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

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 266 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 266

    Supporting the goals and ideals of Peace Officers Memorial Day.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 5, 2005

    Mr. Hefley (for himself and Mr. Stupak) submitted the following 
  resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
    Supporting the goals and ideals of Peace Officers Memorial Day.

Whereas the well-being of all people of the United States is preserved and 
        enhanced as a direct result of the vigilance and dedication of law 
        enforcement personnel;
Whereas more than 870,000 law enforcement personnel, the highest amount ever in 
        the United States, serve their fellow citizens as guardians of peace;
Whereas peace officers are on the front line in preserving the right of the 
        children of the United States to receive an education in a crime-free 
        environment, a right that is all too often threatened by the insidious 
        fear caused by violence in schools;
Whereas 153 peace officers across the Nation were killed in the line of duty 
        during 2004, well below the decade-long average of 165 deaths annually, 
        and a major drop from 2001 when 230 officers were killed, including 72 
        officers in the September 11th terrorist attacks;
Whereas every year, a law enforcement officer is killed somewhere in the United 
        States every 53 hours, and there are also 56,000 assaults against our 
        law officers each year, resulting in 17,000 injuries;
Whereas section 136 of title 36, United States Code, requests that the President 
        issue each year a proclamation designating May 15 as Peace Officers 
        Memorial Day in honor of Federal, State, and local officers killed or 
        disabled in the line of duty; and
Whereas on May 13, 2005, more than 20,000 peace officers are expected to gather 
        in Washington, D.C. to join with the families of their recently fallen 
        comrades to honor those comrades and all others who went before them: 
        Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) supports the goals and ideals of Peace Officers 
        Memorial Day to honor Federal, State, and local peace officers 
        killed or disabled in the line of duty; and
            (2) calls upon the people of the United States to observe 
        such a day with appropriate ceremonies and respect.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 40 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                      January 26, 2005.
Whereas Johnny Carson was born as John William Carson on October 23, 1925, in 
        Corning, Iowa, to Homer ``Kit'' and Ruth Carson;
Whereas Johnny Carson moved with his family to Norfolk, Nebraska, in 1933, 
        served his country as a Navy ensign during World War II, and received a 
        bachelor of arts degree in radio and speech in 1949 from the University 
        of Nebraska;
Whereas Johnny Carson became known as the ``King of Late Night'' as he 
        entertained millions of Americans from 1962 until 1992 as the host of 
        ``The Tonight Show'';
Whereas Johnny Carson won six Emmy Awards, was inducted into the Television Hall 
        of Fame in 1987, was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1992, 
        and received the Kennedy Center Lifetime Achievement Award in 1993;
Whereas Johnny Carson continued to recognize his Midwestern roots by generously 
        donating millions of dollars to communities and institutions in Nebraska 
        and Iowa;
Whereas the United States was saddened by the death of Johnny Carson on January 
        23, 2005, at the age of 79: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) honors Johnny Carson for making us laugh and for his many 
        philanthropic contributions; and
            (2) expresses its deepest sympathy and condolences to his family.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
§ 473.11 Submission of applicant's information. ( a ) An applicant submitting an unsolicited proposal to conduct research and development to be funded by a grant, cooperative agreement, or contract under the Act shall include the information required under § 473.10 in the unsolicited proposal document filed under the assistance or procurement regulations of the DOE or other Federal agency which funds the proposed research and development under the Act.
( b ) In responding to a solicitation for a proposal to conduct research and development funded by a grant, cooperative agreement, or contract under the Act, the applicant shall include the information required under § 473.10 in the proposal.
( c ) Information submitted under § 473.10 of these regulations shall be certified in writing as complete and accurate by the applicant, and if the applicant is not an individual, the chief executive officer of the applicant or his authorized designee shall sign the certification.
#### § 600.120 Purpose of financial and program management.

