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

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 297 

Supporting the goals and ideals of a National Medal of Honor Day to 

celebrate and honor the recipients of the Medal of Honor on the anniversary of the inception of that medal in 1863. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 24, 2005 

Mr. SALAZAR (for himself and Mr. ROGERS of Michigan) submitted the 

following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

RESOLUTION 

Supporting the goals and ideals of a National Medal of 

Honor Day to celebrate and honor the recipients of the 

Medal of Honor on the anniversary of the inception 

of that medal in 1863. 

Whereas the Medal of Honor, the highest distinction that can 

be awarded to a member of the Armed Forces, is awarded by the President, in the name of the Congress, to 

members of the Armed Forces who have distinguished 

themselves conspicuously by gallantry and intrepidity at 

the risk of their lives above and beyond the call of duty; 

Whereas the Nation will forever be in debt to the recipients 

of the Medal of Honor for their bravery and sacrifice in 

times of war or armed conflict; 
2 

•HRES 297 IH 

Whereas the first Medal of Honor awards were presented to 

six men on March 25, 1863, by the Secretary of War; 

Whereas only 3,441 individuals out of the millions of men 

and women who have served the Nation in war, military 

operations, or other armed conflicts have been awarded 

the Medal of Honor; 

Whereas there are 123 Medal of Honor living recipients as 

of May 23, 2005; 

Whereas it is appropriate to honor the heroic recipients of the 

Medal of Honor; 

Whereas public awareness of the importance of the Medal of 

Honor has declined in recent years; 

Whereas the designation of a National Medal of Honor Day 

would focus the efforts of national, State, and local organizations striving to foster public appreciation and recognition of Medal of Honor recipients; and 

Whereas March 25 would be an appropriate date to observe 

National Medal of Honor Day: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) recognizes the heroism and sacrifice of 

3 Medal of Honor recipients; 

4 (2) recognizes the educational opportunity that 

5 a National Medal of Honor Day would present to 

6 the American public; and 

7 (3) supports the goals and ideals of a National 

8 Medal of Honor Day to celebrate and honor the con9 tributions of Medal of Honor recipients. 

Æ
#### § 150.2 Scope.

The regulations in this part apply to all States that have entered into agreements with the Commission or the Atomic Energy Commission pursuant to subsection 274b of the Act. This part also gives notice to all persons who knowingly provide to any licensee, applicant for a license or certificate or quality assurance program approval, holder of a certificate or quality assurance program approval, contractor, or subcontractor, any components, equipment, materials, or other goods or services that relate to a licensee's, certificate holder's, quality assurance program approval holder's or applicant's activities subject to this part, that they may be individually subject to NRC enforcement action for violation of §§ 30.10, 40.10, 61.9b, 70.10, and 71.8.

[63 FR 1901, Jan. 13, 1998, as amended at 80 FR 63419, Oct. 20, 2015]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 7
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                           148,333
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                           0
<MORTGAGE>                                           0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                 188,517
<CASH>                                           6,490
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                                   0
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                         392,488
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              12,001,996
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                 91,766
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                                  0
<POLICY-OTHER>                                       0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                       10,830,331
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                208,972
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,600
<OTHER-SE>                                     222,094
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                12,001,996
<PREMIUMS>                                           0
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                              2,899
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                                  77
<OTHER-INCOME>                                       0
<BENEFITS>                                       1,406
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                      3,712
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                            27,700
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 24,399
<INCOME-TAX>                                     8,540
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             15,859
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    15,859
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                       0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                  0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                      0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0
        

</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 30
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 30 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

§ 30.21 Radioactive drug: Capsules containing carbon-14 urea for “in vivo” diagnostic use for humans. ( a ) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, any person is exempt from the requirements for a license set forth in Section 81 of the Act and from the regulations in this part and part 35 of this chapter provided that such person receives, possesses, uses, transfers, owns, or acquires capsules containing 37 kBq (1 μCi) carbon-14 urea (allowing for nominal variation that may occur during the manufacturing process) each, for “in vivo” diagnostic use for humans.
( b ) Any person who desires to use the capsules for research involving human subjects shall apply for and receive a specific license pursuant to part 35 of this chapter.
( c ) Any person who desires to manufacture, prepare, process, produce, package, repackage, or transfer for commercial distribution such capsules shall apply for and receive a specific license pursuant to § 32.21 of this chapter.
( d ) Nothing in this section relieves persons from complying with applicable FDA, other Federal, and State requirements governing receipt, administration, and use of drugs.
[62 FR 63640, Dec. 2, 1997]
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION

