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

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 998 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 998

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 5099) to provide disaster 
assistance to agricultural producers for crop and livestock losses, and 
                          for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 12, 2006

 Mr. Barrow submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
                         the Committee on Rules

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 5099) to provide disaster 
assistance to agricultural producers for crop and livestock losses, and 
                          for other purposes.

    Resolved, That immediately after the adoption of this resolution 
the Speaker shall, 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. 5099) to provide disaster 
assistance to agricultural producers for crop and livestock losses, and 
for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed 
with. All points of order against the bill and against its 
consideration 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 Agriculture, 
and 20 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chairman and 
ranking minority member of each of the Committees on the Budget, 
Transportation and Infrastructure, Armed Services, and Resources. After 
general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the 
five-minute rule. The bill shall be considered as read. It shall be in 
order to consider an amendment in the nature of a substitute if offered 
by Representative Peterson of Minnesota (or his designee). All points 
of order against the amendment (except for those arising under clause 7 
of rule XVI) 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 
offered by Mr. Peterson of Minnesota (or his designee). The previous 
question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments 
thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion 
to recommit with or without instructions.
                                 <all>
```
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7285 

To amend the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 to increase the Federal 

cost share for the supplemental nutrition assistance program administration to improve staffing and retention. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 7, 2024 

Mrs. HAYES (for herself, Ms. NORTON, Ms. BROWN, Ms. TOKUDA, Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN, Mr. CARSON, Ms. ADAMS, Mr. MCGOVERN, and Mr. 

SOTO) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Agriculture 

A BILL 

To amend the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 to increase 

the Federal cost share for the supplemental nutrition 

assistance program administration to improve staffing 

and retention. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. COST SHARE FOR SNAP ADMINISTRATION FOR 

4 STAFFING AND RETENTION. 

5 Section 16 of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 

6 (7 U.S.C. 2025) is amended— 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 7285 IH

1 (1) in subsection (a) by inserting ‘‘, except as 

2 provided in subsection (a–1),’’ after ‘‘costs’’ the 1st 

3 place it appears, and 

4 (2) by inserting after subsection (a) the fol5 lowing: 

6 ‘‘(a–1) ADMINISTRATIVE COST-SHARING FOR STAFF7 ING AND RETENTION.— 

8 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may pay to 

9 each State agency an amount equal to 100 percent 

10 of all administrative personnel costs incurred by 

11 such agency to carry out the supplemental nutrition 

12 assistance program, including— 

13 ‘‘(A) all costs associated with processing, 

14 hiring, and training new employees employed 

15 under a merit system of personnel administra16 tion as required in section 11(e)(6)(B) by such 

17 to carry out such program; and 

18 ‘‘(B) all costs associated with maintaining 

19 such personnel costs.. 

20 ‘‘(2) WAGE STANDARDS.—Wages of such per21 sonnel shall be— 

22 ‘‘(A) not less than the appropriate rate of 

23 pay that would be payable to Federal employees 

24 under subchapter III of chapter 53 of subpart 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 7285 IH

1 D of part III of title 5 of the United States 

2 Code; and 

3 ‘‘(B) updated annually to not less than any 

4 increase in such rate of pay, including locality 

5 adjustments. 

