alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Calendar No. 1

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. RES. 33

RESOLUTION

To amend Senate Resolution 338 (which establishes

bers of the Senate to private citizens.membership of the select committee from memthe Select Committee on Ethics) to change the

JANUARY 26 (legislative day, JANUARY 5), 1993

Ordered to be placed on the Calendar
III

Calendar No. 1

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. RES. 33

To amend Senate Resolution 338 (which establishes the Select Committee

on Ethics) to change the membership of the select committee from

members of the Senate to private citizens.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 26 (legislative day, JANUARY 5), 1993

Mr. HELMS submitted the following resolution; which was ordered to be placed

on the Calendar

RESOLUTION

To amend Senate Resolution 338 (which establishes the Select Committee on Ethics) to change the membership

of the select committee from members of the Senate

to private citizens.

1 Resolved, That (a) subsection (a) of the first section

2 of Senate Resolution 338, agreed to July 23, 1964 (88th

3 Congress, 2d session), is amended to read as follows:

4 ‘‘(a)(1) there is hereby established a permanent select

5 committee of the Senate to be known as the Select Com6 mittee on Ethics (referred to in this resolution as the ‘Se7 lect Committee’) consisting of 6 members all of whom
2

•SRES 33 PCS

1 shall be private citizens. Three members of the Select

2 Committee shall be selected by the Majority Leader and

3 3 shall be selected by the Minority Leader. Each member

4 of the Select Committee shall serve 6 years except that

5 the Majority Leader and the Minority Leader when mak6 ing their initial appointments shall each designate 1 mem7 ber to serve only 2 years and 1 member to serve only 4

8 years. At least 2 members of the Select Committee shall

9 be retired Federal judges, and at least 2 members of the

10 Select Committee shall be former members of the Senate.

11 Members of the Select Committee may be reappointed.

12 ‘‘(2) The Select Committee shall select a chairman

13 and a vice chairman from among its members.

14 ‘‘(3) Members of the Select Committee shall serve

15 without compensation but shall be entitled to travel and

16 per diem expenses in accordance with the rules and regula17 tions of the Senate.’’.

18 (b) Subsection (e) of the first section of Senate Reso19 lution 338 (as referred to in subsection (a)) is repealed.
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION–NOT TO BE CITED AS PRECEDENT]

United States Court of Appeals

For the First Circuit

No. 01-1760

UNITED STATES,

Appellee,

v.

OSVALDO RODRIGUEZ CARDONA,

Defendant, Appellant.

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

[Hon. Héctor M. Laffitte, U.S. District Judge]

Before

 Torruella, Circuit Judge,

Stahl, Senior Circuit Judge,

and Lynch, Circuit Judge.

Osvaldo Rodriguez Cardona on brief pro se.

Guillermo Gil, United States Attorney, Jorge E. VegaPacheco, Assistant United States Attorney, and Nelson PerezSosa, Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.

November 15, 2001
Per Curiam. We have reviewed the parties' briefs

and the record on appeal. We affirm the district court's

denial of appellant's motion filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §

3582(c)(2). Section 3582(c)(2) pertains to a defendant who

has been sentenced to a term of imprisonment based on a

sentencing range that has subsequently been lowered by

amendment to the guidelines. It is plainly inapplicable to

appellant. Moreover, appellant may not raise again an issue

already considered and rejected on his direct appeal. See

United States v. Rodriguez-Cardona, 924 F.2d 1148, 1154-57

(1st Cir.), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 809 (1991).

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 32.b



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 American Affordable Housing II Limited Partnership (the "Partnership") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Marc N. Teal, Principal Financial Officer of the general partner of the general partner of the Partnership's general partner, C&M Management Inc., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge, after due inquiry:



|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)-15 or 15(d)-15 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 operations of the Partnership.



|                  |     |                            
|----------------- | --- | ---------------------------
|Date:             |     |                            
|November 14, 2007 | By: | /s/ Marc N. Teal           
|                  |     |                            
|                  |     | Marc N. Teal               
|                  |     | Principal Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other

document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Fund and will be retained by the Fund and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

October 28, 2009 

1021 

Order 

 

October 28, 2009 

138948 

CHARLES DIXON, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v SC: 138948 

 COA: 289233 

Kent CC: 07-008338-NP 

BORCULO GARAGE, d/b/a GRASSMID 

TRANSPORT, 

Defendant-Appellee, 

and 

HUDSONVILLE TRUCK AND TRAILER 

SERVICE COMPANY, STOUGHTON 

TRAILERS, INC., and HENDRICKSON USA, 

L.L.C., 

 Defendants. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 15, 2009 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
#### John J. Farrell et al. *v.*J. Russell Spangle

Kins, C. J., Murphy, Shea, Alcorn and Comley, Js.

