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

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3019

To amend title 10, United States Code, to increase the military death gratuity 

from $6,000 to $12,000 and to provide that such death gratuity shall 

be excluded from gross income under the Internal Revenue Code of 

1986. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 5, 2003

Mr. MCGOVERN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Armed 

Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in 

each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL

To amend title 10, United States Code, to increase the 

military death gratuity from $6,000 to $12,000 and to 

provide that such death gratuity shall be excluded from 

gross income under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 3019 IH 

1 SECTION 1. INCREASE IN DEATH GRATUITY PAYABLE WITH 

2 RESPECT TO DECEASED MEMBERS OF THE 

3 ARMED FORCES. 

4 (a) AMOUNT OF DEATH GRATUITY.—Section 

5 1478(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 

6 striking ‘‘$6,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$12,000’’. 

7 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

8 subsection (a) shall apply with respect to deaths occurring 

9 on or after September 11, 2001. 

10 SEC. 2. DEATH GRATUITY EXCLUDIBLE FROM FEDERAL IN11 COME TAXATION. 

12 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (1) of section 134(b) 

13 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to certain 

14 military benefits) is amended by adding at the end the 

15 following new flush sentence: 

16 ‘‘Such term shall include any death gratuity to 

17 which the limitation in section 1478(a) of title 10, 

18 United States Code, applies.’’. 

19 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

20 subsection (a) shall apply to amounts paid with respect 

21 to deaths occurring on or after September 11, 2001.

Æ
Proposed Rule: Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gas EmissionsMeeting Documentation: EPA DRE Protocol Second Round of PeerReview Comments and ResponsesDateStaff Contact InformationName of OrganizationSummary of DiscussionWrittenCommentsProvided?Did they alsosubmit toDocket?Date sentto EPACCDFebruary 25, 2010Scott Bartos(202) 343-9167Bartos.Scott@epamail.epa.gov• Outside participantsidentified below.• EPA ClimateChange Division andEPA contractors:Kirsten Cappel, EPA;Scott Bartos, EPA;Debbie Ottinger,EPA; JeremyScharfenberg, ICFInternational; DebHarris, ICFInternational; ShepBurton, ICFInternational.Participants discussed peercomments and EPA responses fromthe second peer review of EPA’sDRE Protocol. For comments andresponses discussed, see the docket.A main topic discussed on the callwas the JETIA Method andcommenter experience in using theJEITA method. Experience waslimited and results mixed;discussion focused in part on morework needed to test the method. Thediscussion focused in part on morework needed to validate JEITA'sproposed method.N/AOutside Participants:Mike Sherer, Sherer Consulting Services, Inc.,Msherereng@aol.com; Laurie Beu, Consultant to ISMI, laurie.beu@ismi.sematech.org;Steve Trammell, ISMI,steve.trammell@ismi.sematech.org; Mehran Moalem, Applied Materials,Mehran_Moalem@amat.com;Daniel Clark, Applied Materials, Daniel_Clark@amat.com; Phil Chandler, Applied Materials, Phil_Chandler@amat.com;Tom Wong, ISMI; Joe Van Gompel, Midac Corp., joe.van.gompel@gmail.com; Bob Ridgeway, Air Products,RIDGEWRG@airproducts.com1
Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record

Plant ID 06046

Removed 

from Public 

(Non-CBI) 

Docket1

Copyright 

Flag2

File Name Description

x 06046\06046_Checklist.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

06046\06046_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist

06046\06046_HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted

x 06046\06046_PartA.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 06046\06046_PartB.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 06046\06046_PartC.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 06046\06046_PartD.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 06046\06046_PartH.xls Plant submitted survey file

06046\Certification Statement_06046.pdf Plant certification statement

06046\Supporting Documentation\06046_New Image.PNG Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 06046\Supporting Documentation\06046_SCPP_Water Balance_2010.doc Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 06046\Supporting Documentation\06046_St Clair CPRO Pond 2.ppt Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 06046\Supporting Documentation\06046_St Clair CPRO Pond 2.pptx Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 06046\Supporting Documentation\06046_St Clair FGD Pond 4.ppt Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 06046\Supporting Documentation\06046_St Clair FGD Pond 4.pptx Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 06046\Supporting Documentation\06046_St Clair LV POND-3.ppt Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 06046\Supporting Documentation\06046_St Clair LV POND-3.pptx Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 06046\Supporting Documentation\06046_St Clair POND-1.ppt Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 06046\Supporting Documentation\06046_St Clair POND-1.pptx Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

1

 Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database . 

