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

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 460 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 460

  Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3764) to establish a 
 National Independent Inquiry Commission on Disaster Preparedness and 
 Response to examine and evaluate the Federal Government's response to 
  Hurricane Katrina and assess its ability to respond to future large-
                            scale disasters.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 27, 2005

Ms. Slaughter submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
                         the Committee on Rules

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3764) to establish a 
 National Independent Inquiry Commission on Disaster Preparedness and 
 Response to examine and evaluate the Federal Government's response to 
  Hurricane Katrina and assess its ability to respond to future large-
                            scale disasters.

    Resolved, That immediately upon the adoption of this resolution the 
House shall without intervention of any point of order consider in the 
House the bill (H.R. 3764) to establish a National Independent Inquiry 
Commission on Disaster Preparedness and Response to examine and 
evaluate the Federal Government's response to Hurricane Katrina and 
assess its ability to respond to future large-scale disasters. The bill 
shall be considered as read. The previous question shall be considered 
as ordered on the bill to final passage without intervening motion 
except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the 
chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Transportation 
and Infrastructure; and (2) one motion to recommit.
                                 <all>
```
#### HALL v. WOODMERE HOMESTEAD CO. et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

June 16, 1914.)

Action by Martin V. W. Hall against the Woodmere Homestead Company and others.

No opinion. Motion denied. See, also, 148 N. Y. Supp. 1118.
Exhibit
      32.1





CERTIFICATION
      OF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
      ACT
      OF 2002, 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350





In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Simclar, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form
      10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Barry J. Pardon,
      President of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for
      purpose of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, 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 result of operations of the Company.





This
      Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, “filed” with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission.




/s/
                Barry J. PardonBarry
                J. Pardon, PresidentSimclar,
                Inc.August
                14, 2007
###### Editorial Note on Part 2

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

#### § 2.913 Review of Restricted Data or other National Security Information received in evidence.

At the close of the reception of evidence, the presiding officer shall review the record and shall direct that any Restricted Data or other National Security Information be expunged from the record where such expunction would not prejudice the interests of a party or the public interest. Such directions by the presiding officer will be considered by the Commission in the event of review of the determinations of the presiding officer.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

ANGELA DENISE NAILS, *

*

PLAINTIFF, * 1:06-CV-00737.WKW

*

vs. *

*

DOTHAN RESCUE MISSION, *

*

DEFENDANT. *

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

KEVIN WALDING, Esq., Hardwick, Hause, Segrest &

Walding, Dothan, Alabama hereby moves the Court to note this

his entry of appearance as counsel for and on behalf of

Defendant Dothan Rescue Mission and requests the Court and

opposing counsel to serve all future Orders, notices,

pleadings, and the like on him.

THIS the 9th day of October, 2006.

HARDWICK, HAUSE, SEGREST & WALDING

BY: /s/ Kevin Walding 

Kevin Walding (WAL036)

ASB-8121-I-69J

Attorney for Defendant

Post Office Box 1469

Dothan, Alabama 36302

Phone: (334) 794-4144

Fax: (334) 671-9330

Case 1:06-cv-00737-WKW-SRW Document 10 Filed 10/09/2006 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that, this date, I have served a copy

of this document on the following attorney (s) of record by

placing same in the United States Mail in a properly

addressed envelope with prepaid postage.

Angela Denise Nails

342 South Saint Andrews Street

Apartment 808

Dothan, Alabama 36301

This the 9th day of October, 2006. 

