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

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4209 

To amend title IX of the Social Security Act to improve emergency 

unemployment relief for governmental entities and nonprofit organizations. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 2, 2020 

Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina (for himself, Mr. BROWN, Mr. GRASSLEY, Mr. 

WYDEN, Mr. CORNYN, Mr. CARPER, Mr. LANKFORD, Mr. CASEY, Mr. 

PERDUE, Ms. HASSAN, Mrs. LOEFFLER, Mr. CARDIN, Ms. ERNST, Mr. 

WHITEHOUSE, Mr. DAINES, Mr. KING, Mr. CRAMER, Mr. BOOKER, Mr. 

GRAHAM, Ms. SMITH, Mrs. HYDE-SMITH, Mr. BLUMENTHAL, Mr. ROMNEY, Mr. DURBIN, Mr. WARNER, Mr. REED, and Ms. KLOBUCHAR) introduced the following bill; which was read twice, considered, read the third 

time, and passed 

A BILL 

To amend title IX of the Social Security Act to improve 

emergency unemployment relief for governmental entities 

and nonprofit organizations. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Protecting Nonprofits 

5 from Catastrophic Cash Flow Strain Act of 2020’’. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4209 CPS

1 SEC. 2. IMPROVING EMERGENCY UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF 

2 FOR GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES AND NON3 PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 903(i)(1) of the Social Se5 curity Act (42 U.S.C. 1103(i)(1)) is amended— 

6 (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ‘‘during’’ 

7 and inserting ‘‘with respect to’’; 

8 (2) in subparagraph (B), by striking 

9 ‘‘3309(a)(1)’’ and inserting ‘‘3309(a)’’; and 

10 (3) by striking subparagraph (C) and inserting 

11 the following new subparagraph: 

12 ‘‘(C) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 

13 funds transferred to the account of a State under subpara14 graph (A) shall be used exclusively to reduce the amounts 

15 required to be paid in lieu of contributions into the State 

16 unemployment fund pursuant to such section by govern17 mental entities and other organizations described in sec18 tion 3309(a) of such Code.’’. 

19 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.— 

20 (1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), 

21 the amendments made by subsection (a) shall take 

22 effect as if included in the enactment of section 

23 2103 of the Relief for Workers Affected by 

24 Coronavirus Act (contained in subtitle A of title II 

25 of division A of the CARES Act (Public Law 116– 

26 136)). 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 4209 CPS

1 (2) APPLICATION TO WEEKS PRIOR TO ENACT2 MENT.—For weeks of unemployment that occurred 

3 after March 12, 2020, and prior to the date of en4 actment of this section, States may— 

5 (A) issue reimbursements in accordance 

6 with section 903(i)(1)(C) of the Social Security 

7 Act, as in effect prior to the date of enactment 

8 of this section; or 

9 (B) reduce the amounts required to be 

10 paid in accordance with such section 

11 903(i)(1)(C), as amended by subsection (a). 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
###### Editorial Note on Part 302

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 302 appear at 84 FR 15935, Apr. 16, 2019.

#### § 302.8 Computation of time.

In computing any period of time prescribed or allowed by this part, by notice, order or regulation or by any applicable statute, the day of the act, event, or default after which the designated period of time begins to run is not to be included. The last day of the period so computed is to be included, unless it is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday for the Department, in which event the period runs until the end of the next day that is neither a Saturday, Sunday, nor holiday. When the period of time prescribed is seven (7) days or fewer, intermediate Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays shall be excluded in the computation, unless otherwise specified by the DOT decisionmaker or the administrative law judge assigned to the proceeding, as the case may be.
EXHIBIT 32.1
 **CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO**
 **RULE
13a-14(1) OR RULE 15d-14(b) AND 18 U.S.C. SEC. 1350,**
 **AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE**
 **SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002**
 
 
 In
connection with the quarterly report of House of Brussels Chocolates Inc., (the
“Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended January 31, 2005 as filed with
the Securities Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Grant
Petersen, Chief Executive officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Sec. 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 operation of the
      company.
 
 
 Date:
      March 17, 2005By:/s/
      Grant PetersenGrant
      PetersenChief
      Executive Officer
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1150 KA 12-00855 PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, SCONIERS, AND MARTOCHE, JJ.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, APPELLANT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
ROBIN HARVEY, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. (APPEAL NO. 2.)

