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

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 824

Expressing the sense of the Congress that the Government of Poland should

address the claims of Polish-Americans whose homes and properties

were wrongfully expropriated under Poland’s former totalitarian government.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 24, 1999

Mr. BARCIA introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on International Relations

A BILL

Expressing the sense of the Congress that the Government

of Poland should address the claims of Polish-Americans

whose homes and properties were wrongfully expropriated

under Poland’s former totalitarian government.

Whereas during Nazi Germany’s domination of Europe the

systematic genocide of 6,000,000 Jews was conducted,

and more than 8,000,000 members of other ethnic, religious, and political groups were murdered;

Whereas during that dark time millions of Poles were imprisoned or were deported to ghettos, forced labor camps,

and concentration camps;

Whereas the totalitarian regime that subsequently came to

power in Poland perpetrated additional horrors of per-
2

•HR 824 IH

sonal devastation and property expropriation upon tens of

thousands of Poles, including Jewish survivors;

Whereas more than 100,000 of the victims of this dark episode fled their homeland, with many finding sanctuary

and refuge in the United States, while their homes and

properties were occupied by trespassers and opportunists;

Whereas aging victims today chaff at the fact that their

homes and properties are still possessed by those trespassers and opportunists who continue to enjoy the fruits

of their ill-gotten gains despite the fall of the Iron Curtain;

Whereas the Government of Poland has taken nominal and

ineffective measures that create the appearance of providing compensation to these victims, while onerous eligibility requirements, unreasonable statutes of limitation,

and complex procedures mean only a handful have had

their claims fairly addressed;

Whereas every United States citizen can expect the protection

of the Nation’s legal, political, and diplomatic resources;

and

Whereas the Government of Poland has not provided for the

fair consideration of the legitimate claims of victims who

are now United States citizens: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that—

3 (1) the President should inform the Govern4 ment of Poland of the plight of Polish-Americans

5 who deserve to have their citizenship restored and

6 claims to their wrongfully expropriated homes and
3

•HR 824 IH

1 properties considered under a fair rule of law that

2 provides for compensation and restitution regardless

3 of a claimant’s current nationality;

4 (2) the Government of Poland should imme5 diately fulfill its responsibilities to consider the

6 claims of these victims under such a rule of law; and

7 (3) the President should instruct the represent8 atives of the United States to all multilateral treaty9 based institutions to work to deny admission or fi10 nancial benefits to the Government of Poland until

11 it fulfills these responsibilities.

Æ
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 123 (Monday, June 26, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 39426]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-16095]



[[Page 39426]]

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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigations Nos. 731-TA-96 and 439-445 (Review)]


Industrial Nitrocellulose From Brazil, China, France, Germany, 
Japan, Korea, the United Kingdom, and Yugoslavia

AGENCY: International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Revised schedule for the subject reviews.

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

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 16, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: D.J. Na (202-708-4727), Office of 
Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., 
Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired persons can obtain information 
on this matter by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-
1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special 
assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the 
Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. General information concerning 
the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server 
(http://www.usitc.gov).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Effective October 15, 1999, the Commission 
established a schedule for the conduct of the subject reviews (64 FR 
57483, October 25, 1999). Effective February 1, 2000, the Commission 
revised its schedule for the reviews (65 FR 5889, February 7, 2000), 
pursuant to a request for a two-month extension by counsel for Wolff 
Walsrode AG, a German producer, and Bayer Corporation, a German 
importer. In order to carefully evaluate recent important developments 
in the industrial nitrocellulose industry, the Commission has further 
determined to exercise its authority to extend the review period by up 
to 90 days pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1675(c)(5)(B), and is hereby revising 
its schedule.
    The Commission's new schedule for the reviews is as follows: the 
Commission will make its final release of information on August 2, 
2000; and final party comments are due on August 8, 2000.
    For further information concerning these reviews, see the 
Commission's notices cited above and the Commission's Rules of Practice 
and Procedure, part 201, subparts A through E (19 CFR part 201), and 
part 207, subparts A and F (19 CFR part 207).

    Authority: These reviews are being conducted under authority of 
title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published 
pursuant to section 207.62 of the Commission's rules.

    Issued: June 19, 2000.