2

 Copyright documents are available from the docket.
Exhibit 99.1





Certification



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, I, George Feldenkreis, the Chief Executive Officer of Perry Ellis International, Inc., a Florida corporation (the Company), hereby certify that the amendment on Form 10-K/A1 to
the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended January 31, 2003 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.







|Dated:  May 19, 2003 |  | /S/    GEORGE
FELDENKREIS
|-------------------- |  | -------------------------
|                     |  | Name: Title:
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

MICHAEL WILLIAMS,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D18-2867

[December 6, 2018]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, Martin County; Lawrence Michael 

Mirman, Judge; L.T. Case No. 2013-CF-000931-B.

Michael E. Williams, Live Oak, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

GROSS, CIKLIN and LEVINE,

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Exhibit 14.1
 BELL MICROPRODUCTS INC.
 CODE OF ETHICS
FOR
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER,
AND CORPORATE CONTROLLER
   1.
    
    Act with honesty and integrity, avoiding actual or apparent conflicts of interest in my
personal and professional relationships. If I find myself in a position where my objectivity
may be questioned because of individual interest or family or personal relationships, I will
notify the Board of Directors of the Company immediately.2.
    
    Provide the Company full, fair, accurate, timely, and understandable disclosure in reports
and documents that the Company files with or submits to the Securities and Exchange Commission
and in other public communications made by the Company.3.
    
    Comply to the best of my ability with rules and regulations of federal, state and local
governments and other appropriate private and public regulatory agencies. I understand this
responsibility may not be delegated or assumed by the Company or any other person.4.
    
    Act in good faith, responsibly, with due care, competence and diligence, without
misrepresenting material facts or allowing my independent judgment to be subordinated.5.
    
    Respect the confidentiality of information acquired in the course of my employment except
when authorized or otherwise legally obligated to disclose. Confidential information acquired
in the course of my employment may not be used for personal advantage.6.
    
    Maintain knowledge and skills important and relevant to my position.7.
    
    Report suspected violations of this Code promptly in written form to the Chief Executive
Officer, Chief Financial Officer, or the Board of Directors of the Company.




---



##### 



8.
    
    Accept responsibility for adherence to this Code and acknowledge that violations of this Code
may expose both me and the Company to criminal or civil prosecution. I understand that any
violation of this Code may result in corrective action, including possible termination of my
employment with the Company. I further acknowledge and understand that the Company may also
seek civil recourse against me and/or refer alleged criminal misconduct to law enforcement
agencies.9.
    
    Acknowledge that this Code cannot anticipate every possible situation or cover every topic in
detail. If I am unclear about a situation, it is my responsibility to ask for guidance before
taking action.
 Printed name and titleSignatureDate
#### § 19.254 Judicial review.

Any national bank, Federal savings association, or Federal branch or agency of a foreign bank whose rights, privileges and franchises have been terminated by order of the Comptroller under this part has the right of judicial review of such order pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 1818(h).
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

      CERTIFICATION PURSUANT SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

           In connection with the quarterly report of Bell Microproducts Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, W. Donald Bell, Chief
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:

       (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.


March 15, 2004                            /s/ W. Donald Bell
                                          Chief Executive Officer
108TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 3062

AN ACT

To amend the Mineral Leasing Act to authorize the

Secretary of the Interior to issue separately, forthe same area, a lease for tar sand and a leasefor oil and gas, and for other purposes.

108TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 3062

AN ACT

To amend the Mineral Leasing Act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to issue separately, for the same

area, a lease for tar sand and a lease for oil and gas,

and for other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 3062 EH

1 SECTION 1. COMBINED HYDROCARBON LEASING.

2 (a) SPECIAL PROVISIONS REGARDING LEASING.—

3 Section 17(b)(2) of the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C.

4 226(b)(2)) is amended—

5 (1) by inserting ‘‘(A)’’ after ‘‘(2)’’; and

6 (2) by adding at the end the following:

7 ‘‘(B) The Secretary may issue under this Act for the

8 same area, separately—

9 ‘‘(i) a lease for exploration for and extraction of

10 tar sand; and

11 ‘‘(ii) a lease for exploration for and development

12 of oil and gas.