SCOTT D. MCNAMARA, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, UTICA (STEVEN G. COX OF COUNSEL), FOR APPELLANT.

REBECCA L. WITTMAN, UTICA, FOR DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Oneida County (Barry M. Donalty, A.J.), dated September 14, 2011. The order granted that part of the motion of defendant to suppress certain physical evidence.

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Same Memorandum as in People v Weathers (___ AD3d ___ [Nov. 16, 2012]).

Entered: November 16, 2012 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 88 (Friday, May 5, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 26206]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-11292]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of Banks 
or Bank Holding Companies

    The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank 
Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and Sec. 225.41 of the Board's 
Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank holding company. 
The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth 
in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).
    The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal 
Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for 
inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons 
may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for 
that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must 
be received not later than May 22, 2000.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (D. Michael Manies, 
Assistant Vice President) 925 Grand Avenue, Kansas City, Missouri 
64198-0001:
    1. Robert and Michelle Sullivan, and Michael and Nancy Van Cleef, 
all of Carleton, Nebraska; to acquire voting shares of Carleton Agency, 
Inc., Carleton, Nebraska, and thereby indirectly acquire voting shares 
of Citizens State Bank, Carleton, Nebraska.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, May 2, 2000.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Associate Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 00-11292 Filed 5-4-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

February 1, 2023

No. 04

- 22

- 00800

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF E.A.R., E.A.R., E.A.R. AND E.A.R., CHILDREN

From the 57th Judicial Distric t Court

, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2021

- PA

- 00214

Honorable Linda A. Rodriguez , Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

This is an accelerated appeal of an order terminating the appellants’ parental rights,

which must be disposed of by this Court within 180 days of the date the notice of appeal is filed.

T EX

. R. J UD

. A DMIN

. 6.2. Appellants’ briefs were due January 23, 2023. Both Appellant E.J. and

Appellant A.V.R. have filed motions for extension of time to file their respective briefs.

Appellants’ motions are GRANTED. Appellants’ briefs are due February 13, 2023.

Given the time constraints governing the disposition of th is appeal, further requests for

extensions of time will be disfavored.

It is so ORDERED February 1 , 202 3

.

PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO:

__________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ

, CLERK OF COURT
EXHIBIT 23.2

                                 March 20, 2007

For:
INKSURE TECHNOLOGIES INC.

Attn: Mr. Mickey Brandt

                   Re: INKSURE TECNOLOGIES INC. - FORM 10-KSB

We hereby confirm our consent to use the name of this firm in connection with
the Risk Factors under the headlines "Under current Israeli law, Inksure Ltd.
May not be able to enforce covenants not to compete" (page 24) and "Under
Israeli Law, our stockholders may face difficulties in the enforcement of civil
liabilities" from the word "However, subject to (11th line)..." through the end
of the paragraph (page 24), of the form 10-KSB filed by you with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission.


                                            Very truly yours,

                                         Yossi Avraham, Arad & Co.
#### Rose Kolacki, Appellant, *v.*The State of New York, Respondent.

(Claim No. 18711.)

(Argued June 4, 1936;

decided July 8, 1936.)

*483
      *Milton J. Whedon*for appellant.

*John J. Bennett, Jr., Attorney-General (Leon M. Layden*and *Burns F. Barford*of counsel], for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs, Crouch, Loughran and Finch, JJ.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.
333-67977 of IDG Books Worldwide, Inc. on Form S-8 of our reports dated November
9, 1998 (December 18, 1998 as to Note 15), appearing and incorporated by
reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of IDG Books Worldwide, Inc. for
the year ended September 30, 1998.

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
-------------------------
DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

San Jose, California
December 28, 1998
#### BANK OF ODENVILLE v. ST. CLAIR MINERAL & MINING COMPANY.

(Decided June 1, 1916.)

Appeal from St. Clair Circuit Court.

Heard before Hon. James E. Blackwood.

C. R. Robinson, for appellant. J. P. Montgomery, for appellee.

Per Curiam.

Affirmed for want of assignment of error.
### NUMBER 13

- 2 1

- 00 438

- CV



## COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

– EDINBURG

IN THE INTEREST OF T .C. AND K .C., C HILDREN

On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 5

of Nueces County, Texas.



## ORDER

Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Benavides and Tijerina Order Per Curiam

This is an appeal of a final order terminating parental rights. Appell ee has filed a

first motion of extension fo time to file a brief. Appell ee’s brief was due on April 1 4 , 2022.