6 ‘‘(3) APPROVAL OF WAGE PLANS.—Not less 

7 than 1 year after the effective date of this sub8 section, the State agency shall submit to the Sec9 retary for approval, the personnel wage plans imple10 mented by such agency to carry out paragraph (2), 

11 including employees’ position titles, duties, wages, 

12 and appropriate rates of pay applicable under this 

13 subsection.’’. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
----

|   | (1) | In connection with the Annual Report of the Company on form 10-K for the twelve month period ended May 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) and Section 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 results of operation of the Company for the periods presented therein.. |
|--------|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | By:                            |  /s/ Daniel W. Dowe    |   |
|--------|--------------------------------|--------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |                           |  Daniel W. Dowe                       |   |
|   |                           | Chief Executive Officer and                |   |
|   |                           | Chief Financial Officer                    |   |
|   |                           |                                       |   |
|   | Date: September 13, 2011  |

----
<PAGE>   1




                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.3


March 24, 1998

To the Board of Directors of Forcenergy Inc:

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (File No. 33-80919) and on Form S-4 (File No. 333-46099)
of Forcenergy Inc. of our reports dated February 16, 1998, February 7, 1997 and
February 9, 1996, and our estimates of the net proved natural gas and oil
reserves of Forcenergy, as of January 1, 1998, 1997 and 1996, and to all
references to our estimates of the net proved natural gas and oil reserves of
the Company as of those dates, included in this Annual Report on form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 1997.



                                          COLLARINI ENGINEERING INC.

                                          /s/       CHERYL R. COLLARINI, P.E.
                                          -------------------------------------
                                          Cheryl R. Collarini, P.E.
                                          President
EX4.1



 Exhibit 4.1 
  





 







 The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this certificate, shall
be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations: 

 


							
	     TEN COM
	  	 	    —	 	  	as tenants in common
	     TEN ENT
	  	 	    —	 	  	as tenants by the entireties
	     JT TEN
	  	 	    —	 	  	as joint tenants with right of
		  				  	survivorship and not as tenants
		  				  	in common




 
			
	 UNIF GIFT MIN ACT  — 
	 	.................... Custodian .........................
		 	      (Cust)                           (Minor)
		 	under Uniform Gifts to Minors
		 	Act ........................................................
		 	                            (State)
	 UNIF TRF MIN ACT  —
	 	................ Custodian (until age ............)
		 	    (Cust)
		 	....................... under Uniform Transfers
		 	    (Minor)
		 	to Minors Act .........................................
		 	                                    
(State)


 
 

  
 Additional abbreviations may
also be used though not in the above list. 
 FOR VALUE RECEIVED,
                                         
    hereby sell, assign and transfer unto 
  

					
	PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER	 		 	
	IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE	 		 	
	 	 		 	
	 	 		 	
			
	 	 	 	 	 
	(PLEASE PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS, INCLUDING ZIP CODE, OF ASSIGNEE)
	
	 
	
	 
		
	 	 	Shares
	of the common stock represented by the within Certificate, and do hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint	 	
		
	 	 	Attorney
	to transfer the said stock on the books of the within named Corporation with full power of substitution in the premises.	 	
			
	Dated                                
                             	 		 	

  

					
		 	 X
	 	  

		 	 X
	 	  

		 	 NOTICE:
	 	THE SIGNATURE(S) TO THIS ASSIGNMENT MUST CORRESPOND WITH THE NAME(S) AS WRITTEN UPON THE FACE OF THE CERTIFICATE IN EVERY PARTICULAR, WITHOUT ALTERATION OR ENLARGEMENT OR ANY CHANGE WHATEVER.

  

	
	Signature(s) Guaranteed

  

			
	 By
	 	 


			
	THE SIGNATURE(S) SHOULD BE GUARANTEED BY AN ELIGIBLE GUARANTOR INSTITUTION (BANKS, STOCKBROKERS, SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS AND CREDIT UNIONS WITH MEMBERSHIP IN AN APPROVED SIGNATURE GUARANTEE MEDALLION PROGRAM),
PURSUANT TO S.E.C. RULE 17Ad-15.
#### § 211.3 Definitions.

The definitions set forth in § 210.3 of this chapter apply in this part.
#### Alvin CONERLY, Appellant, v. Stan A. YATES, Warden, FCI Allenwood.

No. 04-4664.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) Oct. 7, 2005.

Decided Oct. 11, 2005.

Alvin Conerly, Loretto, PA, pro se.