13 ‘‘(C) A lease issued under subparagraph (B)(ii) shall

14 not be further subject to the Combined Hydrocarbon Leas15 ing Act of 1981 (30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.).

16 ‘‘(D) A lease issued for tar sand shall be issued using

17 the same bidding process, annual rental, and posting pe18 riod as a lease issued for oil and gas, except that the min19 imum acceptable bid required for a lease issued for tar

20 sand shall be $2 per acre.

21 ‘‘(E) The Secretary may waive, suspend, or alter any

22 requirement under section 26 that a permittee under a

23 permit authorizing prospecting for tar sand must exercise

24 due diligence, to promote any resource covered by a com25 bined hydrocarbon lease.’’.
3

•HR 3062 EH

1 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section

2 17(b)(1)(B) of the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C.

3 226(b)(1)(B)) is amended in the second sentence by in4 serting ‘‘, subject to paragraph (2)(B),’’ after ‘‘the Sec5 retary’’.

6 SEC. 2. REGULATIONS.

7 Within 45 days after the date of the enactment of

8 this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall issue final reg9 ulations to implement this Act.

Passed the House of Representatives October 8,

2003.

Attest:

Clerk.
# C_2023166EN.01000301.xml

| 11.5.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 166/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.5.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 166/3

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

10 May 2023

(2023/C 166/03)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,0950 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 148,18 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4478 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,86813 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 11,1938 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 0,9771 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 149,90 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 11,5485 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 23,419 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 370,98 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,5363 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,9219 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 21,3974 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6222 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4657 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,5739 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7303 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,4541 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 449,79 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 20,5005 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,5818 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 16 150,98 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,8821 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 60,995 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | |
| THB | Thai baht | 36,858 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 5,4497 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 19,3954 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 89,8185 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,0950

JPY

Japanese yen

148,18

DKK

Danish krone

7,4478

GBP

Pound sterling

0,86813

SEK

Swedish krona

11,1938

CHF

Swiss franc

0,9771

ISK

Iceland króna

149,90

NOK

Norwegian krone

11,5485

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

23,419

HUF

Hungarian forint

370,98

PLN

Polish zloty

4,5363

RON

Romanian leu

4,9219

TRY

Turkish lira

21,3974

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6222

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4657

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,5739

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7303

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,4541

KRW

South Korean won

1 449,79

ZAR

South African rand

20,5005

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,5818

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

16 150,98

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,8821

PHP

Philippine peso

60,995

RUB

Russian rouble

THB

Thai baht

36,858

BRL

Brazilian real

5,4497

MXN

Mexican peso

19,3954

INR

Indian rupee

89,8185

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

---
---

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 Annual Report of Elephant & Castle Group Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Richard
Bryant, Chief 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 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 results of
      operations of the Company.

| | /s/Richard Bryant            
| | -----------------------------
| | Richard Bryant               
| | Chief Executive Officer and  
| | President                    
| | (principal executive officer)

Dated: April 16, 2007

---
* 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 limit ed circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FIFTH CIRCUIT

____________

No. 02-11046

(Summary Calender)

____________

MANASSEH ADRIEL PHILIP,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

ANNE M. ESTRADA, DISTRICT DIRECTOR,

United States Immigration and Naturalization Service;

JOHN ASHCROFT, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondents-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:98-CV-987-P

March 19, 2003

Before DAVIS, WIENER, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Manasseh Adriel Philip appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to reopen 28 U.S.C.

§ 2241 proceedings. The district court construed Philip’s p ro se motion, which was filed more than-2-

two years after entry of the judgment that denied § 2241 relief, as arising under F ED

. R. C IV

. P. 60(b).

We review a decision on a F ED

. R. C IV

. P. 60(b) motion for an abuse of discretion. Hess v.