Sections 600.121 through 600.128 prescribe standards for financial management systems, methods for making payments and rules for satisfying cost sharing and matching requirements, accounting for program income, budget revision approvals, making audits, determining allowability of cost, and establishing fund availability.
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**201 KA 14-01229** 
PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., PERADOTTO, CARNI, SCONIERS, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

ANTWANE WALKER, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

J. SCOTT PORTER, SENECA FALLS, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

WILLIAM J. FITZPATRICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SYRACUSE (VICTORIA M. WHITE OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Appeal from an order of the Onondaga County Court (Thomas J. Miller, J.), dated June 13, 2014. The order determined that defendant is a level two risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act.

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from an order determining that he is a level two risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law § 168 et seq. ). Contrary to defendant’s contention, County Court’s determination that defendant is a level two risk is based upon clear and convincing evidence ( see generally § 168-n [3]). The evidence supports the court’s determination that defendant’s primary purpose in establishing the relationship with the victim was to victimize her ( see People v Washington , 91 AD3d 1277, 1277, lv denied 19 NY3d 801). Defendant approached the victim on a bus and thereafter initiated contact with her through Facebook and by cell phone, even though she had not given defendant her last name or cell phone number. Defendant then persistently texted the victim and invited her to dinner, but instead took her to a hotel where he raped her. “[T]he self-serving denial of defendant that he established the relationship for the purpose of victimizing the victim presented an issue of credibility for the court” ( People v Romana , 35 AD3d 1241, 1242, lv denied 8 NY3d 810).

Entered: February 13, 2015 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
#### Catherine Caporale, Appellee, v. The Sovereign Camp of the Woodmen of the World, Now Known as Woodmen of the World Life Insurance Society, Appellant.

Gen. No. 41,153.

*274opinion filed June 26, 1940.

William E. Mooney, for appellant; Ellidor M. Libonati, for appellee; Abraham Miller, of counsel.

Opinion by

Presiding Justice Friend.

‘ ‘Not to be published in full.”
**Exhibit 32.2**

**Certification of Chief financial Officer Under Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

The undersigned officer of The First Bancorp, Inc. (the "Company") hereby certifies that the Company's quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2008 to which this certification is being furnished as an exhibit (the "Report"), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"), and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. This certification is provided pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K ("Item 601(b)(32)") promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "Securities Act"), and the Exchange Act. In accordance with clause (ii) of Item 601(b)(32), thiscertification (A) shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section, and (B) shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.

 

Date: August 7, 2008

 

/s/ F. Stephen Ward

F. Stephen Ward

Executive Vice President & Chief Financial Officer

The First Bancorp, Inc.

 

 

Page 1
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED December 4, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-40807 Summary Calendar

SHELIA R. BEAUMONT, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus JO ANNE B. BARNHART, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant-Appellee.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:02-CV-313

-------------------- Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Shelia R. Beaumont filed a complaint seeking review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“the Commissioner”) denying her application for Supplemental Security Income benefits. See 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). After the Commissioner answered Beaumont’s complaint, the Commissioner moved the district court to reverse the agency’s decision and to remand the matter for further administrative proceedings.No. 03-40807 -2- The district court granted the motion and remanded the matter pursuant to the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) provides that “[t]he [district] court shall have power to enter, upon the pleadings and transcript of the record, a judgment affirming, modifying, or reversing the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security, with or without remanding the cause for a rehearing.” 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Beaumont argues that there is no basis for a remand and that she is entitled to an award of benefits because she meets the requirements for listed impairments pursuant to 20 C.F.R. Pt. 404, Subpt. P, App. 1, §§ 12.05(C) and (D). The Commissioner argues that the record contain inconsistencies and conflicts which require further administrative review. After an examination of the record, we agree with the Commissioner that the record contains inconsistencies and unresolved issues that preclude an immediate award of benefits. “Conflicts in the evidence are for the [Commissioner] and not the courts to resolve.” Newton v. Apfel , 209 F.3d 448, 452 (5th Cir. 2000). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court reversing the Commissioner’s decision and remanding the matter for further administrative proceedings is AFFIRMED. We deem it unnecessary to resolve the parties’ dispute over the applicable standard of review.