    By order of the Commission.
Donna R. Koehnke,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-16095 Filed 6-23-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-M
#### § 301-70.708 What actions may we take if an employee fails to activate the Government contractor-issued travel charge card and/or misuses the travel charge card?

Internal agency policies and procedures should be established defining what are considered to be misuses of the Government contractor-issued travel charge card. Appropriate action may be taken pursuant to those policies if an employee fails to activate the Government contractor-issued travel charge card within 60 days of receipt or misuses the travel charge card.

[FTR Amdt. 2016-01, 81 FR 63138, Sept. 14, 2016]
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 122 (Friday, June 23, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 39139]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-15906]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. NJ00-5-000]


Southern Minnesota Municipal Power Agency; Notice of Filing

June 19, 2000
    Take notice that on June 6, 2000, Southern Minnesota Municipal 
Power Agency tendered for filing a revision to its Open Access 
Transmission Tariff on file with the Commission. The filed revision 
adds a new service, Generation to Schedule Imbalance Service, to the 
services already provided under the tariff.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest such filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice 
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). All such motions and 
protests should be filed on or before June 27, 2000. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission to determine the appropriate action to be 
taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection. This filing may also be viewed on 
the Internet at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-
2222 for assistance).

David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-15906 Filed 6-22-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
§ 105-70.023 Subpoena for attendance at hearing. ( a ) A party wishing to procure the appearance and testimony of any individual at the hearing may request that the ALJ issue a subpoena.
( b ) A subpoena requiring the attendance and testimony of an individual may also require the individual to produce documents at the hearing.
( c ) A party seeking a subpoena shall file a written request therefor not less than 15 days before the date fixed for the hearing unless otherwise allowed by the ALJ for good cause shown. Such request shall specify any documents to be produced and shall designate the witnesses and describe the address and location thereof with sufficient particularity to permit such witnesses to be found.
( d ) The subpoena shall specify the time and place at which the witness is to appear and any documents the witness is to produce.
( e ) The party seeking the subpoena shall serve it in the manner prescribed in § 105-70.008. A subpoena on a party or upon an individual under the control of a party may be served by first class mail.
( f ) A party or the individual to whom the subpoena is directed may file with the ALJ a motion to quash the subpoena within ten days after service or on or before the time specified in the subpoena for compliance if it is less than ten days after service.
I

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 873

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to clarify that employees

of a political subdivision of a State shall not loose their exemption

from the hospital insurance tax by reason of the consolidation of the

subdivision with the State.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 25, 1999

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts (for himself, Mr. MOAKLEY, Mr. MARKEY, Mr.

MEEHAN, Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts, Mr. MCGOVERN, Mr.

DELAHUNT, Mr. OLVER, Mr. TIERNEY, and Mr. CAPUANO) introduced

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and

Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to clarify

that employees of a political subdivision of a State shall

not loose their exemption from the hospital insurance

tax by reason of the consolidation of the subdivision

with the State.

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

•HR 873 IH

1 SECTION 1. CLARIFICATION OF EMPLOYMENT RELATION2 SHIP WHERE POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF

3 STATE IS CONSOLIDATED WITH STATE.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subparagraph (D) of section

5 3121(u)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating

6 to application of hospital insurance tax to Federal, State,

7 and local employment) is amended by adding at the end

8 the following new clause:

9 ‘‘(iii) An employee of a political sub10 division of a State shall not be treated as

11 having terminated such employee’s employ12 ment relationship with such subdivision by

13 reason of the abolition of such subdivision

14 (or other consolidation of any agency or in15 strumentality of such subdivision with the

16 State) if, as a result of such abolition (or

17 other consolidation), such employee be18 comes an employee of the State and con19 tinues to hold the same or substantially the

20 same position with the State.’’

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

22 subsection (a) shall apply to all abolitions and other con23 solidations, whether occurring before, on, or after the date

24 of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-7737

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

TIMOTHY GADSON,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Orangeburg. Cameron McGowan Currie, District

Judge. (5:01-cr-0084-CMC-1)

Submitted: December 14, 2006 Decided: December 22, 2006

Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Timothy Gadson, Appellant Pro Se. Stacey Denise Haynes, OFFICE OF

THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Timothy Gadson appeals the district court’s order denying

his motion for reduction of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C.

