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

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 445 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 445

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                    September 15, 2005.
    Resolved, That the following named Members be, and are hereby, elected to 
the following standing committees of the House of Representatives:
    Committee on Agriculture: Mrs. Schmidt to rank after Mr. Fortenberry.
    Committee on Government Reform: Mrs. Schmidt to rank after Ms. Foxx.
    Committee on Homeland Security: Mr. King of New York, Chairman; Ms. Ginny 
Brown-Waite of Florida to rank after Mr. Dent.
    Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure: Mrs. Schmidt to rank after 
Mr. Boustany.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
#### NICHOLS, Appellant, v. WILLEY, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

July 1, 1914.)

Action by James K. Nichols, as trustee in bankruptcy of the Star Electric Company, bankrupt, against Albert L. Willey.

No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.
§ 200.427 Bonding costs. ( a ) Bonding costs arise when the Federal awarding agency requires assurance against financial loss to itself or others by reason of the act or default of the non-Federal entity. They arise also in instances where the non-Federal entity requires similar assurance, including: bonds as bid, performance, payment, advance payment, infringement, and fidelity bonds for employees and officials.
( b ) Costs of bonding required pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Federal award are allowable.
( c ) Costs of bonding required by the non-Federal entity in the general conduct of its operations are allowable as an indirect cost to the extent that such bonding is in accordance with sound business practice and the rates and premiums are reasonable under the circumstances.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Phil Doran, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, rendered on July 24, 1979, unanimously affirmed. The case is remitted to the Supreme Court, New York County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (subd 5). No opinion. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Ross, Markewich, Yesawieh and Carro, JJ.
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Peter F. Rhall, Appellant, v. Ross E. Herold, as Director of Dannemora State Hospital, Respondent.

Appeal dismissed, without costs, on the ground that relator has been released on parole (see *People ex rel. Wilder*v. *Marhley,*26 N Y 2d 648). Herlihy, P. J., Reynolds, Aulisi, Staley, Jr., and Greenblott, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32.1


CERTIFICATION OF THE
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S. C. SECTION 1350


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT
TO


SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the
Annual Report of SigmaBroadband Co., (the "Company") on Form 10-K
for the period ended December 31, 2015 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Jeffery A. Brown, President and Principal Executive Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S. C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes- Oxley Act of 2002, that,
to my knowledge:





(1) 	The Report fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and


(2) 	The information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.








SIGMABROADBAND CO.





June 7, 2016





By: /s/ Jeffery A. Brown


Jeffery A. Brown


President, Secretary, Principal Executive Officer, and Director
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL
EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In
connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Velocity
Portfolio Group, Inc. for the period ended June 30, 2009, I, John C.
Kleinert, President and Chief Executive Officer, hereby certifies pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      
|-- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|1. | Such Quarterly Report on
 Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009,
 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
 results of operations of Velocity Portfolio Group, Inc.

|                         |     |                                  | 
|------------------------ | --- | -------------------------------- | 
|Dated: September 4, 2009 | /s/ | John C. Kleinert                 | 
|                         |     |                                 
|                         |     | John C. Kleinert, President
 and | 
|                         |     | Chief Executive Officer          | 

---
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 1061 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 1061

 Expressing support for designation of the week of September 16, 2018, 
       through September 22, 2018, as ``Balance Awareness Week''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 12, 2018

Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas submitted the following resolution; 
       which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Expressing support for designation of the week of September 16, 2018, 
       through September 22, 2018, as ``Balance Awareness Week''.