Cockrell , 281 F.3d 212, 215 (5th Cir. 2002). Philip contends that he is entitled to relief under the

Supreme Court’s decision in INS v. St. Cyr

, 533 U.S. 289, 326 (2001), which held that discretionary

relief from deportati on under § 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act “remains available for

aliens

. . . whose convictions were obtained through plea agreements and who, notwithstanding those

convictions, would have been eligible for § 212(c) relief at the time of their plea under the law then

in effect.” Philip is correct that, under S t. Cyr

, he was entitled to apply for discretionary relief. The

record, however, reveals that Philip’s application for discretionary relief was, in fact, considered by

the immigration judge, who denied the request on the merits. The immigration judge concluded that

Philip had fallen “woefully short of meeting the required burden” for discretionary relief because he

had abused, and failed to economically support, his family; continued to deny responsibility for his

actions; and failed to demonstrate rehabilitation. None of the evidence of subsequent rehabilitation

now cited by Philip was before the immigration judge or the Board of Immigration Appeals. Thus,

St. Cyr does not entitle Philip to anything he has not already received.

Philip’s remaining arguments are conclusory and without merit. Because Philip has not shown

that the district court abused its discretion in denying F ED

. R. C IV

. P. 60(b) relief, the judgment of the

district court is AFFIRMED.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3104 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  2d Session

                               H. R. 3104

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

  To provide for the establishment of separate campaign medals to be 
    awarded to members of the uniformed services who participate in 
Operation Enduring Freedom and to members of the uniformed services who 
                participate in Operation Iraqi Freedom.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3104

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
  To provide for the establishment of separate campaign medals to be 
    awarded to members of the uniformed services who participate in 
Operation Enduring Freedom and to members of the uniformed services who 
                participate in Operation Iraqi Freedom.

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

SECTION 1. REQUIREMENT.

    The President shall establish a campaign medal specifically to 
recognize service by members of the uniformed services in Operation 
Enduring Freedom and a separate campaign medal specifically to 
recognize service by members of the uniformed services in Operation 
Iraqi Freedom.

SEC. 2. ELIGIBILITY.

    Subject to such limitations as may be prescribed by the President, 
eligibility for a campaign medal established pursuant to section 1 
shall be set forth in regulations to be prescribed by the Secretary 
concerned (as defined in section 101 of title 10, United States Code). 
In the case of regulations prescribed by the Secretaries of the 
military departments, the regulations shall be subject to approval by 
the Secretary of Defense and shall be uniform throughout the Department 
of Defense.

            Passed the House of Representatives March 30, 2004.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A15A1641. PINGHUA WANG v. THE STATE.

The appeal in this case was docketed on April 20, 2015. Appellants’ brief and

enumeration of errors were due on May 11, 2015. This Court gave Appellant two

extensions to file her brief, one until August 28, 2015 and another until September

10, 2015. As of the date of this Order, the Appellant has not filed her brief and

enumeration of errors, nor hasshe asked for an extension or otherwise communicated

with the Court. The Appellee has filed a Motion To Dismiss due to Appellant’s

failure to file her brief and enumeration of errors. Accordingly, Appellee’s Motion

To Dismiss this appeal is hereby GRANTED and this appeal is dismissed as

abandoned. See Court of Appeals Rule 23 (a); Reese v. State, 216 Ga. App. 773 (456

SE2d 271) (1995). 

To PINGHUA WANG: Your appeal has been DISMISSED because your brief

and enumeration of errors were not filed when due. If you have decided you do not

want to appeal, you need not do anything more. However, if you do still want to

appeal, you may have the right to an OUT-OF-TIME APPEAL – but you MUST

TAKE ACTION to exercise that right by moving for an out-of-time appeal in the trial

court. If your motion for an out-of-time appeal is denied, you may appeal that denial

to this court within thirty (30) days of the trial court’s decision. See: Rowland v.

State, 264 Ga. 872 (452 SE2d 756) (1995).

September 28, 2015
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

09/28/2015
###### Editorial Note on Part 220

#### Editorial Note:

A copy of each form referred to in this part is filed as a part of the original document. Copies are available upon request to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System or any Federal Reserve Bank.

#### §§ 220.114-220.116 [Reserved]