§ 3582(c)(2) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by

the district court. United States v. Gadson, No. 5:01-cr-00084-

CMC-1 (D.S.C. Sept. 27, 2006). We dispense with oral argument

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in

the materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

AFFIRMED
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL AND ACCOUNTING OFFICER OF

PAINCARE HOLDINGS, INC. 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 on Form 10K of PainCare Holdings, Inc. (the Company) for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Randy Lubinsky, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Mark Szporka, as Chief Financial & Accounting Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a)or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of he Company as of and for the period covered by the Report.

| |  | /s/ Randy Lubinsky                     
| |  | ---------------------------------------
| |  | Randy Lubinsky, Chief Executive Officer
| |  |                                        
| |  | Date: April 2, 2007                    
| |  |                                        
| |  | /s/ Mark Szporka                       
| |  | Mark Szporka, Chief Financial &        
| |  | Accounting Officer                     
| |  |                                        
| |  | Date: April 2, 2007                    

---
#### § 102-37.140 What is a State plan of operation?

A State plan of operation is a document developed under State law and approved by GSA in which the State sets forth a plan for the management and administration of the SASP in the donation of property.
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TOSECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 ofTitle 18, United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, the Vice President, Treasurer andActing Chief Financial Officer of American Science &Engineering, Inc. (the “Company”), does hereby certify that to theundersigned’s knowledge:

 

1.                                       theCompany’s Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,2004 (“10-Q”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934: and

 

2.                                       theinformation contained in the Company’s 10-Q being filed fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operation of theCompany

 

Date: November 3, 2004

 

 
|   | /s/ Kenneth J. Galaznik                                                 |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Kenneth J. Galaznik                                                     |
|   | *Vice President Finance, Treasurer and  Acting Chief Financial Officer* |

 

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906has been provided to American Science & Engineering, Inc. andwill be retained by American Science & Engineering, Inc. andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

1

----
132P11-8

#### State v. Gregory Lynn Gordon

1. Def’s *Pro Se*Petition for *Writ of Mandamus*(COAP15-180)

1. Denied

2. Defs *Pro Se*Motion to Proceed *In Forma Pauperis*

2. Allowed

3. Defs *Pro Se*Motion for Ex-Parte Petition for *Writ of Certiorari*

3. Dismissed
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

CASE NO. 1:22-cv-24066-KMM 

GRACE, INC.; ENGAGE MIAMI, INC.; 

SOUTH DADE BRANCH OF THE NAACP; 

MIAMI-DADE BRACH OF THE NAACP; 

CLARICE COOPER; YANELIS VALDES; 

JARED JOHNSON; and ALEXANDER 

CONTRERAS, 

 Plaintiffs, 

v. 

CITY OF MIAMI, 

 Defendant. 

 / 

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION 

FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE OBJECTIONS 

TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 

THIS CAUSE having come before the Court on Defendant City of Miami’s Motion for 

an Extension of Time to File Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation [DE 

__] and the Court having reviewed the file, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it 

is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: 

1. The Motion is hereby GRANTED; 

2. The deadline to file Objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and 

Recommendation [DE 52] shall be extended through and including May 19, 2023. 

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers, Miami, Florida this ___ day of May, 2023. 

 _____________________________ 

 K. MICHAEL MOORE 

 United States District Judge 

Copies furnished to all counsel of record 

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 53-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/09/2023 Page 1 of 1
#### § 115-1.100 Scope of subpart.

This subpart establishes the Environmental Protection Agency Property Management Regulations (EPPMR), chapter 115 of the Federal Property Management Regulations System (FPMR) (41 CFR chapter 101); states its relationship to the FPMR, and provides instructions governing the property management policies and procedures of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Exhibit 10.2


 


Waiver
and Clarification


 


JMJ
hereby waives all negative covenants in any and all agreements (warrant, note, etc.) in relation to the time of which the reverse
stock split was needing to be effectuated by, which is hereby agreed to as January 27, 2017. It is acknowledged that the reverse
stock split became effective in the marketplace the morning of January 27, 2017. As such, and by way of clarification, the warrants
issued on January 30, 2017 for 6,000,000 warrants are on a pre-split basis, which after taking into account the reverse stock
split amounts to 12,000 warrants.