Appell ee has requested a twenty

- day (20) extension to file a brief.

Appeals in parental termination and child protection cases are governed by the

rules of appellate procedure for accelerated appeals but include additional expedited

deadlines and procedures. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 28.4; T EX

. R. J UD

. A DMIN . 6.2(a). The2

interme diate appellate courts are directed to ensure “as far as reasonably possible” that

these appeals are brought to final disposition within 180 days of the date the notice of

appeal is filed. T EX

. R. J UD

. A DMIN . 6.2(a). Given the nature of these cases and the

shortened appellate deadlines, we limit the request to one five

- day extension of time

absent truly extraordinary circumstances. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.6(d).
This Court, having fully examined and considered a ppell ee’ s motion is of the

opinion that, in the interest of justice, a ppell ee’s first motion for extension of time to file

his brief should be granted in part with order. The Court, however, requires strict

adherence to the briefing rules in appeals of parental ter mination cases, such as this

appeal, and looks with disfavor upon the delay caused by such extension requests. See

T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 38.6; see also id . at R. 28.4.

The Court GRANTS in part a ppel lee ’s first motion for extension of time. This

motion is GRANTED insofar as the Court will extend a ppell ee’ s deadline to file its brief to

5:00 o ’ clock p.m. on Monday, Apri l 2 5 , 2022

. The Court DENIES appellee’s request for a

twenty

- day (20) extension. Further motions for extension of time will not be favorably
entertained by this Court, absent extraordinary circumstances

.
PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed on the 20th day of April , 202 2

.
EXHIBIT F 

Summary of Segal Consulting Expenses 

Service Description Amount

Business Meals $114.02

Hotel $1,849.72

In-City Transportation $205.34

Other Professional Services $0.00

Parking $0.00

Mileage $0.00

Travel $1,846.71

TOTAL $4,015.79

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3537-6 Filed:07/16/18 Entered:07/16/18 15:58:50 Desc:

Exhibit F Page 1 of 1
#### GENERAL ELECTRIC CREDIT CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. T. R. GRUBBS d/b/a T. R. Grubbs Tire & Appliance, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 74-3186.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

June 2, 1975.

Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied July 2, 1975.

*784H. Dee Johnson, Jr., Hubert D. Johnson, Dallas, Tex., for plaintiff-appellant.

J. R. Cornelius, Jefferson, Tex., James R. Cornelius, Jr., Lufkin, Tex., for defendant-appellee.

B. A. Britt, Jr., Texarkana, Tex., for Goodyear Tire.

J. W. Falvey, Jr., Longview, Tex., for EAC Credit Corp.

Before CLARK, Associate Justice,* and GOLDBERG and AINSWORTH, Circuit Judges.

*

 Of the Supreme Court of the United States, (Retired) sitting by designation.

PER CURIAM:

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Careful examination of the record shows that the trial judge’s findings are not clearly erroneous. As to the claim of appellant that any award of damages in excess of $20,000 was foreclosed by Grubbs’ failure to cross-appeal and complain of the initial award in this amount (which was specifically denied by the trial judge by order dated February 26, 1974, but not mentioned in his memorandum of decision dated July 18, 1974, and which is the basis of our affirmance) we need only point to the language of this court on remand of the case:

> Needless to say, we cannot accept the trial court’s award of $20,000 as a blanket recovery for “destruction of Grubbs’ business.” . . . On remand Grubbs’ recovery is to be limited to (1) credit for “trust receipt” merchandise which was not credited to him when trust receipts financing was terminated, (2) Grubbs’ losses on accounts which he had the sole right to collect, caused by the mailing of the “direct pay” notices, and (3) credit for merchandise wrongfully repossessed from Grubbs’ customers and sold.

> . [W]e reverse the award of $20,000 in damages on Grubbs’ counterclaim, and remand for a precise determination of damages on his counterclaim.

478 F.2d 53, 58-59.

Affirmed.
#### Job CARRETE-MICHEL, Petitioner, v. IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent.

No. 85-2524.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted June 11, 1986.

Decided Oct. 9, 1986.

Robert Frager, Kansas City, Mo., for petitioner.

David V. Bernal, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Div., U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., for respondent.

*387Before HEANEY, Circuit Judge, FLOYD R. GIBSON, Senior Circuit Judge, and BATTEY,* District Judge.