J.B., a minor child, by and )

through his next friend, )

Addie Ward, on behalf of )

himself and all others )

similarly situated, )

)

Plaintiff, )

) CIVIL ACTION NO.

v. ) 2:06cv755-MHT

)

WALTER WOOD, in his )

individual capacity, )

)

Defendant. )

J.B., a minor child, by and )

through his next friend, )

Addie Ward, on behalf of )

himself and all others )

similarly situated, )

)

Plaintiff, )

) CIVIL ACTION NO.

v. ) 2:06cv908-MHT

)

WALTER WOOD, in his )

individual capacity, )

)

Defendant. )

Case 2:06-cv-00755-MHT-CSC Document 29 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 1 of 4
 The cases are essentially identical. Apparently the 1

Plaintiffs filed the second lawsuit in an unsuccessful attempt to

avoid the Prison Litigation Reform Act’s bar. (See Prison

Litigation Reform Act, below.)

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

The Defendant J. Walter Wood, Jr., individually,

moves for an entry of summary judgment against the

Plaintiffs for all claims in the above referenced

cases. 

The Plaintiffs bring these consolidated cases1

because the minor plaintiff J.B. was required to wait

in detention before being placed in a DYS facility,

allegedly without “treatment” for his juvenile

delinquency. The Defendant asserts that no material

questions of fact exist to support a claim against the

Defendant for damages. 

In support of this motion the Defendant submits the

following:

Brief In Support

Exhibit 1. J.B. Commitment information

Exhibit 2. Deposition excerpts of the Plaintiff

J.B.

Exhibit 3. Affidavit of J. Walter Wood, Jr., and 

Case 2:06-cv-00755-MHT-CSC Document 29 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 2 of 4
Exhibit 4. Affidavit of Pat Pendergast, 

Respectfully submitted

TROY KING

ATTORNEY GENERAL

s/ T. Dudley Perry, Jr. 

T. Dudley Perry, Jr.

Bar Number: 3985-R67T

Deputy Attorney General

Post Office Box 66

Mt. Meigs, AL 36057

Telephone: (334) 215-3803

Fax: (334) 215-3872

E-Mail:

dudley.perry@dys.alabama.gov

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hearby certify that on the 29th day of May, 2007,

I electronically filed the foregoing Motion for Summary

Judgment, with the Clerk of the Court Using the CM/ECF

system which will send notification of such filing to

the following:

Michael J. Crow, Esq.

BEASLEY, ALLEN, CROW

METHVIN, PORTIS & MILES, P.C.

Post Office Box 4160

Montgomery, AL 36103-4160

Case 2:06-cv-00755-MHT-CSC Document 29 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 3 of 4
Robert D. Drummond, Jr., Esq.

ATTORNEY AT LAW 

6767 Taylor Circle

Montgomery, AL 36117

s/T. Dudley Perry, Jr. 

T. Dudley Perry, Jr.

Bar Number: 3985-R67T

Deputy Attorney General

Attorney For Defendant

J. Walter Wood, Jr.

Case 2:06-cv-00755-MHT-CSC Document 29 Filed 05/29/2007 Page 4 of 4
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

vs. ) Case No. 2:06CR203-MHT

)

JOSEPH LEE STRINGER )

PRETRIAL CONFERENCE ORDER

A pretrial conference was held on September 25, 2006 before the undersigned

Magistrate Judge. Present at this conference was the Honorable Donnie Bethel, counsel

for the defendant, and Assistant United States Attorney Christopher Snyder, counsel for

the government. As a result of the conference, it is

ORDERED as follows:

1. Jury selection is set for October 30, 2006. The trial of this case is set for the

trial term commencing on October 30, 2006 before United States District Judge Myron

H. Thompson and is expected to last two (2) trial days.

2. There are no motions currently pending.

3. Proposed voir dire questions shall be filed on or before October 23, 2006.

Counsel should not include questions seeking information which is provided in the jury

questionnaire.

4. All Motions in Limine shall be filed on or before October 23, 2006. Motions in

Limine must be accompanied by a brief. Failure to file a brief will result in denial of the

motion.

Case 2:06-cr-00203-MHT-CSC Document 13 Filed 09/26/2006 Page 1 of 2
5. Proposed jury instructions shall be filed on or before October 23, 2006.