Whereas vestibular (inner-ear-balance) disorders are underdiagnosed and 
        undertreated;
Whereas as many as 35 percent of adults 40 years of age and older in the United 
        States, approximately 69,000,000 people in the United States, have 
        experienced some form of vestibular dysfunction;
Whereas 80 percent of people 65 years of age and older have experienced 
        dizziness;
Whereas vestibular disorder patients may consult 4 or more physicians and spend 
        50 months or more in their search for a diagnosis;
Whereas the Vestibular Disorders Association celebrates ``Balance Awareness 
        Week'' to reduce the time it takes to diagnose a vestibular disorder by 
        helping patients recognize their symptoms and encouraging them to seek 
        help from a qualified vestibular specialist; and
Whereas the week of September 16, 2018, through September 22, 2018, would be an 
        appropriate week to designate as ``Balance Awareness Week'': Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) supports the designation of ``Balance Awareness Week''; 
        and
            (2) recognizes the importance of raising public awareness 
        about vestibular disorders.
                                 <all>
```
EX-31 Rule13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certifications.

 

 

I, Helaine M. Kaplan,certify that:

 

1. I have reviewedthis report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respectof the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of the COMM 2013-CCRE7Mortgage Trust (the "Exchange Act periodic reports");

 

2. Based on myknowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3. Based on myknowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required tobe provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is includedin the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4. Based on myknowledge and the servicer compliance statements required in this report underItem 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Actperiodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under theservicing agreements in all material respects; and

 

5. All of the reportson assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securitiesand their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance withservicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in thisreport in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except asotherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliancedescribed in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

 

In giving thecertifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me bythe following unaffiliated parties:

 

Midland LoanServices, a Division of PNC Bank, National Association, as Master Servicer,Situs Holdings, LLC, as Special Servicer, Wells Fargo Bank, NationalAssociation, as Trustee and Certificate Administrator, Wells Fargo Bank,National Association, as Custodian, Park Bridge Lender Services LLC, asOperating Advisor, KeyBank National Association (as successor to KeyCorp RealEstate Capital Markets, Inc.), as Primary Servicer, Midland Loan Services, aDivision of PNC Bank, National Association, as Primary Servicer for the MoffettTowers Mortgage Loan, Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC, as Special Servicer for theMoffett Towers Mortgage Loan, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, asTrustee for the Moffett Towers Mortgage Loan, Wells Fargo Bank, NationalAssociation, as Custodian for the Moffett Towers Mortgage Loan, and Park BridgeLender Services LLC, as Operating Advisor for the Moffett Towers Mortgage Loan.

 

 

 

Dated: September 14,2020

 

 

/s/ Helaine M. Kaplan

 

 

President

(seniorofficer in charge of securitization of the depositor)
**EXHIBIT 35.1**

 

**SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT**

**New Holland Credit Company, LLC**

 

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of New Holland Credit Company, LLC (“NHCC”), as Servicer pursuant to the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of February 1, 2013 (as amended from time to time, the “Sale and Servicing Agreement”) by and among NHCC, CNH Capital Receivables LLC and CNH Equipment Trust 2013-A, does hereby certify that:

 

1.                                      NHCC is Servicer under the Sale and Servicing Agreement.

 

2.                                      The undersigned is duly authorized as required pursuant to the Sale and Servicing Agreement to execute and deliver this Certificate to the Indenture Trustee.

 

3.                                      This Certificate is delivered pursuant to Section 4.9(a) of the Sale and Servicing Agreement and Item 1123 of Regulation AB.

 

4.                                      A review of the Servicer’s activities during the 12 month period ending (and including) December 31, 2013 and of its performance under the Sale and Servicing Agreement has been made under my supervision.

 

5.                                      To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Sale and Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout the 12 month period ending (and including) December 31, 2013.

 

6.                                      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate this 27th day of March, 2014.

 

----

 
| March   27, 2014 |   |                    |
|------------------|--------|-------------------------|
|             |   |                    |
|             | By:    | /s/   Steven C. Bierman |
|             | Name:  | Steven   C. Bierman     |
|             | Title: | President               |

 

----
NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION.

UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL

AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.

IN THE

ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent,

v.

FOX JOSEPH SALERNO, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 23-0020 PRPC

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County

No. CR2000-017362

The Honorable Scott Sebastian Minder, Judge

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix

By Krista Wood

Counsel for Respondent

Fox Joseph Salerno, Limon, Colorado

Petitioner

FILED 5-11-2023
STATE v. SALERNO

Decision of the Court

2

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Jennifer M. Perkins, Judge Angela K. Paton, and Judge D. 

Steven Williams delivered the decision of the Court.

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Petitioner Fox Joseph Salerno seeks review of the superior 

court’s order dismissing his petition for post-conviction relief, filed 

pursuant to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1. This is his twelfth 

petition.

¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or error of law, this court will 

not disturb a superior court’s ruling on a petition for post-conviction relief. 

State v. Gutierrez, 229 Ariz. 573, 577, ¶ 19 (2012). It is petitioner’s burden to 

show that the superior court abused its discretion by denying the petition 

for post-conviction relief. See State v. Poblete, 227 Ariz. 537, 538, ¶ 1 (App. 

2011) (petitioner has burden of establishing abuse of discretion on review).

¶3 We have reviewed the record in this matter, the superior 