AFFIRMED.
#### § 603.1265 Expenditures or outlays.

Charges made to the project or program. They may be reported either on a cash or accrual basis, as shown in the following table:

| If reports are prepared on a . . . | Expenditures are the sum of . . . |
| --- | --- |
| (a) Cash basis | (1) Cash disbursements for direct charges for goods and services; |
| | (2) The amount of indirect expense charge; |
| | (3) The value of third party in-kind contributions applied; and |
| | (4) The amount of cash advances and payments made to any other organizations for the performance of a part of the RD&D effort. |
| (b) Accrual basis | (1) Cash disbursements for direct charges for goods and services; |
| | (2) The amount of indirect expense incurred; |
| | (3) The value of in-kind contributions applied; and |
| | (4) The net increase (or decrease) in the amounts owed by the recipient for goods and other property received, for services performed by employees, contractors, and other payees and other amounts becoming owed under programs for which no current services or performance are required. |
Exhibit 32.1

                  Certification of Chief Executive Officer and
                   Acting Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to
                             18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
                             as Adopted Pursuant to
                  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 and accompanies the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB/A (the "Form
10-QSB/A") for the quarter ended March 31, 2004 of Universal Detection
Technology (the "Issuer").


I, Jacques Tizabi, the Chief Executive Officer and Acting Chief Financial
Officer of Issuer certify that, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my
knowledge:


          (i)  the Form 10-QSB/A fully complies with the requirements of Section
               13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
               and

          (ii) the information contained in the Form 10-QSB/A fairly presents,
               in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
               operations of the Issuer.

Date:  September 17, 2004



                                                 /s/ Jacques Tizabi
                                              ---------------------------------
                                               Name: Jacques Tizabi
SUBCHAPTER D - SOCIOECONOMIC

PROGRAMS

PART 2019 - SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAMS

PART 2022 - APPLICATION OF LABOR LAWS TO GOVERNMENT ACQUISITIONS

PART 2024 - PROTECTION OF PRIVACY AND FREEDOM OF INFORMATION

PART 2019 - SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAMS

Subpart 2019.7 - Subcontracting With Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business,

and Women-Owned Small Business Concerns

2019.705 Responsibilities of the contracting officer under the subcontracting

assistance program.

2019.705-4 Reviewing the subcontracting plan.

PART 2022 - APPLICATION OF LABOR LAWS TO GOVERNMENT ACQUISITIONS

Subpart 2022.1 - Basic Labor Policies

2022.101-1 General.

2022.103-4 Approvals.

Subpart 2022.9 - Nondiscrimination Because of Age

2022.901-70 Contract provisions.

PART 2024 - PROTECTION OF PRIVACY AND FREEDOM OF INFORMATION

Subpart 2024.1 - Protection of Individual Privacy

2024.103 Procedures.

Subpart 2024.2 - Freedom of Information Act

2024.202 Policy.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

February 6, 2014

N o. 04

- 14

- 00018

- CV

Damien HERRERA and Blaine Castle,

Appellant s

v.

Judy STAHL and Sue Hensley,

Appellee s

From the 166th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012

- CI

- 05750 Honorable Michael E. Mery, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

The trial court signed the order appellants seek to appeal on December 16, 2013. Because this is an accelerated, interlocutory appeal, appellant’s notice of appeal was due to be filed on January 6, 2014. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 26.1(b). A motion for extension of time to file the notice of appeal was due on January 21, 2014. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 26.3. Although appellants filed a notice of appeal within the fifteen

- day grace period allowed by Rule 26.3, they did not file

a motion for extension of time.

A motion for extension of time is necessarily implied when an appellant, acting in good faith, files a notice of appeal beyond the time allowed by Rule 26.1 but within the fifteen

- day grace period provided by Rule 26.3 fo r filing a motion for extension of time. See Verburgt v.

