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

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1776 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1776

 To require employees at a call center who either initiate or receive 
  telephone calls to disclose the physical location of such employees.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 29, 2007

 Mr. Altmire introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To require employees at a call center who either initiate or receive 
  telephone calls to disclose the physical location of such employees.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Call Center Consumer's Right to Know 
Act''.

SEC. 2. CALL CENTER REQUIREMENTS.

    (a) In General.--A United States corporation or its subsidiaries 
that utilizes a call center to initiate telephone calls to, or receive 
telephone calls from, individuals located in the United States, shall 
require each employee in the call center to disclose the physical 
location of such employee at the beginning of each telephone call so 
initiated or received.
    (b) Certification Requirement.--A corporation or subsidiary 
described in subsection (a) shall annually certify to the Federal Trade 
Commission whether or not the corporation or subsidiary, and the 
employees of the corporation or subsidiary at its call centers, have 
complied with that subsection.
    (c) Noncompliance.--A corporation or subsidiary that violates 
subsection (a) shall be subject to such civil penalties as the Federal 
Trade Commission prescribes under section 3.
    (d) Call Center Defined.--In this section, the term ``call center'' 
means a location that provides customer-based service and sales 
assistance or technical assistance and expertise to individuals located 
in the United States via telephone, the Internet, or other 
telecommunications and information technology.

SEC. 3. FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION RULES.

    Not later than 9 months after the date of enactment of this Act, 
the Federal Trade Commission shall prescribe rules to provide for 
effective monitoring and compliance with this Act. The Federal Trade 
Commission's rulemaking shall include appropriate civil penalties for 
noncompliance with this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32.2

CFO CERTIFICATION

I, Andrew Kim,
certify that:



| | (1) | I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of TCW Direct Lending
VIII LLC; and
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | Based on my knowledge, this 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 report.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |  |  |     |  |                              
|-------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | -----------------------------
|Date: April 27, 2022 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ Andrew Kim               
|                     |  |  |  |     |  | Andrew Kim                   
|                     |  |  |  |     |  | Chief Financial Officer      
|                     |  |  |  |     |  | (Principal Financial Officer)
§ 10.16 Conditions requisite for change in designation of beneficiary. A change of beneficiary of an adjusted service certificate to be valid must be made: ( a ) By notice signed by the veteran or his duly authorized agent, and delivered or properly mailed to the Department of Veterans Affairs during the lifetime of the veteran. Such change shall not take effect until approved by the Secretary and after such approval the change shall be deemed to have been made as of the date the veteran signed said written notice and change, whether the veteran be living at the time of said approval or not.
( b ) Or by last will and testament of the veteran, duly probated. Such change shall not be effective until received by the Department of Veterans Affairs and approved by the Secretary and after such approval the change shall be deemed to have been made as of the date of death of the veteran: *Provided,* That a change of beneficiary signed subsequent to the date upon which the will was executed and delivered in accordance with paragraph (a) of this section shall if approved in accordance with regulations take precedence over the designation by will.
*Provided, however,* That any payment made to a beneficiary of record, before notice of change of beneficiary has been received in the Department of Veterans Affairs and approved by the Secretary, shall not be made again to the changed beneficiary.
o B V E L, c:) 1' ivi r: rvi I cc > i< r c> i< A I r o rv 

A Privat e Non-Profit Developmen t Corporatio n 

April20,2010 QO T - OST - SOO^L- \ \ H ^ ^ 

Mr. Dennis J. DeVany, Chief 

Essential Air Service Division 

Office of Aviation Analysis 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Office of the Secretary of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

RE: Support for the Altoona-Blair County Airport Authority to Recommend Colgan Air 

Dear Mr. DeVany: 

This letter is to serve as our official endorsement of the Altoona-Blair County Airport Authority's 

recommendation that Colgan Air, Inc., operating as United Express, continue as the operator of essential 

air service at the Altoona-Blair County Airport. 