 /s/ Kevin Walding 

Of Counsel

Case 1:06-cv-00737-WKW-SRW Document 10 Filed 10/09/2006 Page 2 of 2
function dcs_2_0(dcs_URI,dcs_QRY,dcs_EXT){        var dCurrent = new Date();        var P = "";        P+="http"+(window.location.protocol.indexOf('https:')==0?'s':'')+"://199.173.225.112/dcs.gif?";        P+="dcsuri="+escape(dcs_URI);        P+="&dcsqry="+escape(dcs_QRY);        if ((window.document.referrer != "") && (window.document.referrer != "-"))        {                if (!(navigator.appName == "Microsoft Internet Explorer" && parseInt(navigator.appVersion) < 4) )                {                        P+="&dcsref="+escape(window.document.referrer);                }        }        P+=dcs_EXT;        //P+="&dcssip=yourdomain";  //For Cross domain tracking, replace 'yourdomain' and remove the leading '//'.        //P+="&dcsp3p=yourp3pheader";  //To issue P3P header, replace 'yourp3pheader' and remove the leading '//'.        //P+="&dcscfg=yourcfg";  //To configure DCS, replace 'yourcfg' and remove the leading '//'.        P+="&dcsdat="+escape(dCurrent.getTime());        document.write('<IMG BORDER="0" NAME="DCSIMG" WIDTH="1" HEIGHT="1" SRC="'+P+'" ALT=" ">');}function dcsExtend(N,V){        dcsEXT+="&"+N+"="+escape(V);}function dcsMeta(){        var F=false;        var myDocumentElements;        if (document.all)        {                F = true;                myDocumentElements=document.all.tags("meta");        }        if (!F && document.documentElement)        {                F = true;                myDocumentElements=document.getElementsByTagName("meta");        }        if (F)        {                for (var i=1; i<=myDocumentElements.length;i++)                {                        myMeta=myDocumentElements.item(i-1);                        if (myMeta.name.indexOf('WT.')==0)                                dcsExtend(myMeta.name,myMeta.content);                }        }}var dcsURI=window.location.pathname;var dcsQRY=window.location.search;var dcsEXT="";dcsExtend("WT.ti",document.title);dcsExtend("WT.sr",screen.width + "X" + screen.height);dcsExtend("WT.cd",screen.colorDepth);dcsExtend("WT.ul",navigator.userLanguage);dcsMeta();dcs_2_0(dcsURI,dcsQRY,dcsEXT);
1Fireplace NSPS IncrementalCost EffectivenessPresented for the Hearth, Patio & Barbecue AssociationFireplace Caucus2Cost Effectiveness Calculation Tool345
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Charles Delgado, Appellant.

In a *coram nobis*proceeding (1) to vacate a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County, rendered January 10, 1966, and (2) for resentence so as to enable defendant to appeal from the judgment rendered upon such resentencing, defendant appeals from an order of said court, entered May 21, 1969, which denied the application without a hearing. Order reversed, on the law, and application remitted to the County Court for (1) a complete hearing on the issues of defendant’s indigence during the time within which a notice of appeal from the judgment of conviction could have been filed on his behalf and whether he either knew or had been informed of his right to appeal as a poor person and (2) a new determination. No questions of fact have been considered. In our opinion, defendant should have been informed of his right to appeal as a poor person if he was in fact indigent. If he was unable to afford to continue to pay retained counsel, his knowledge of a right to appeal without knowledge that he could do so as a poor person was insufficient to establish an informed waiver of his rights (cf. *People*v. *Montgomery,*24 N Y 2d 130; *People*v. *Ludwig,*16 N Y 2d 1062; *People*v. *Williams,*28 A D 2d 985). Sufficient has been shown to entitle him to a hearing. Christ, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur; (Beldock, P. J., deceased.)
PGI 219.705-6 Postaward responsibilities of the contracting officer.       (f) When reviewing subcontracting reports, contracting officers may use the document entitled “DoD Subcontracting Program—Business Rules and Processes for (1) Electronic Subcontracting Reporting System (eSRS) and (2) Preparing and Reviewing Related Subcontract Reports.” The document is available at http://business.defense.gov/Acquisition/Subcontracting/.    **Parent topic:** PGI 219.705 Responsibilities of the contracting officer under the subcontracting assistance program.
ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE



Reference
is hereby made to that certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of March 1, 2013, by and among DEUTSCHE MORTGAGE &
ASSET RECEIVING CORPORATION, as Depositor, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Master Servicer, WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION, as Special Servicer, U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee, PARK BRIDGE LENDER SERVICES LLC, as Operating Advisor
and DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS, as Certificate Administrator, Paying Agent and Custodian with respect to Commercial Mortgage
Pass-Through Certificates, Series COMM 2013-CCRE6 (the "Agreement"). Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise defined
shall have the meanings assigned in the Agreement.



Pursuant
to Section 10.11 of this Agreement, I, Daniel Marthinsen, Managing Director of Special Servicing do hereby certify that:



| | 1. | A review of the activities of the Special Servicer during the period from
January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2016 (the “Reporting Period”), and of its performance per the Agreement during
such period has been made under my supervision, and
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Special Servicer
has fulfilled all of its obligations under this Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------









IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 28thday
of Febryary 2017.













_____________________________

Daniel
Marthinsen

Managing Director

Wells Fargo Bank
Case 2:06-cv-00791-MEF-SRW Document 5 Filed 09/20/2006 Page 1 of 2
Case 2:06-cv-00791-MEF-SRW Document 5 Filed 09/20/2006 Page 2 of 2
#### § 590.100 OMB Control Numbers.

The information collection requirements contained in this part have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget under Control No. 1903-0081.
