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

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S.J. Res. 38 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. J. RES. 38

  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
   United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Federal Highway 
  Administration relating to ``Waiver of Buy America Requirements for 
                      Electric Vehicle Chargers''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 26, 2023

  Mr. Rubio (for himself, Mr. Scott of Florida, Mr. Marshall, and Mr. 
Cramer) introduced the following joint resolution; which was read twice 
     and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
   United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Federal Highway 
  Administration relating to ``Waiver of Buy America Requirements for 
                      Electric Vehicle Chargers''.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress disapproves the 
rule submitted by the Federal Highway Administration relating to 
``Waiver of Buy America Requirements for Electric Vehicle Chargers'' 
(88 Fed. Reg. 10619 (February 21, 2023)), and such rule shall have no 
force or effect.
                                 <all>
```
#### § 1706.102 Application.

This part applies to all programs or activities conducted by the agency.
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 Victory Divide Mining Company (the
      "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with
      the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Shulin Liu, 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.





Date:
                March 31, 2008
            By:
            /s/
                SHULIN LIUShulin
              LiuChief
              Executive Officer
§ 101.72 Compulsory process. ( a ) If a person refuses to permit a duly authorized representative of HHS to have access to any premises or to the source of information necessary to the administration or the enforcement of the DPA and other applicable statutes, this part, or official actions, HHS, through its authorized representative may seek compulsory process. Compulsory process means the institution of appropriate legal action, including ex parte application for an inspection warrant or its equivalent, in any forum of appropriate jurisdiction.
( b ) Compulsory process may be sought in advance of an audit, investigation, or other inquiry, if, in the judgment of the Secretary there is reason to believe that a person will refuse to permit an audit, investigation, or other inquiry, or that other circumstances exist which make such process desirable or necessary.
#### Alexander T. Porter, Respondent, *v.*Magnetic Separator Company, Appellant.

*Porter*v. *Magnetic Separator Co.,*115 App. Div. 333, affirmed.

(Argued October 24, 1907;

decided November 19, 1907.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered *512November 28,1906, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial in an action to recover money alleged to have been loaned.

*H. J). Bailey*for appellant.

*Maurice Fits Gerald*and *F. F. Hollaway*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs, on opinion below.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, O’Brien, Vann, Werner, Willard Bartlett and Chase, JJ.
SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

ONE HUNDRED SECOND CONGRESS 

Convened January 3, 1991 

FIRST SESSION { 

SECOND SESSION { 

EXECUTIVE CALENDAR 

Monday, June 17, 1991 

PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF WALTER J. STEWART, 

SECRETARY OF THE SENATE 

By Gerald A. Hackett, Executive Clerk 
1 

TREATIES 

Calendar Treaty Subject Reported 

No. Doc. No. Bv 

1 EX. B., Two Related Protocols to the Convention for Feb 5 91 Reported favorably 

95-1 the Unification of Certain Rules Relating by Mr. Pell, Committee on 

to International Carriage by Air, as Foreign Relations, with a 

Amended (Montreal Aviation Protocols No. 3 resolution of advice and 

and 4). consent to ratification 

with provisos. {Printed 

report--Ex. Rept. 102-1 

together with minority 

views). 

NOMINATIONS 

Calendar Message Nominee, Office, And Predecessor Reported 

No. No. Bv 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

* 80 139 David Floyd Lambertson, of Kansas, a Career May 7, 91 Mr. Pell, 

Member of the Senior Foreign Service, Committee on Foreign 

Class of Minister-Counselor, to be Relations, without printed 

Ambassador Extraordinary and report. 

Plenipotentiary of the United States of 

America to the Kinl!:dom of Thailand. 

*Signifies nominee's commitment to respond to requests to appear and testify before any duly 

constituted committee of the Senate.