The current service to Washington, DC Dulles by Colgan Air, hic. /United Express, using the 

SAAB 340, has proven to be a destination satisfying the needs of the Altoona-Blair County regional 

community. Colgan Air has had an excellent safety record serving our airport facility and, combining that 

with dependable cabin class equipment and their appropriate scheduling connections, highlights our 

support for the endorsement of Colgan's continued operations at the Altoona-Blair County Airport. 

While I am sure the Authority is grateful to the other carriers who submitted proposals, we at 

ABCD Corp., as the primary economic development organization serving the Altoona-Blair County 

Community, wholeheartedly endorse the Altoona-Blair County Airport Authority's decision to 

recommend support to the Colgan Air, Inc/United Express continued operation as the essential air service 

provider at the Altoona-Blair County Airport facility. 

On behalf of the Altoona-Blair County Development Corporation's Board of Directors and Staff, 

we would like to commend the members of the Airport Authority and the Staff for their continued due 

diligence in providing quality air service at the Altoona-Blair County Airport. If there is any additional 

information that you need, please feel free to contact our office at your convenience. 

Sincerely, / Sincerely, 

JosepK/S. ^heetz Marm J/ Marasco 

Chairman Pre/d^ t & CEO 

MJM/ch 

cc: ABCD Corp. Executive Committee 

Altoona-Blair County Airport Authority 

l^r^# ^ Blair County Commissioners 

f K V Williaiii'SiWr¥,Mk^,-^eitV^ft^ltl)M-^'-^ i^L.s.Ni c. I >iM i c )rM. N: , 

^=^P^^^' ^ I:MAII_ . .ilirJ"'.il» tl> i.r|Xi T;; 

l-^^^B- * \vi:r. sri I.: luifv.,, / \N\V\\..II>I j . •. .i I'.ci- • 

PENNSYLVANI A \ invtrnt the fulun
**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 Illini Corporation (the“Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2004 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the hereof (the “Report”), I Burnard K.McHone, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuantto 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

 

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

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

 

 
| /s/Burnard  K. McHone                  |   |
|----------------------------------------|--------|
|                                   |
| Burnard K.  McHone                     |
| President  and Chief Executive Officer |
| May 14, 2004                           |

 

----
#### § 1.970 Standards for compromise.

Decisions of the Committee respecting acceptance or rejection of a compromise offer shall be in conformity with the standards in §§ 1.930 through 1.936. In loan guaranty cases the offer of a veteran or other obligor to effect a compromise must relate to an indebtedness established after the liquidation of the security, if any, and shall be reviewed by the Committee. An offer to effect a compromise may be accepted if it is deemed advantageous to the Government. A decision on an offer of compromise may be revised or modified on the basis of any information which would warrant a change in the original decision.

(Authority: 31 U.S.C. 3711; 38 U.S.C. 501, 3720)

[44 FR 59907, Oct. 17, 1979, as amended at 69 FR 62202, Oct. 25, 2004]
41687.

#### GILLESPIE et al. v. GEORGIAN FINANCE & INVESTMENT CORPORATION.

Submitted January 3, 1966

Decided February 18, 1966.

Felton, Chief Judge.

“Generally a cause of action ex delicto cannot be set off against an action ex contractu, and vice versa. *Hecht v. Snook & Austin Furniture Co.,*114 Ga. 921 (41 SE 74); *Bagan v. Standard Scale Co.,*123 Ga. 14 (50 SE 951); *Bibb Basket Co. v. Eufaula Bank &c. Co.,*42 Ga. App. 394 (156 SE 310); *Collins v. Garrett,*50 Ga. App. 203 (177 SE. 275). The only exception to this rule is where equitable principles such as insolvency or nonresidence of the plaintiff are involved. *Hecht v. Snook & Austin Furniture Co.,*supra; *Cornett v. Ault,*124 Ga. 944 (53 SE 460); *Aetna Ins. Co. v. Lunsford,*179 Ga. 716 (1) (177 SE 727); *Porter v. Davey Tree-Expert Co.,*34 Ga. App. 355, 357 (3) (129 SE 557); *Hartman v. Citizens Bank*&c. *Co.,*47 Ga. App. 562, 565 (6) (171 SE 195). These same rules apply also to pleas of recoupment. *Fontaine v. Baxley, Boles & Co.,*90 Ga. 416 (2) (17 SE 1015); *Harden v. Lang,*110 Ga. 392 (2), 398 (36 SE 100); *Aetna Ins. Co. v. Lunsford,*supra (p. 720).” *Heard v. Melin,*107 Ga. App. 772 (1) (131 SE2d 131).