6. The court will not consider a plea pursuant to Rule 11(c) (1)(A) or (C) unless

notice is filed on or before noon on October18, 2006. The government and defendant

are informed that if a defendant waits until the last minute to enter a plea, and if that plea,

for whatever reason, is not accepted by the court, the defendant and the government will

be expected to be prepared to go to trial on October 30, 2006. The court will not

continue the trial of this case as to any defendant because a defendant’s plea was not

accepted. In other words, the defendant and the government should not wait until the last

minute for a defendant to enter a guilty plea, and both the defendant and the government

should all be ready to go to trial on October 30, 2006, as to all defendants, even though a

particular guilty plea was not accepted by the court.

Done this 26 day of September, 2006. th

 /s/Charles S. Coody 

CHARLES S. COODY

CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:06-cr-00203-MHT-CSC Document 13 Filed 09/26/2006 Page 2 of 2
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1


                            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 Quarterly Report of Universal Detection Technology (the
"Registrant") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2007, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Jacques Tizabi, Principal Executive Officer and Acting Principal Financial
Officer of the Registrant, certify to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities and 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 Registrant.




Dated:  August 20, 2007               /s/ Jacques Tizabi
                                      ------------------------------------------
                                      Jacques Tizabi
                                      Principal Executive Officer and Acting
                                      Principal Financial Officer and Principal
                                      Accounting Officer
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, EASTERN DIVISION

B.B., a minor, by and )

through his mother and )

next friend, OWENA KNOWLES, )

)

Plaintiff, )

) CIVIL ACTION NO.

v. ) 3:06cv715-MHT

) 

PAWN CITY, INC., a )

corporation, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

ORDER

It is ORDERED that the motion to dismiss (Doc. No.

48) is set for submission, without oral argument, on

August 21, 2007, with all briefs due by said date.

DONE, this the 7th day of August, 2007.

 /s/ Myron H. Thompson 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-00715-MHT-TFM Document 51 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 1 of 1
Subpart 3030.2—CAS Program Requirements

Parent topic: PART 3030—COST ACCOUNTING STANDARDS ADMINISTRATION

3030.201 Contract requirements.

3030.201-5 Waiver.

(a) The CPO is authorized to waive the applicability of the Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) under

(FAR) 48 CFR 30.201–5(b). This authority may not be redelegated.

(c) Waiver requests must conform to (HSAR) 48 CFR 3001.70.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION

PROGRESSIVE AMERICAN INSURANCE )

COMPANY, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) Civil Action No. 2:06-cv-717-ID

)

CAROL THORN; JOLEEN LEEA COLON; )

DALE EUGENE KIRKINDOLL; ELIZABETH S. )

KIRKINDOLL; THOMAS HOLT KIRKINDOLL; )

JAMES W. GRIFFIN; SANDRA L. GRIFFIN; )

PATRICK A. BELT; CHRISTOPHER B. BELT; )

GENE STEGMAIER; ESTATE OF WILLIAM R. )

KLAUSS, a deceased minor; ESTATE OF )

CHERETY THORN, a deceased minor; )

LV STABLER MEMORIAL HOSPITAL; BRPT )

LAKE REHABILITATION CENTER; BUTER )

COUNTY EMERGENCY MEDICAL )

SERVICES; )

)

Defendants, )

)

ENTRY OF DEFAULT

It appearing that defendant, Butler County EMS, was duly served with a copy of the

summons and complaint in this action on March 13, 2007; defendants Baton Rouge Clinic,

Southern National Life Insurance Company, and Schumacher Medical Group of Alabama, were

duly served with a copy of the summons and complaint in this action on July 23, 2007, and said

defendants have failed to answer or otherwise defend this action, as required by law, as set out in

the motion filed herein on September 11, 2007, by plaintiff’s attorney.

DEFAULT is hereby entered against said defendants, Butler County EMS, Baton Rouge

Clinic, Southern National Life Insurance Company, and Schumacher Medical Group of Alabama.

DONE THIS 29th day of November , 2007.

/s/ Debra P. Hackett

 

DEBRA P. HACKETT

CLERK, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

Case 2:06-cv-00717-ID-SRW Document 97 Filed 11/29/2007 Page 1 of 1
**EXHIBIT 32.1******

----

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

| In connection with the Quarterly Report          of SEDONA Corporation on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending March 31,          2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date          hereof (the "Quarterly Report"), I, Marco A. Emrich, Chief Executive          Officer of SEDONA Corporation certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the    Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (1) The Quarterly 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          Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial    condition and results of operations of SEDONA Corporation.                                                                                                                                                                                                                 |

|                |   |                                  |   |
|---------------------|--------|---------------------------------------|--------|
| Dated: May 14, 2004 |   | /s/ MARCO A. EMRICH                   |   |
|                |   |                                       |   |
|                |   | Marco A. Emrich                       |   |
|                |   | President and Chief Executive Officer |   |
|                |   | (Principal Executive Officer)         |   |

19

----
#### § 984.90 Effect of termination or amendment.