Presidential Documents

65365 

Federal Register 

Vol. 71, No. 216 

Wednesday, November 8, 2006 

Title 3— 

The President 

Executive Order 13414 of November 3, 2006 

Amendment to Executive Order 13402, Strengthening Federal 

Efforts To Protect Against Identity Theft 

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the 

laws of the United States of America, and in order to amend the date 

by which the Identity Theft Task Force shall submit to the President its 

coordinated strategic plan, it is hereby ordered that section 3(a) of Executive 

Order 13402 of May 10, 2006, is amended to read as follows: ‘‘review 

the activities of executive branch departments, agencies, and instrumentalities 

relating to the policy set forth in section 1, and building upon these prior 

activities, prepare and submit in writing to the President by February 9, 

2007, or as soon as practicable thereafter as the Chairman and Co-Chairman 

shall determine, a coordinated strategic plan to further improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the Federal Government’s activities in the areas of 

identity theft awareness, prevention, detection, and prosecution.’’. 

THE WHITE HOUSE, 

November 3, 2006. 

[FR Doc. 06–9148 

Filed 11–7–06; 8:45 am] 

Billing code 3195–01–P 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS5GWBOLD.EPS</GPH>
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 Salon Media Group, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2004, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
David Talbot, Chairman and 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 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); 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/ David Talbot
                                            ------------------------------------
          November 12, 2004                 David Talbot
                                            Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
#### The City of New York, Respondent, *v.*John Watts de Peyster et al., Defendants, and Walter J. Salomon, Appellant.

*City of New York*v. *de Peyster,*120 App. Div. 762, affirmed.

(Submitted December 6, 1907;

decided December 20, 1907.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered July 31, 1907, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term in an action to restrain the continuance of an encroachment upon a street in the city of New York.

*William Allan Hoar*for appellant.

*Francis K. Pendleton, Corporation Counsel (Theodore Connoly*and *George O'Reilly*of counsel), for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur : Cullen, Gh. J., O’Brien, Edward T. Bartlett, Haight, Vann, Hiscook and Chase, JJ.
1 

### Mears, Gilbert

From: Sheila Conry <sc@abender.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2014 6:13 PM To: Mears, Gilbert Subject: Docket #: EPA-HQ-TRI-2013-0281
Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged

Hello, Mr. Means,
The Toxics Release Inventory loophole needs to be closed. It is outrag eous that the citizenry is being run over by the fossil fuel industry and kept in the dark about the deleterious toxins that are being released into our environment.
Thank you for your consideration.

Cordially,
Sheila Conry 328 Highland Lane Edgeworth, PA 15143

412.656.1058 cell
§ 1623.1 Purpose. The purpose of this rule is to: ( a ) Ensure that the Corporation is able to take prompt action when necessary to safeguard LSC funds or to ensure the compliance of a recipient with applicable provisions of law, or a rule, regulation, guideline or instruction issued by the Corporation, or the terms and conditions of a recipient's grant or contract with the Corporation; and
( b ) Provide procedures for prompt review that will ensure informed deliberation by the Corporation when it has made a proposed determination that financial assistance to a recipient should be suspended.
§ 1336.75 Allowable loan activities. The following are among those activities for which a loan may be made from the RLF: ( a ) The establishment or expansion of businesses engaged in commercial, industrial or agricultural activities, such as farming, manufacturing, construction, sales, service;
( b ) The establishment or expansion of cooperatives engaged in the production and marketing of farm products, equipment, or supplies; the manufacture and sale of industrial, commercial or consumer products; or the provision of various commercial services;
( c ) Business or job retention;
( d ) Small business development;
( e ) Private sector job creation; and
( f ) Promotion of economic diversification, e.g. targeting firms in growth industries that have not previously been part of a community's economic base.
§ 157.10 Basis and scope. ( a ) *Basis.* This part is based on the following sections of title I of the Affordable Care: ( 1 ) 1311. Affordable choices of health benefits plans.
( 2 ) 1312. Consumer Choice.
( 3 ) 1321. State flexibility in operation and enforcement of Exchanges and related requirements.
( 4 ) 1411. Procedures for determining eligibility for Exchange participation, advance payments of the premium tax credit and cost-sharing reductions, and individual responsibility exemptions.
( 5 ) 1412. Advance determination and payment of the premium tax credit and cost-sharing reductions.
( b ) *Scope.* This part establishes the requirements for employers in connection with the operation of Exchanges.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v.