IV 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 417

Directing the Secretary of Defense to transmit to the House of Representatives not later than 14 days after the date of the adoption of this 

resolution documents in the possession of the Secretary of Defense relating to the disclosure of the identity and employment of Ms. Valerie 

Plame. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 29, 2005

Mr. HOLT (for himself, Mr. INSLEE, Mr. GRIJALVA, Mr. CONYERS, Mr. 

KUCINICH, Mr. TIERNEY, Mr. MCDERMOTT, Mr. ACKERMAN, Mr. 

DEFAZIO, Mr. HINCHEY, Mr. DELAHUNT, Mr. DOYLE, Mr. UDALL of 

Colorado, Mr. VISCLOSKY, Mr. MCGOVERN, Mr. PALLONE, Ms. LEE, and 

Ms. MATSUI) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 

the Committee on Armed Services 

RESOLUTION

Directing the Secretary of Defense to transmit to the House 

of Representatives not later than 14 days after the date 

of the adoption of this resolution documents in the possession of the Secretary of Defense relating to the disclosure of the identity and employment of Ms. Valerie 

Plame.

1 Resolved, That the Secretary of Defense is directed 

2 to transmit to the House of Representatives not later than 

3 the date that is 14 days after the date of the adoption 

4 of this resolution, all documents, including telephone and 
2

•HRES 417 IH 

1 electronic mail records, logs and calendars, personnel 

2 records, and records of internal discussions in the posses3 sion of the Secretary of Defense relating to the disclosure 

4 of the identity of Ms. Valerie Plame as an employee of 

5 the Central Intelligence Agency during the period begin6 ning on May 6, 2003, and ending on July 31, 2003.

Æ
EXHIBIT 10(iii)(a)

                                    Amendment

The following clause will replace the existing clause 3(b) in the Employment
Agreement between Barry Pardon and Techdyne, Inc. dated 27th September 2000:

(b) In addition to the base salary as provided in paragraph 3(a), the Company
may pay the Executive an annual bonus. The amount of such annual bonus will be
determined entirely at the discretion of the Chairman and Chief Executive
Officer of the Company and will take account of the financial performance of the
Company in its most recent financial year and the performance of the Executive
in his role as President of the Company in the same period. Such bonus, if any,
shall be paid no later than 31st March of each year and will be in the form of
either cash or shares of Common Stock in the Company.

5 April 2002


ATTEST:                                     TECHDYNE, INC

WITNESS

/s/ Ian Durie                                 By /s/   Samuel J. Russell
---------------------------                   ----------------------------------
                                                       SAMUEL J RUSSELL,
                                                       Chairman of the Board and
                                                       Chief Executive Officer

WITNESS                                     EXECUTIVE


/s/ Roxie Alvarez                                /s/   Barry Pardon
------------------                          ------------------------------------
                                                       BARRY PARDON
#### § 52.53 Referral to the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS).

The Commission shall refer a copy of the application to the ACRS. The ACRS shall report on those portions of the application which concern safety.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Shamar Jackson, Appellant.

[814 NYS2d 164]

*401Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Arlene Silverman, J.), rendered July 29, 2004, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third and fourth degrees, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 41/2 to 9 years and 3 to 6 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly exercised its discretion in precluding defendant’s attempt to impeach the arresting officer with a portion of his grand jury testimony *(see People v Duncan,*46 NY2d 74, 80 [1978], *cert denied*442 US 910 [1979]). Even if the snippet of testimony from the grand jury can reasonably be viewed as inconsistent with an aspect of the officer’s trial testimony, the purported inconsistency rests on a slender semantic basis and lacks probative value. Defendant received a full opportunity to attack the officer’s credibility, and there was no impairment of defendant’s right to confront witnesses and present a defense *(see Delaware v Van Arsdall,*475 US 673, 678-679 [1986]).

The court also properly exercised its discretion in permitting the officer to testify that he recognized defendant from patrolling the neighborhood as this evidence was relevant to the contested issue of identification *(see People v Alvino,*71 NY2d 233, 241-242 [1987]), and did not suggest any prior criminal activity by defendant. Defendant’s challenge to the officer’s testimony, on cross-examination, that he later learned defendant’s name after checking his arrest files is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would reject it. This testimony was elicited by defendant *(see People v Melendez,*55 NY2d 445, 451-452 [1982]), who did not request any remedy from the court. Concur—Buckley, P.J., Mazzarelli, Friedman, Sweeny and McGuire, JJ.
§ 455.31 Allocation formulas. ( a ) Financial assistance for conducting technical assistance programs for units of local government and public care institutions shall be allocated among the States by multiplying the sum available by the allocation factor set forth in paragraph (c) of this section.
( b ) Financial assistance for conducting technical assistance programs and acquiring and installing energy conservation measures, including renewable resource measures, for schools and hospitals, shall be allocated among the States by multiplying the sum available by the allocation factor set forth in paragraph (c) of this section.