D. Brian Simpson, Office of United States Attorney, Harrisburg, PA, for Ap-pellee.

Before ALITO, SMITH and COWEN, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Alvin Conerly appeals the District Court’s order denying his petition filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. In his petition, Conerly challenged the Bureau of Prison’s calculation of his sentence and alleged that he was entitled to credit for time spent in temporary federal custody and in state custody. The District Court denied his petition, and Conerly filed a timely notice of appeal.

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Our review of the District Court’s legal conclusions is plenary, and we review its findings of facts for clear error. *See Ruggiano v. Reish,*307 F.3d 121, 126 (3d Cir.2002). The procedural history of this case and the details of Conerly’s claims are well-known to the parties, set forth in the District Court’s opinion, and need not be repeated here. On appeal, Conerly contends that appellee waived any defense to his claim by failing to timely respond to it. We disagree. Conerly also argues that he is entitled to credit on his federal sentence for the time served on his second state sentence because this sentence for conspiracy and bank robbery was based on the same offense or acts as the federal sentence for racketeering. However, a RICO offense is not the same as the underlying *129predicate act and can be prosecuted and sentenced separately. *See United States v. Pungitore,*910 F.2d 1084 (3d Cir.1990)(allowing prosecution for a RICO offense after conviction for the underlying predicate offense); *United States v. Grayson,*795 F.2d 278, 283 (3d Cir.l986)(allow-ing separate prosecutions and cumulative punishments for RICO offense and underlying predicate offense.).

For the above reasons, as well as those set forth by the District Court, we will affirm the District Court’s December 20, 2004, order.
§ 200.200 Prescription drugs; reminder advertisements and reminder labeling to provide price information to consumers. ( a ) Prescription drug reminder advertisements and reminder labeling intended to provide price information to consumers are exempt from the requirements of §§ 201 .100 and 202.1 of this chapter if all of the following conditions are met: ( 1 ) The only purpose of the reminder advertisement or reminder labeling is to provide consumers with information concerning the price charged for a prescription for a particular drug product, and the reminder advertisement or reminder labeling contains no representation or suggestion concerning the drug product's safety, effectiveness, or indications for use.
( 2 ) The reminder advertisement or reminder labeling contains the proprietary name of the drug product, if any; the established (generic) name of the drug product, if any; the drug product's strength if the product contains a single active ingredient or if the product contains more than one active ingredient and a relevant strength can be associated with the product without indicating each active ingredient (the established name and quantity of each active ingredient are not required); the dosage form; and the price charged for a prescription for a specific quantity of the drug product.
( 3 ) The reminder advertisement or reminder labeling may also include other written, printed, or graphic matter, e.g., identification of professional or convenience services provided by the pharmacy: *Provided,* That such information is neither false nor misleading and contains no representation or suggestion concerning the drug product's safety, effectiveness, or indications for use.
( 4 ) The price stated in the reminder advertisement or reminder labeling as that charged for a prescription shall include all charges to the consumer including, but not limited to, the cost of the drug product, professional fees, and handling fees, if any. Mailing fees and delivery fees, if any, may be stated separately and without repetition.
( b ) This exemption from §§ 201.100 and 202.1 of this chapter is applicable to all prescription drug reminder labeling and reminder advertisements solely intended to provide consumers with information regarding the price charged for prescriptions including price lists, catalogs, and other promotional material, whether mailed, posted in a pharmacy, placed in a newspaper, or aired on radio or television.
( c ) Any reminder advertisement or reminder labeling intended to provide consumers with prescription price information which is not in compliance with this section shall be the subject of appropriate regulatory action. Such action may be taken against the product and/or the responsible person.
[40 FR 58799, Dec. 18, 1975]
#### STANDARD OIL COMPANY OF NEW JERSEY, A CORPORATION, RELATOR, v. VINCENT J. MURPHY, DIRECTOR OF REVENUE AND FINANCE OF THE CITY OF NEWARK, RESPONDENT.

Argued March 23, 1939

Decided April 26, 1939.

Before Justices Case, Donges and Porter.

For the relator, *Robert L. Hood*and *William J. Egan.*

For the respondent, *Thomas L. Parsonnet.*

Per Curiam.