In this ex contractu action by a chattel mortgagee for a deficiency judgment following the unresisted foreclosure of the bill of sale to secure debt, the answer of the defendant mortgagors—which alleged inadequacy of price resulting from commencement of the judicial sale by the sheriff prior to the statutory time, induced by the mortgagee with intent to defraud, etc., and which prayed only for a general judgment against the plaintiff in the amount sued for by the plaintiff —alleged an ex delicto action. This was an attempt to defend against the ex contractu action by setting off against it the ex delicto action for fraud. Since there is alleged no equitable principle, such as insolvency or nonresidence of the plaintiff, this defense was not available as a remedy for the defendants. Accordingly, the court did not err in its judgments sustaining the renewed general demurrer to the answer as amended and entering a default judgment in favor of the plaintiff mortgagee.

*Judgments affirmed.*

*Frankum and Panned, JJ., concur.*

*135*William B. Morgan,*for appellants.

*Zachary & Hunter, Thomas W. Elliott,*for appellee.
Exhibit 99.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                SECTION 302(a) OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Steven Kass, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Tofutti Brands Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the
Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls
which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's
auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and

6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes
in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect
internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation,
including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and
material weaknesses.

Date: May 13, 2003

/s/Steven Kass*
---------------
Steven Kass
Chief Financial Officer
* The originally executed copy of this Certification will be maintained at the
Company's offices and will be made available for inspection upon request.
§ 21.6060 Services and assistance. ( a ) *General.* VA may provide to program participants: ( 1 ) Vocationally oriented services and assistance of the kind provided veterans under chapter 31, title 38 U.S.C.;
( 2 ) Employment assistance during the 18 month period following completion of a vocational training program, including: ( i ) Educational, vocational, psychological, employment and personal adjustment counseling;
( ii ) Placement services to effect suitable placement in employment, and post-placement services to attempt to insure satisfactory adjustment in employment; and
( iii ) Personal adjustment and work adjustment training. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 1524(b))
( 3 ) Such other services and assistance of the kind provided veterans under chapter 31, except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, as are necessary to enable the veteran to prepare for, and participate in, vocational training or employment.
( b ) *Services and assistance not provided.* VA will not provide to a participant under this program any: ( 1 ) Loan;
( 2 ) Subsistence allowance;
( 3 ) Automobile adaptive equipment of the kind provided eligible veterans under 38 U.S.C., chapter 39 or chapter 31;
( 4 ) Training at an institution of higher learning in a program of education that is not predominantly vocational in content;
( 5 ) Employment adjustment allowance;
( 6 ) Room and board in a special rehabilitation facility for a period in excess of 30 days;
( 7 ) Independent living services, except those which are indispensable to the pursuit of the vocational training program during the period of rehabilitation to the point of employability under § 21.6160 of this part; or
( 8 ) Period of extended evaluation under 38 U.S.C. 3106(e).
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 1524(b))
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 238 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 238

 To repeal a prohibition on the use of certain funds for tunneling in 
 certain areas with respect to the Los Angeles to San Fernando Valley 
                    Metro Rail project, California.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 2007

  Mr. Waxman introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
             Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To repeal a prohibition on the use of certain funds for tunneling in 
 certain areas with respect to the Los Angeles to San Fernando Valley 
                    Metro Rail project, California.

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

SECTION 1. REPEAL OF PROHIBITION.