( c ) The allocation factor (K) shall be determined by the formula: where, as determined by DOE: ( 1 ) Sfc is the projected average retail cost per million Btu's of energy consumed within the region in which the State is located as contained in current regional energy cost projections obtained from DOE.
( 2 ) Nfc is the summation of the Sfc numerators for all States;
( 3 ) N is the total number of eligible States;
( 4 ) SP is the population of the State;
( 5 ) SC is the sum of the State's heating and cooling degree days; and
( 6 ) NPC is the summation of the (SP)(SC) numerators for all States.
( d ) Except for the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, no allocation available to any State may be less than 0.5 percent of all amounts allocated in any grant program cycle. No State will be allocated more than 10 percent of the funds allocated in any grant program cycle.
Editorial Note on Part 2
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

§ 2.623 Notice of hearing on application for early review of site suitability issues in combined license proceeding. ( a ) Where an applicant for a combined license under part 52 of this chapter requests an early review and hearing and an early partial decision on issues of site suitability pursuant to § 2.101(a-2), the provisions in the notice of hearing setting forth the matters of fact and law to be considered, as required by § 2.104, shall be modified so as to relate only to the site suitability issue or issues under review. The notice will provide appropriate opportunities for participation by a representative of an interested State under § 2.315(c) and for limited appearances under § 2.315(a), limited however, to the issues of site suitability for which early review has been requested by the applicant.
( b ) After docketing of part two of the application, as provided in §§ 2.101(a-1) and 2.603, a supplementary notice of hearing will be published under § 2.104 with respect to the remaining unresolved issues in the proceeding within the scope of § 2.104. This supplementary notice of hearing will provide that any person whose interest may be affected by the proceeding and who desires to participate as a party in the resolution of the remaining issues shall file a petition for leave to intervene pursuant to § 2.309 within the time prescribed in the notice. This supplementary notice will also provide appropriate opportunities for participation by a representative of an interested State under § 2.315(c) and for limited appearances under § 2.315(a).
( c ) Any person who was permitted to intervene as a party under the initial notice of hearing on site suitability issues and who was not dismissed or did not withdraw as a party may continue to participate as a party to the proceeding without having to demonstrate standing under § 2.309(d), *provided, however,* that within the time prescribed for filing of petitions for leave to intervene in the supplementary notice of hearing, the party files a notice of intent to continue as a party. The notice must include the information required by § 2.309(f). A party who files a non-timely notice of intent to continue as a party may be dismissed from the proceeding, absent a determination that the party has made a substantial showing of good cause for failure to file on time, and with particular reference to the factors specified in §§ 2.309(c)(1)(i) through (iv) and 2.309(d). The notice will be ruled upon by the Commission or presiding officer designated to rule on petitions for leave to intervene.
( d ) To the maximum extent practicable, the presiding officer (as applicable, the membership of the licensing board) designated to preside in the proceeding on the remaining unresolved issues pursuant to the supplemental notice of hearing will be the same as the presiding officer (as applicable, the membership of the licensing board) designated to preside in the initial notice of hearing on site suitability issues.
#### Alfio Manzitto, Appellant, v. Jack Parker Construction Corporation, Respondent, et al., Defendant.

Judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated May 22, 1968, affirmed. No opinion. Appeal from order of said court, dated October 30, 1968, dismissed. An order denying a motion for a new trial, made only on the trial minutes, is not appealable. In any event, the contentions urged with respect to the motion were considered on the appeal from the judgment. One bill of costs is allowed to respondent to cover both appeals. Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Rabin, Benjamin and Martuscello, JJ., concur.
###### Editorial Note on Part 34

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 34 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

#### § 34.111 Applications for exemptions.

The Commission may, upon application of any interested person or upon its own initiative, grant an exemption from the requirements of the regulations in this part if it determines the exemption is authorized by law and would not endanger life or property or the common defense and security and is otherwise in the public interest.
Editorial Note on Part 35
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 35 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

§ 35.2433 Records of decay of strontium-90 sources for ophthalmic treatments. ( a ) A licensee shall maintain a record of the activity of a strontium-90 source required by § 35.433 for the life of the source.
( b ) The record must include— ( 1 ) The date and initial activity of the source as determined under § 35.432; and
( 2 ) For each decay calculation, the date and the source activity as determined under § 35.433.
MEDIATION REFERRALS

The following cases have been returned to the regular docket pursuant to S.Ct.Prac.R. XIV(6)(E):

2007-1874.

#### State ex rel. OmniSource Corp. v. Self-Insuring Emps. Evaluation Bd.

Franklin App. No. 06AP-650, 2007-Ohio-4452.