Argued April 7

decided April 22, 1964

*Jonathan Lovejoy,*with whom, on the brief, were *John B. Cuneo*and *John E. Watson, Jr.,*for the appellants (plaintiffs).

*Sidney Vogel,*for the appellee (defendant).

Per Curiam.

The plaintiffs have appealed from a judgment rendered by the Court of Common Pleas in favor of the defendant in an action to enjoin him from maintaining a mooring for his tugboat in Nor-*710walk harbor. The plaintiffs claim that certain legal conclusions on which the court based its decision were, as applied to the facts of this ease, erroneous.

The plaintiffs did not file either a request for a finding or a draft finding. Consequently no finding was made. A finding is neeessary where error is claimed in conclusions of law or fact that do not appear on the face of the record. Practice Book, 1963, §609; Maltbie, Conn. App. Proc. §126. As there is no finding, we are limited in our review to the facts which appear on the record. *Gitlitz*v. *Davis,*146 Conn. 280, 281, 150 A.2d 213; *Mendrochowicz*v. *Wolfe,*139 Conn. 506, 509, 95 A.2d 260. The only facts of record in the present case are those which are admitted in the pleadings and which appear in the judgment. *Burma Development Corporation*v. *Sanford,*149 Conn. 414, 416, 180 A.2d 631. The memorandum of decision establishes no facts, and it cannot take the place of a finding. *Tuite*v. *Tuite,*150 Conn. 345, 346, 189 A.2d 394; *Gitlitz*v. *Davis,*supra, 281.

As we cannot review the conclusions of the court on the basis of the facts which appear on the record, they must stand.

There is no error.
Exhibit 32.2

                          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 American HealthChoice, Inc.  (the
 "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2006 as filed with
 the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
 John C. Stuecheli, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
 to 18 U.S.C. S 1350, as adopted pursuant to S 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley  Act
 of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge and belief:

           (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.



 /s/ John C. Stuecheli


 John C. Stuecheli

 Chief Financial Officer

 May 15, 2006
Editorial Note on Part 892
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 892 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 892.1770 Diagnostic x-ray tube mount. ( a ) *Identification.* A diagnostic x-ray tube mount is a device intended to support and to position the diagnostic x-ray tube housing assembly for a medical radiographic procedure.
( b ) *Classification.* Class I (general controls). The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter, subject to the limitations in § 892.9.
[53 FR 1567, Jan. 20, 1988, as amended at 61 FR 1125, Jan. 16, 1996; 66 FR 38819, July 25, 2001]
# United States Court of Appeals **For the Eighth Circuit**

___________________________ No. 18-1300

___________________________ Teressa Davis lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. MO Jackson County lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant Sixteenth Judicial Court lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee Arthurine Criswell, in their individual a nd official capacities; Mary Marquez, in

their individual and official capacities; Randy Krueger, in their individual and official capacities; Diane Turner, in their individual and official capacities lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants

____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City

____________ Submitted: March 4, 2019 Filed: March 7, 2019 [Unpublished]

____________ Before LOKEN, COLLOTON, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.

____________PER CURIAM. Teressa Davis appeals follo wing the district court’s 1 adverse grant of judgment in her employment action. Having carefully reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, we find no basis for reversal. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

1 The Honorable Gary A. Fenner, United St ates District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. -2-
Flight Rules

 Pilot maintains line of sight on the aircraft

 Do not fly at night

 Do not fly above 400 feet

 Do not fly above people

 Do not fly within 5 miles of an airport

 Respect privacy and property
Dear Mr. Wells :

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing fro m your petition (Docket No. FAA−2015

− 3411 )

. This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to process your petition.

 Provide a copy of the Motion Picture and Television Operations Manual (MPTOM) which is required by Order 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 8, Section 1. If you wish for us to
proce ed without this manual and remove closed

- set filming from your proposed operation please inform of us of your intention by the requested response date listed below.

Please submit the additional information (non

- proprietary) to your docket at www.regulations.gov

. Once your information has been submitted, please also send a copy of the requested information (and any proprietary information ), as well as your comment tracking number from regulations.gov via e

- mail to 333exemptions@faa.gov

. If you want us to process your request any further, we must receive the information described above by 12/ 7/15 . I f we do not receive the information

, we will close the dock et without notifying you further.