    The second sentence of section 321 of the Department of 
Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1986 (99 Stat. 
1287) is repealed.
                                 <all>
```
#### § 14.704 Authorization of transportation necessary for commitment of a veteran beneficiary.

When a mentally ill veteran who should be committed is hospitalized by the Department of Veterans Affairs and under the law of the State wherein the hospital is located, a commitment may not be had locally, the veteran may be returned temporarily to the jurisdiction of the appropriate court in order that the commitment can be accomplished. If the veteran is in a Department of Veterans Affairs hospital, the Hospital Director may authorize travel of the veteran and an attendant or attendants, if necessary, upon request of the Regional Counsel. If the veteran is being maintained in a non-Department of Veterans Affairs hospital, the Director of the facility authorizing and paying for the care may authorize such travel upon request of the Regional Counsel.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2276 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

  1st Session
                                H. R. 2276

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 2, 2007

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 
                        and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
    at 203 North Main Street in Vassar, Michigan, as the ``Corporal 
            Christopher E. Esckelson Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. CORPORAL CHRISTOPHER E. ESCKELSON POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 203 North Main Street in Vassar, Michigan, shall be known 
and designated as the ``Corporal Christopher E. Esckelson Post Office 
Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Corporal 
Christopher E. Esckelson Post Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives October 1, 2007.

            Attest:

                                            LORRAINE C. MILLER,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
§ 1.671 Definitions. For the purpose of §§ 1.670 through 1.673, the following definitions apply: ( a ) *Administrative subdivision of funds.* An administrative subdivision of funds is any administrative subdivision of an appropriation or fund which makes funds available in a specified amount for the purpose of controlling apportionments or reapportionments.
( b ) *Allotment.* An allotment is an authorization by the Director, Office of Budget and Finance, to department and staff office heads (allottees) to incur obligations within specified amounts, during a specified period, pursuant to an Office of Management and Budget apportionment or reapportionment action. The creation of an obligation in excess of an allotment is a violation of the administrative subdivision of funds.
( c ) *Allowance.* An allowance is a subdivision below the allotment level, and is a guideline which may be issued by department or staff office heads (allottees) to facility directors and other officials, showing the expenditure pattern or operating budget they will be expected to follow in light of the program activities contemplated by the overall VA budget or plan of expenditure. The creation of an obligation in excess of an allowance is not a violation of the administrative subdivision of funds.
(Authority: 31 U.S.C. 1514)
#### John Wallace and Franklin Allen, as Committee of Marie F. Wilmerding, Plaintiffs, *v.*Rose Frey et al., Defendants. Same, Plaintiffs, *v.*Rose Frey, The United States Trust Company et al., Defendants. Same, Plaintiffs, *v.*Rose Frey and The Mount Morris Bank, Defendants.

(Supreme Court, New York Special Term,

March, 1899.)

Lunatics — While the inquisition is in force, a settlement made with a lunatic is void and cannot be pleaded.

The transferee of an adjudged lunatic will not be permitted to interpose, in actions brought by her committee to set aside said transfers, supplemental answers which allege a settlement entered into by the transferee with the lunatic pending the action and while the inquisition continued. Such a defense must be deemed frivolous as," during the life of the inquisition, the presumption .of insanity is conclusive.

Motion by the defendant Eose Frey for leave to serve a supplemental answer in each of these actions, setting np a defense, the nature of which is stated in the opinion.

James C. De La Mare, for motion.

John B. Gleason, opposed.

Giegerich, J.

These actions are brought by the committee of an adjudged lunatic to set aside- certain transfers made by the latter to the defendant Eose Frey, who applies for leave to set up by supplemental answer a settlement entered into by her with the lunatic during the pendency of the action, and while the inquisition remained in force, as it still continues.

The defense must be viewed as frivolous, since the presumption of insanity, during the life of the inquisition, is conclusive, and the actual sanity of the adjudged incompetent cannot be shown in support of an agreement made during that period. Carter v. Beckwith, 128 N. Y. 312.

Therefore, the motion is denied, with $10 costs.

Motion denied, with $10 costs.