court’s order dismissing the petition for post-conviction and petition. 

Petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion.

¶4 For the foregoing reasons, we grant review but deny relief.
#### STUMM v. FICK.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

July 31, 1914.)

Action by Charles Stumm, as sole next of kin and executor, etc., of Lena Fick, deceased, against Christian Fick and another.

No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs.
Third Department,

August, 1969

(August 11, 1969)

#### In the Matter of the Claim of Crescencio Morales, Appellant. Martin P. Catherwood, as Industrial Commissioner, Respondent.

Application for order directing the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board to grant claimant a rehearing denied, without costs and'without prejudice to an application to the Appeal Board. Application by attorney not duly licensed in this State to appear specially denied (Judiciary Law, §§ 478, 484). Gibson, P. J., Reynolds, Staley, Jr., Cooke and Greenblott, JJ., concur.
* Pursuant to 5 T H 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
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-51119 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

LEROY SALAZAR GARZA,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas

(A-01-CR-130-ALL-SS)

_________________________________________________________________ July 26, 2002

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Pursuant to his conditional guilty plea t o possession of a

firearm by a convicted felon and possession of a stolen firearm,

Leroy Salazar Garza appeals the denial of his motion to suppress a

fir earm discovered during a pat down search (following a traffic

stop) and made the basis of his conviction. Garza admits the

Officer who stopped him had reason to suspect he was the owner of

the truck he was driving and had outstanding arrest warrants. He2

contends, however, that the totality of the circumstances fall

short of supporting a reasonable suspicion that he was armed.

Conclusions of law concerning a motion to suppress are

reviewed de novo ; findings of fact, for clear error. U nited States

v. Jordan

, 232 F.3d 447, 448 (5th Cir. 2000). Garza does not

challenge any findings of fact.

Given, inter alia

, the degree of nervousness Garza exhibited,

his other suspicious behavior, the fact that the stop was made in

front of a daycare center, and the fact that Garza never took his

hands out of hi s pockets, the Officer’s pat down did not violate

the Fourth Amendment. T erry v. Ohio

, 392 U.S. 1, 22-24, 27 (1968);

United States v. Webster

, 162 F.3d 308, 332 (5th Cir. 1998), cert.

denied

, 528 U.S. 829 (1999); United States v. Michelletti

, 13 F.3d

838, 840-41 (5th Cir.)(en banc), cert. denied

, 513 U.S. 829 (1994).

AFFIRMED
§ 182.510 What actions will the Federal Government take against a recipient determined to have violated this part? If a recipient is determined to have violated this part, as described in § 182.500 or § 182.505, the agency may take one or more of the following actions— ( a ) Suspension of payments under the award;
( b ) Suspension or termination of the award; and
( c ) Suspension or debarment of the recipient under the agency's regulation implementing the OMB guidance on nonprocurement debarment and suspension (2 CFR part 180), for a period not to exceed five years.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          18,068
<SECURITIES>                                    24,878
<RECEIVABLES>                                   36,180
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (3,200)
<INVENTORY>                                        304
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                90,038
<PP&E>                                          21,255
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (9,153)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 119,877
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           15,735
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            25
<OTHER-SE>                                     103,948
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   119,877
<SALES>                                        113,735
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               113,735
<CGS>                                           34,869
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   34,869
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                55,826
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  81
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 24,919
<INCOME-TAX>                                     7,354
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             17,565
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    17,565
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.72
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.68
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-QSB
FOR THE PERIOD ENDED JUNE, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         490,592
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,150
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               498,742
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 514,985
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           32,178
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        64,313
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,312,049
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   514,985
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  107,757
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (107,757)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (107,757)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 684,459
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   576,702
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.90
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.89


</TABLE>
§ 2424.1125 How does a limited denial of participation start? A limited denial of participation is made effective by providing the person, and any specifically named affiliate, with notice: ( a ) That the limited denial of participation is being imposed;
( b ) Of the cause(s) under § 2424.1110 for the sanction;
( c ) Of the potential effect of the sanction, including the length of the sanction and the HUD program(s) and geographic area affected by the sanction;
( d ) Of the right to request, in writing, within 30 days of receipt of the notice, a conference under § 2424.1130; and
( e ) Of the right to contest the limited denial of participation under § 2424.1130.
Exhibit 32.1

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 Calgon Carbon Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q/A for the period ended
March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John S. Stanik, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
§ 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and result of operations of the Company for the periods presented therein.



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ John S. Stanik     
|Chief Executive Officer
|March 27, 2006         

This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and
shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.