner alleges that she suffered a shoulder injury 

that was caused by her September 21, 2011 receipt of influenza (“flu”) vaccine. Respondent 

denies that the flu vaccine caused petitioner’s shoulder injury, any other injury, or her current 

condition. Nonetheless, the parties agreed to resolve this matter informally.

 

1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the special master’s action in this 

case, the special master intends to post this unpublished decision on the United States Court of Federal 

Claims’s website, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, 116 Stat. 2899, 

2913 (Dec. 17, 2002). Vaccine Rule 18(b) states that all decisions of the special masters will be made 

available to the public unless they contain trade secrets or commercial or financial information that is 

privileged and confidential, or medical or similar information whose disclosure would constitute a clearly 

unwarranted invasion of privacy. When such a decision is filed, petitioner has 14 days to identify and 

move to delete such information prior to the document’s disclosure. If the special master, upon review, 

agrees that the identified material fits within the banned categories listed above, the special master shall 

delete such material from public access.
2

The undersigned finds the terms of the stipulation to be reasonable. The court hereby 

adopts the parties’ said stipulation, attached hereto, and awards compensation in the amount and 

on the terms set forth therein. Pursuant to the stipulation, the court awards a lump sum of

$80,000.00, representing reimbursement for all damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C. 

§ 300aa-15(a) (2006). The award shall be in the form of a check payable to petitioner in the 

amount of $80,000.00.

In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of the 

court is directed to enter judgment herewith.2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 16, 2015 s/ Laura D. Millman

 Laura D. Millman

 Special Master

 

2 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by each party, either separately or 

jointly, filing a notice renouncing the right to seek review.
Exhibit 32.2

Certification Pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350)

I, Richard Heyse, certify that:

1. the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended
September 30, 2006 (the Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 Innophos, Inc.
at the dates and for the periods indicated.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
Innophos, Inc. and will be retained by Innophos, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

The undersigned expressly disclaims any obligation to update the foregoing certification except as required by law.

Date: November 14, 2006



/s/ RICHARD HEYSERichard HeyseVice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to the requirements of 18
U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed as a part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
#### § 29.109 Inspection determinations.

The determination of type, grade, size, form, condition, or other tobacco characteristics shall be based upon a thorough examination of the lot of tobacco to be certificated or an official sample of such lot. The certification of a lot of tobacco shall be a true representation of the lot, or of the official sample, at the time of inspection.
#### § 29.3602 Rule 1.

Each grade shall be treated as a subdivision of a particular type. When the grade is stated in an inspection certificate, the type also shall be stated.