Dorner , 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997) (construing the predecessor to Rule 26). However, the appellant must offer a reasonable explanation for failing to file the notice of appeal in a timely mann er. See id. ; T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 26.3, 10.5(b)(1)(C).

It is therefore ORDERED that appellant file, within fifteen days from the date of this order, a response presenting a reasonable explanation for failing to file the notice of appeal in a timely mann er. If appellant fails to respond within the time provided, the appeal will be

dismissed. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 42.3(c)._________________________________ Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 6th day of February, 2014

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
H. Res. 283

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

May 18, 2005.

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule

XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the

Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of

the bill (H.R. 1817) to authorize appropriations for fiscal

year 2006 for the Department of Homeland Security, and for

other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of the

bill are waived. General debate shall be confined to the bill

and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled

by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Homeland Security. After general debate the bill

shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute

rule. In lieu of the amendments recommended by the Committees on Homeland Security, Energy and Commerce, and

the Judiciary now printed in the bill, it shall be in order to

consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment

under the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of
2

•HRES 283 EH

a substitute printed in part A of the report of the Committee

on Rules accompanying this resolution. That amendment in

the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. All

points of order against that amendment in the nature of a

substitute are waived. Notwithstanding clause 11 of rule

XVIII, no amendment to that amendment in the nature of

a substitute shall be in order except those printed in part B

of the report of the Committee on Rules. Each amendment

may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may

be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall

be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment,

and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. All

points of order against such amendments are waived. At the

conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the

Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with

such amendments as may have been adopted. Any Member

may demand a separate vote in the House on any amendment

adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the bill or to the

amendment in the nature of a substitute made in order as

original text. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage
3

•HRES 283 EH

without intervening motion except one motion to recommit

with or without instructions.

Attest:

Clerk.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 601 Reported in House (RH)]

<DOC>

                                                  House Calendar No. 97
115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 601

                          [Report No. 115-382]

 Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3922) to extend funding 
      for certain public health programs, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            November 1, 2017

   Mr. Burgess, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following 
resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3922) to extend funding 
      for certain public health programs, and for other purposes.

    Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 3922) to extend funding 
for certain public health programs, and for other purposes. All points 
of order against consideration of the bill are waived. In lieu of the 
amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce now printed in the bill, the amendment printed in 
part A of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this 
resolution, modified by the amendment printed in part B of that report, 
shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be 
considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, 
as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as 
ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, 
to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of 
debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce; and (2) one motion to 
recommit with or without instructions.
                                                  House Calendar No. 97

115th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                              H. RES. 601

                          [Report No. 115-382]

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3922) to extend funding 
      for certain public health programs, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                            November 1, 2017

        Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed
```
Case 3:06-cr-00191-MHT-CSC Document 1 Filed 08/15/2006 Page 1 of 3
Case 3:06-cr-00191-MHT-CSC Document 1 Filed 08/15/2006 Page 2 of 3
Case 3:06-cr-00191-MHT-CSC Document 1 Filed 08/15/2006 Page 3 of 3
#### § 429.120 Maximum civil penalty.

Any person who knowingly violates any provision of § 429.102(a) may be subject to assessment of a civil penalty of no more than $560 for each violation. As to § 429.102(a)(1) with respect to failure to certify, and as to § 429.102(a)(2), (5) through (9), each unit of a covered product or covered equipment distributed in violation of such paragraph shall constitute a separate violation. For violations of § 429.102(a)(1), (3), and (4), each day of noncompliance shall constitute a separate violation for each basic model at issue.

[76 FR 12451, Mar. 7, 2011, as amended at 81 FR 41794, June 28, 2016; 81 FR 96351, Dec. 30, 2016; 83 FR 1291, Jan. 11, 2018; 83 FR 66083, Dec. 26, 2018; 85 FR 830, Jan. 8, 2020; 86 FR 2955, Jan. 14, 2021; 87 FR 1063, Jan. 10, 2022; 88 FR 2193, Jan. 13, 2023; 89 FR 1028, Jan. 9, 2024]