 





	/s/ JMJ
    Financial	 
	JMJ
    Financial	 
	ITS:
    Principal
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED

October 6, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-50140 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RUBEN M. AVILA,

Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. SA-02-CR-413-ALL-OG
USDC No. SA-02-M-35-ALL

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

Before BARKSDALE, EMILO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Rubin M. Avila appeals his conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 111

for simple assault, following a jury trial. Avila argues that the

evidence was not sufficient to support his convicti on because it

did not show that he forcibly assaulted James Palermo, a member of

the Security Forces, or that he intended to place him in reasonable

apprehension of immediate harm.No. 03-50140

-2-

Title 18 U.S.C. § 111 punishes anyone who "forcibly assaults,

resists, opposes, impedes, inti midates, or interferes with a

[federal officer] while engaged in or on account of the performance

of official duties." S ee United States v. Moore

, 958 F.2d 646, 649

(5th Cir. 1992). Given the testimony at trial that Avila swung his

right arm towards the security officer who had placed his fingers

on the back of Avila’s arm because Palerm o had insulted him, a

reasonable trier of fact could have found that the evidence

established guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. U nited States v.

Jaramillo , 42 F.3d 920, 923 (5th Cir. 1995).

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 2 

Case 1:22-cv-24023-RNS Document 20-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/13/2023 Page 1 of 4
7Q2a 31bD DODO 431D 5527

OFFICIAL USE I

\

For delivery information, visit our website at www.usps.com"^.

PS Form 3800, April 2015 psn 7530-02-000-9047

$.

$

$.

$

U.S, Postal ServiceTM

CERTIFIED MAIL® RECEIPT

Domestic Mail Only

Certified Mail Fee

t _______________________________________

^tra Senrices & Fees (chxklxa, adatea as appmprtaa)

Return Receipt (hardcopy)

Return Receipt (electronic)

Certified MallRestitcted Oellveiy

Adult Signatute Required

MullSignature Reetnctad Dellueiy $

Postage

Total Postage and Fees

<vooc

1^” .PosSnark

I Here , \ '

\ -4'

See Reverse for Instructions

Case 1:22-cv-24023-RNS Document 20-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/13/2023 Page 2 of 4
1/3/23, 11:47 AM USPS.com® - USPS Tracking® Results

https://tools.usps.com/go/TrackConfirmAction?tRef=fullpage&tLc=2&text28777=&tLabels=70203160000043105927%2C 1/2

USPS Tracking

® FAQs 

Tracking Number:

70203160000043105927

Copy Add to Informed Delivery (https://informeddelivery.usps.com/)

Latest Update

Your item was picked up at a postal facility at 3:55 am on December 20, 2022 in WASHINGTON, DC

20022.

Get More Out of USPS Tracking:

USPS Tracking Plus

®

Available for Pickup

WASHINGTON, DC 20220

December 19, 2022, 10:06 am

Arrived at Post Office

WASHINGTON, DC 20018

December 19, 2022, 9:42 am

In Transit to Next Facility

December 18, 2022

Arrived at USPS Regional Facility

WASHINGTON DC DISTRIBUTION CENTER

December 16, 2022, 4:28 pm

Departed USPS Regional Facility

Delivered

Delivered, Individual Picked Up at Postal Facility

WASHINGTON, DC 20022

December 20, 2022, 3:55 am

Remove Feedback

Case 1:22-cv-24023-RNS Document 20-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/13/2023 Page 3 of 4
1/3/23, 11:47 AM USPS.com® - USPS Tracking® Results

https://tools.usps.com/go/TrackConfirmAction?tRef=fullpage&tLc=2&text28777=&tLabels=70203160000043105927%2C 2/2

See Less 

NEW YORK NY DISTRIBUTION CENTER

December 15, 2022, 11:49 pm

Arrived at USPS Regional Facility

NEW YORK NY DISTRIBUTION CENTER

December 15, 2022, 9:04 pm

Hide Tracking History

Text & Email Updates 

USPS Tracking Plus® 

Product Information 

Track Another Package

Need More Help?

Contact USPS Tracking support for further assistance.

FAQs

Enter tracking or barcode numbers

Case 1:22-cv-24023-RNS Document 20-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/13/2023 Page 4 of 4