Unless otherwise expressly provided by the Secretary, the termination of this subpart or of any regulation issued pursuant to this subpart, or the issuance of any amendment to either thereof, shall not (a) affect or waive any right, duty, obligation, or liability which shall have arisen or which may thereafter arise in connection with any provision of this subpart or any regulation issued under this subpart, or (b) release or extinguish any violation of this subpart or of any regulation issued under this subpart, or (c) affect or impair any rights or remedies of the Secretary or of any other person, with respect to any such violation.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, EASTERN DIVISION

CINCINNATI INSURANCE )

COMPANY, )

)

Plaintiff, )

) CIVIL ACTION NO.

v. ) 3:06cv733-MHT

) 

JOSEPH DONALD PRATHER )

and LINDA PRATHER, )

)

Defendants. )

ORDER

It is ORDERED that the motion to continue (doc. no.

32) is denied.

DONE, this the 19th day of October, 2007.

 /s/ Myron H. Thompson 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-00733-MHT-TFM Document 33 Filed 10/19/2007 Page 1 of 1
§ 205.281 Petition for implementation of special refund procedures. ( a ) At any time after the issuance of a Remedial Order (including for purposes of this subpart a Remedial Order for Immediate Compliance and an Order of Disallowance), or a Consent Order, the Special Counsel of the Department of Energy, the ERA Office of Enforcement, or any other enforcement official of the Department of Energy may file with the Office of Hearings and Appeals a Petition for the Implementation of Special Refund Procedures.
( b ) The Petition shall state that the person filing it has been unable readily either to identify the persons who are entitled to refunds to be remitted pursuant to a Remedial Order or a Consent Order or to ascertain the amounts of refunds that such persons are entitled to receive. The Petition shall request that the Office of Hearings and Appeals institute appropriate proceedings under this subpart to distribute the funds referred to in the enforcement documents.
( c ) The Petition shall contain a copy of each relevant enforcement document, shall be filed in duplicate, and shall meet the requirements of § 205.9 of this part.
# Subpart 814.4 [Reserved]

**Parent topic:**PART 814 - SEALED BIDDING
|     |  |             
|---- |  | ------------
|LOGO |  | Exhibit 23.2

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITOR

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (File No. 333-191641) pertaining to the 2013 Equity Incentive Award
Plan of Pattern Energy Group Inc. of our reports dated February 21, 2014 and March 14, 2013 relating to the financial statements of South Kent Wind LP and of our reports dated February 21, 2014 relating to the financial statements of Grand
Renewable Wind LP which appear in this Form 10-K/A of Pattern Energy Group Inc.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Chartered Professional Accountants, Licensed Public Accountants

Toronto, Ontario, Canada

May 5, 2014



LOGO
1643.205-70 Contract clause.

The clause set forth in section 1652.243–70 shall be inserted in all FEHB Program contracts.

Parent topic: Subpart 1643.2—Changes
ex10_7.htm


     

    
      Employment
Contract of Liu Ruisheng

      


      Employer:
Wide Broad Group Limited    Employee: Liu
Ruisheng

      


      Position:
Chief Executive Officer and Chairman

      


      Job Duty: implement and take
the responsibility as a “CEO & Chairman” of the company, act as

      the best
interest of the group company.

      


      Effective Period: Under the
rule of No.7 termination clause, the employment contract period will be 2 years
and the effective date will be July 1st,
2009.

      


      Remuneration:
HKD$1,300,000/year, it will be installed within 13 months and paid in the
last day of each month. The 13th’s
salary will be paid with last month.
#### Lillian Silk, Respondent, v. Leo Silk, Appellant.

Order entered December 1, 1969, which granted plaintiff’s motion for temporary alimony and counsel fees, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, to the extent of reducing the award of temporary alimony to $100 per week and the counsel fees to $1,000; and as so modified the order is otherwise affirmed, without costs and without disbursements to. either party. On the present record the awards for temporary alimony and counsel fees were excessive to the extent indicated. Concur — Eager, J. P., Capozzoli, McGivern, Nunez and McNally, JJ.
2007-2331.

#### State v. Hayes.

Franklin App. No. 06AP-290, 2007-0hio-3056. On motion for leave to file delayed appeal. Motion denied.

Cupp, J., dissents.