If you ha ve any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267

- 4549

. Sincerely, /S/ Michael J. Cameron Program Analyst
Editorial Note on Part 864
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 864 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 864.7250 Erythropoietin assay. ( a ) *Identification.* A erythropoietin assay is a device that measures the concentration of erythropoietin (an enzyme that regulates the production of red blood cells) in serum or urine. This assay provides diagnostic information for the evaluation of erythrocytosis (increased total red cell mass) and anemia.
( b ) *Classification.* Class II. The special control for this device is FDA's “Document for Special Controls for Erythropoietin Assay Premarket Notification (510(k)s).”
[45 FR 60612, Sept. 12, 1980, as amended at 52 FR 17733, May 11, 1987; 65 FR 17144, Mar. 31, 2000]
§ 1.31-1 Credit for tax withheld on wages. ( a ) The tax deducted and withheld at the source upon wages under chapter 24 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 (or in the case of amounts withheld in 1954, under subchapter D, chapter 9 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939) is allowable as a credit against the tax imposed by Subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, upon the recipient of the income. If the tax has actually been withheld at the source, credit or refund shall be made to the recipient of the income even though such tax has not been paid over to the Government by the employer. For the purpose of the credit, the recipient of the income is the person subject to tax imposed under Subtitle A upon the wages from which the tax was withheld. For instance, if a husband and wife domiciled in a State recognized as a community property State for Federal tax purposes make separate returns, each reporting for income tax purposes one- half of the wages received by the husband, each spouse is entitled to one-half of the credit allowable for the tax withheld at source with respect to such wages.
( b ) The tax withheld during any calendar year shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed by Subtitle A for the taxable year of the recipient of the income which begins in that calendar year. If such recipient has more than one taxable year beginning in that calendar year, the credit shall be allowed against the tax for the last taxable year so beginning.
exv10w39



 







Exhibit 10.39




 July 29, 2005



Mr. Gary M. Wilson

1200, Post Oak Blvd, # 3007,

Houston, TX 77056




Dear Mr. Wilson,




In conjunction and contemporaneously with the execution of a Change of Control Agreement dated 29
July 2005 this Letter of Agreement serves to update and confirm certain other benefits of your
employment with Hanover Compressor Company (“Company”) and yourself as set out in your Letter of
Employment dated April 9 2004.




	 	1.	 	Schooling and Education Allowance: The Schooling and Educational Allowance
will be $50,000 per year for the period May 15 2004 to May 15 2006 and shall be $25,000
per year for the period May 15 2006 to May 15 2008 subject to an annual review of tuition
rates at the commencement of each school year. This allowance shall be grossed up at a
rate of 32.5% for tax purposes.
	 
	 	2.	 	Travel Allowance: The Travel Allowance will be calculated on the basis of the
cost of an unrestricted and refundable Full Economy Ticket from Houston Texas to London
England for yourself and your family per year. The Travel Allowance may be used for any
travel related expenses such as airfares, car rental, train fares, taxis and other forms
of transportation. This allowance shall be grossed up at a rate of 32.5% for tax purposes.
	 
	 	3.	 	Shipment of Household Goods and Personal Effects: The Company shall reimburse
you for the cost of the shipment of your household goods and personal effects as and when
these are incurred.
	 
	 	4.	 	Closing Costs in U.S.: The Company shall reimburse you for customary Closing
Costs in the U.S. as and when these are incurred.




This Letter of Agreement supersedes and replaces the Letter of Employment dated April 9 2004 with
respect to the subject matters addressed herein.




Sincerely,




/S/ JOHN JACKSON




John Jackson

Chief Executive Officer

Hanover Compressor Company
JAMES F. MARTENS*

KELLI H. TODD

LACY L. LEONARD

─────────────────

Attorneys at Law 

─────────────────

*Board Certified in Tax Law 

Texas Board of Legal 

Specialization

MARTENS, TODD, LEONARD, TAYLOR & AHLRICH

A GENERAL PARTNERSHIP

───────────────────────────────

301 CONGRESS AVENUE, SUITE 1950 

AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701

(512) 542-9898

FAX (512) 542-9899

www.textaxlaw.com

AMANDA G. TAYLOR

DANIELLE V. AHLRICH

ALLEGRA D. HILL

─────────────────

Attorneys at Law 

─────────────────

August 5, 2015

Via E-Filing 

Court of Appeals 

Third District of Texas 

Attn: The Honorable Jeffrey Kyle, Clerk 

Price Daniel Sr. Building 

209 West 14th Street, Room 101 

Austin, Texas 78701 

Re: Court of Appeals Number: 03-14-00510-CV

 Trial Court Number: D-1-GN-13-002811 

 

 Noah S. Bunker, Paul Carrell, Everett Brew Houston, Jr., W. 