MELVIN FLORES

- ORTIZ,

Defendant

- Appellant. No. 14

- 1040 4

D.C. No. 4:14

- cr

- 00399

- RCC

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Raner C. Collins, Chief Judge, Presiding

Submitted June 22, 2015 **

Before: HAWKINS, GRABER, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

Melvin Flores

- Ortiz appeals from the district court’ s judgment and

challenges the 18

- month sentence imposed following his guilty

- plea conviction for

attempted exportation of a firearm and magazines , in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 554.

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

JUN 25 2015

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 14

- 10404

Flores

- Ortiz contends that he received ineffective assistance of counsel

because his attorney failed properly to explain his plea deal . Contrary to Flores

Ortiz’s contention, the record does not permit us to consider his ineffective

assistance argument on direct appeal. See United States v. Rahman , 642 F .3d

1257, 1259

- 60 (9th Cir. 2011) ( this c ourt reviews ineffective assistance claims on

direct appeal only where the record is sufficiently developed or inadequate

representation is obvious). Flores

- Ortiz may pur sue this claim through a motion

under 28 U.S.C. § 2255.

AFFIRMED.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-1989
HARBISON STATION APARTMENTS, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DENISE CORDERO, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Colu mbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CA-97-1841-3-17BD) Submitted: December 18, 1997 Decided: January 6, 1998 Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Denise Cordero, Appellant Pro Se. Charles Elford Carpenter, Jr.,RICHARDSON, PLOWDEN, CARPENTER & ROBINSON, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order remanding this case to the state court. A district court order remanding a case to the state court from which it was removed generally is not appealable. 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d) (1994); Thermtron Prods., Inc. v. Hermansdorfer , 423 U.S. 336, 342 (1976); Nutter v. Monongahela Power Co. , 4 F.3d 319, 321 (4th Cir. 1993). Because none of the exceptions apply here, we dismiss the appeal from the remand order.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.

DISMISSED
Exhibit 32.2

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

In
connection with the annual report of R&R Acquisition VI, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-K for the period ending June 30, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Kirk M. Warshaw, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to ss. 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, as amended; and                  
| |     |                                                                                                                                                      
| | (2) | The information contained
 in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
 condition and result of operations of the Company.

|                               | 
|------------------------------ | 
|Dated: September 23, 2009     
|                               | 
|/s/ Kirk M. Warshaw            | 
|                               | 
|Kirk M. Warshaw                | 
|Chief Financial Officer        | 
|(Principal Financial
 Officer)

A signed
original of this certification has been provided to the Company and will be
retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.

---
SCPW-21-0000073

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

 

CHRIS SLAVICK, Petitioner

vs.

STATE OF HAWAI#I, Respondent.

 

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

(CAAP-20-0000076; CASE NO. 1PR191000014)

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ.)

Upon consideration of petitioner Christopher Lee

Slavick’s “Motion for Release of Prisoner Pending Disposition of

Application for Habeas Corpus,” which was filed as a petition for

writ of mandamus on February 17, 2021, and the record, it appears

that petitioner fails to present any basis upon which he is

entitled to be released from custody by this court, and has

alternative means to seek relief, including seeking release from

the Hawai#i Paroling Authority, as provided by law. Petitioner,

therefore, is not entitled to the requested extraordinary writ. 

See Kema v. Gaddis, 91 Hawai#i 200, 204, 982 P.2d 334, 338 (1999)

(a writ of mandamus is an extraordinary remedy that will not

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCPW-21-0000073

26-FEB-2021

08:34 AM

Dkt. 5 ODDP
issue unless the petitioner demonstrates a clear and indisputable

right to relief and a lack of alternative means to redress

adequately the alleged wrong or obtain the requested action). 

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for writ of

mandamus is denied.

IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that the clerk of the

appellate court shall process the petition for writ of mandamus

without payment of the filing fee.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, February 26, 2021.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

/s/ Michael D. Wilson

/s/ Todd W. Eddins

2
#### Benjamin Harris, Respondent, *v.*Fannie J. Scott, Appellant.

*Harris*v. *Scott,*113 App. Div. 890, affirmed.