*

 The Honorable Richard H. Battey, United States District Judge for the District of South Dakota, sitting by designation.

ORDER

This illegal immigrant-deportation case comes before this Court for the second time. On November 28, 1984, we remanded the case to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) for reconsideration. *Carrete-Michel v. Immigration and Naturalization Service,*749 F.2d 490 (8th Cir.1984). The facts of this case are stated in that opinion, and no point would be served in reiterating them here. The BIA subsequently reconsidered the case in accordance with our opinion and found that Carrete-Michel was still not eligible for suspension of deportation. Carrete-Michel appeals again, raising several issues. We have reviewed these arguments and find them to be without merit in light of the Supreme Court’s recent opinion in *Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Rios-Pineda,*471 U.S. 444, 105 S.Ct. 2098, 85 L.Ed.2d 452 (1985). Accordingly, the BIA’s order is affirmed. *See*8th Cir.R. 12(a).
**EXHIBIT 32.1**
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OFTHE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
I, Eric J. Pulaski, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of BindView DevelopmentCorporation (the “Company”), certify that (i) theCompany’s Form 10-K/A, Amendment No. 1 for the year ended December31, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in the Form 10-K/A, Amendment No. 1 for the year ended December 31,2003 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and the results ofoperations of the Company.   By /s/ ERIC J. PULASKI Eric J. Pulaski Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer December 20, 2004
A signed original of the foregoing certification has been provided to the Company and will beretained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff uponrequest.
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
            AS ADDED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      In connection with the Quarterly Report of Pacific CMA, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Alfred
Lam, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.ss.
1350, as added by ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

      (b)   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Company as of and for the period covered by the Report.

                                      By:   /S/ Alfred Lam
                                            ----------------------
                                            Alfred Lam, Chief Executive Officer

Date:   May 13, 2005
Exhibit 24.5

                               KEYSPAN CORPORATION

                                POWER OF ATTORNEY



     WHEREAS,  KeySpan  Corporation,  a New York  corporation  (the  "Company"),
intends to file with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, an Annual Report on Form 10-K as prescribed by
said Commission  pursuant to said Act and the rules and regulations  promulgated
thereunder.

     NOW,  THEREFORE,  in my capacity as a director of the Company,  I do hereby
appoint GERALD LUTERMAN, JOHN J. BISHAR, JR. and MICHAEL J. TAUNTON, and each of
them  severally,  as my  attorneys-in-fact  with power to execute in my name and
place, and in my capacity as a director of KeySpan Corporation, said Report, any
amendment  to said  Report  and  any  other  documents  required  in  connection
therewith, and to file the same with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have executed this power of attorney this 10th day of
March, 2004.





                                                     /s/James L. Larocca
Editorial Note on Part 302
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 302 appear at 84 FR 15935, Apr. 16, 2019.

§ 302.705 Further procedures. ( a ) If no answer is filed within the designated time, or if a timely filed answer raises no material issue of fact, the DOT decisionmaker may, upon the basis of the record in the proceeding, enter a final order fixing the rate or rates.
( b ) If an answer raising a material issue of fact is filed within the time designated in the Department's order, the DOT decisionmaker may then issue an order authorizing additional pleadings and/or establishing further procedural steps, including setting the matter for oral evidentiary hearing before an administrative law judge.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM RIVER
HOLDING CORPORATION AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>   1,000

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999             DEC-25-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-26-1998             DEC-27-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999             DEC-25-1998
<CASH>                                           2,917                     507
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   30,425                  25,829
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (973)                   (794)
<INVENTORY>                                     24,043                  18,024
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                62,330                  45,076
<PP&E>                                          67,750                  51,155
<DEPRECIATION>                                (13,409)                 (4,298)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 345,543                 262,709
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         (26,126)                (15,543)
<BONDS>                                      (115,000)               (115,000)
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         (34,558)                (31,513)
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                      (91,748)                (63,125)
<OTHER-SE>                                     12,863                   3,472
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 (345,543)               (262,709)
<SALES>                                      (128,803)               (100,498)
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             (128,803)               (100,498)
<CGS>                                           77,678                  42,188
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   39,612                  24,617
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,332                     728
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              17,263                  10,273
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  7,082                   1,574
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,999                   (614)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              5,083                     960
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,083                     960
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0


</TABLE>