Andrew Buchholz, Scott J. Leighty, Jad L. Davis, and Holly 

Clause, Appellants v. Tracy D. Strandhagen, Appellee

 

Dear Mr. Kyle: 

In accordance with the Clerk’s request, please accept this letter as 

notification that Amanda G. Taylor of Martens, Todd, Leonard, Taylor & Ahlrich 

intends to present oral argument on behalf of Appellants, Bunker et. al., on 

September 16, 2015 at 1:30 am. 

Sincerely, 

MARTENS, TODD, LEONARD, TAYLOR & AHLRICH

 

 By: /s/ Amanda Taylor 

Amanda Garrett Taylor 

ataylor@textaxlaw.com 

Texas Bar No. 24045921 

ACCEPTED

03-14-00510-CV

6368689

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

8/5/2015 2:10:05 PM

JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERK

 FILED IN 3rd COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 8/5/2015 2:10:05 PM JEFFREY D. KYLE Clerk
cc: Via E-service to:

Dan Byrne, DByrne@FBHF.com

Lessie Fitzpatrick, LFitzpatrick@FBHF.com

Christine Burgess, CBurgess@FBHF.com

Counsel for Appellee Tracy D. Strandhagen
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 221 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 221

Expressing the sense of the Senate regarding the case of United States 
                                v. Knox.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                June 14 (legislative day, June 7), 1994

    Mr. Roth (for himself and Mr. Grassley) submitted the following 
    resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Expressing the sense of the Senate regarding the case of United States 
                                v. Knox.

Whereas the United States Congress has passed legislation to protect children 
        against the evils of child pornography, including the Child Protection 
        Act of 1984, and provided for the enforcement of those laws;
Whereas on November 4, 1993, the United States Senate, by a vote of 100-to-0, 
        denounced as improper the United States Justice Department's new, narrow 
        interpretation of the Federal child pornography statutes as delineated 
        by the Solicitor General in the case of United States v. Knox and 
        implored the Justice Department to properly enforce the law and protect 
        our Nation's children; and
Whereas, on June 9, 1994, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third 
        Circuit in the case of United States v. Knox rejected the Justice 
        Department's narrow interpretation of the Federal child pornography 
        statutes and reinstate the conviction of Stephen Knox: Now, therefore, 
        be it
    Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that the Justice 
Department should accept the persuasive opinion of the United States 
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in the case of United States v. 
Knox and that the Justice Department should vigorously oppose any 
effort by the defendant in that case, or any other party, to overturn 
the decision in that case.

                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 99.1

                          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 American HealthChoice, Inc.  (the
 "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed  with
 the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I
 Dr. J. W. Stucki, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,  pursuant
 to 18 U.S.C. S 1350, as adopted pursuant to S 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley  Act
 of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge and belief:

      (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.


 /s/ Dr. J. W. Stucki
 -----------------------
 Dr. J. W. Stucki
 Chief Executive Officer

 August 14, 2002
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 172 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 172

 A resolution providing that notwithstanding the sine die adjournment; 
 the President of the Senate, the President pro tempore, the majority 
      and minority leaders are authorized to make appointments to 
            commissions, committee, boards, or conferences.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

            November 20 (legislative day, November 2), 1993

    Mr. Mitchell (for himself and Mr. Dole) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 A resolution providing that notwithstanding the sine die adjournment; 
 the President of the Senate, the president pro tempore, the majority 
      and minority leaders are authorized to make appointments to 
            commissions, committee, boards, or conferences.

    Resolved, That notwithstanding the sine die adjournment of the 
present session of the Congress, the President of the Senate, the 
president of the Senate pro tempore, the majority leader of the Senate, 
and the minority leader of the Senate be, and they are hereby, 
authorized to make appointments to commissions, committees, boards, 
conferences, or interparliamentary conferences authorized by law, by 
concurrent action of the two Houses, or by order of the Senate.

                                 <all>
```