(Submitted January 26, 1909;

decided February 9, 1909.)

Appeal, by permission, from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial depart-*579merit, entered June 9, 1906, which affirmed a judgment of the Monroe County Court affirming a judgment of the Municipal Court of the city of Rochester in favor of plaintiff in an action to recover commissions alleged to have been eirned as real estate broker.

*Wilbur F. Osborn*for appellant.

*George W. Thomas*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur : Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Haight, Werner, Willard Bartlett, Hiscock and Chase, JJ.
§ 170.204 Functional standards. The Secretary adopts the following functional standards: ( a ) *Accessibility* — ( 1 ) *Standard.* Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0, Level A Conformance (incorporated by reference in § 170.299).
( 2 ) *Standard.* Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0, Level AA Conformance (incorporated by reference in § 170.299).
( b ) *Reference source. Standard.* HL7 Version 3 Standard: Context-Aware Retrieval Application (Infobutton) (incorporated by reference in § 170.299). ( 1 ) - ( 2 ) [Reserved]
( 3 ) *Standard.* HL7 Version 3 Standard: Context Aware Knowledge Retrieval Application. (“Infobutton”), Knowledge Request, Release 2 (incorporated by reference in § 170.299). *Implementation specifications.* HL7 Implementation Guide: Service-Oriented Architecture Implementations of the Context-aware Knowledge Retrieval (Infobutton) Domain, Release 1 (incorporated by reference in § 170.299).
( 4 ) *Standard.* HL7 Version 3 Standard: Context Aware Knowledge Retrieval Application (“Infobutton”), Knowledge Request, Release 2 (incorporated by reference in § 170.299). *Implementation specifications.* HL7 Version 3 Implementation Guide: Context-Aware Knowledge Retrieval (Infobutton), Release 4 (incorporated by reference in § 170.299).
[77 FR 54284, Sept. 4, 2012, as amended at 80 FR 62743, Oct. 16, 2015; 85 FR 25940, May 1, 2020]
#### § 1703.201 Decision to hold meeting.

When Commission members make a decision to hold a meeting, the proposed meeting will ordinarily be scheduled for a date no earlier than eight days after the decision to allow sufficient time to give appropriate public notice. At the time a decision is made to hold a meeting, the time, place, and subject matter of the meeting will be determined, as well as whether the meeting is to be open or closed to the public.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 46 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. CON. RES. 46

        Providing for corrections in the enrollment of S. 4367.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

            December 18 (legislative day, December 16), 2024

   Mr. Carper (for himself and Mrs. Capito) submitted the following 
       concurrent resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
        Providing for corrections in the enrollment of S. 4367.

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That in the enrollment of S. 4367, an Act to provide for improvements 
to the rivers and harbors of the United States, to provide for the 
conservation and development of water and related resources, and for 
other purposes, the Secretary of the Senate shall make the following 
corrections:
            (1) In paragraph (2) of section 203(d) of the Water 
        Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2231(d)) (as added 
        by section 1109(a)(3)(C)), strike ``maximum Federal cost'' and 
        insert ``Federal share of the cost''.
            (2) In section 204(c)(1) of the Water Resources Development 
        Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2232(c)(1)) (as amended by section 
        1110(a)(1)), strike ``United States funds'' and insert ``United 
        States''.
            (3) In section 1142(3), strike ``in paragraph (4) and 
        inserting the following'' and insert ``by striking paragraph 
        (4) and inserting the following''.
            (4) In section 1203(a)(1), strike ``food'' and insert 
        ``flood''.
            (5) In paragraph (2) of section 1113(d) of the Water 
        Resources Development Act of 1986 (100 Stat. 4232; 110 Stat. 
        3719; 136 Stat. 3781) (as added by section 1355(1)(B))--
                    (A) in the paragraph heading, strike 
                ``Reconnaissance study'' and insert ``Pre-design 
                planning costs''; and
                    (B) strike ``a reconnaissance study carried out by 
                the Secretary'' and insert ``pre-design planning 
                costs''.
                                 <all>
```