On reviewing the stipulated facts and the inferences which flow therefrom we conclude that the alleged right upon which relator rests has not the clarity or the certainty which are essential to the invocation of a prerogative writ of peremptory *mandamus.*

The application for the writ will be denied and the rule to show cause discharged; but without costs.
---

EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION

I, John G. Robertson, Chief Executive Officer of IAS Communications, Inc.
  certify that:

1.       I have reviewed this annual report on
  Form 10-KSB of IAS Communications, Inc.;

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

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

|                    | IAS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
|------------------- | ----------------------
|                    |                       
|                    | By:                   
|                    |                       
|                    |                       
|                    |                       
|                    |                       
|Date: July 27, 2004 |                       

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                             145
<SECURITIES>                                     3,639
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,415
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (56)
<INVENTORY>                                      5,312
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                15,595
<PP&E>                                           2,597
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (1,839)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  19,665
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,849
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        24,871
<OTHER-SE>                                    (10,055)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    19,665
<SALES>                                          9,113
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 9,113
<CGS>                                            4,432
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    8,821
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    492
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                492
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       492
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .05
        

</TABLE>
#### Morris A. Marks et al., Respondents, v. Jacob Freidus et al., Appellants.

In this libel action in which plaintiffs allege that their professional reputation has been harmed by certain statements made in letters sent them by defendants, defendants appeal from three orders of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, one dated February 13, 1969 and two dated March 20, 1969, as follows: (1) as limited by their brief, from so much of the first order as denied their cross motion to change the place of trial; (2) from *965the entire order of March 20, 1969 which denied defendants’ renewed motion to dismiss the complaint; and (3) from so much of the other order of March 20, 1969 as granted plaintiffs a trial preference. Order of February 13, 1969 affirmed insofar as appealed from and first above-described order of March 20, 1969 affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Second above-described order of May 20, 1969 reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law and the facts, without costs; accordingly, the third decretal paragraph thereof which granted plaintiffs a trial preference is struck out. The preference was granted plaintiffs on the ground that as attorneys who have alleged a cause of action in libel they are entitled to a speedy determination of the controversy since their professional reputation is involved. In our opinion the interests of justice do not require an early trial (CPLR 3403, subd. [a], par. 3) and it was an abuse of discretion to direct one. Brennan, Acting P. J., Hopkins, Benjamin, Munder and Martuscello, JJ., concur.
Editorial Note on Part 17
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 17 appear at 68 FR 24879, May 9, 2003, and at 88 FR 45065, July 14, 2023.

§ 17.23 Discovery. ( a ) No later than 60 days prior to the hearing, unless otherwise ordered by the presiding officer, a party may make a request to another party for production, inspection, and copying of documents that are relevant to the issues before the presiding officer. Documents must be provided no later than 30 days after the request has been made.
( b ) For the purpose of this part, the term *documents* includes information, reports, answers, records, accounts, papers and other data and documentary evidence. Nothing contained in this section may be interpreted to require the creation of a document, except that requested data stored in an electronic data storage system must be produced in a form readily accessible to the requesting party.
( c ) Requests for documents, requests for admissions, written interrogatories, depositions, and any forms of discovery, other than those permitted under paragraphs (a) and (e) of this section, are not authorized.
( d ) ( 1 ) Within 10 days of service of a request for production of documents, a party may file a motion for a protective order.
( 2 ) The presiding officer may grant a motion for a protective order, in whole or in part, if he or she finds that the discovery sought: ( i ) Is unduly costly or burdensome,
( ii ) Will unduly delay the proceeding, or
( iii ) Seeks privileged information.
( 3 ) The burden of showing that a protective order is necessary shall be on the party seeking the order.
( 4 ) The burden of showing that documents should be produced is on the party seeking their production.
( e ) The presiding officer shall order depositions upon oral questions only upon a showing that: ( 1 ) The information sought cannot be obtained by alternative methods, and
( 2 ) There is a substantial reason to believe that relevant and probative evidence may otherwise not be preserved for presentation by a witness at the hearing.