alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 5133.

#### William Koblenschlag *v.*The State.

Unlawful' Sale oe Liquor to a Minor—Evidence.—Upon a trial for the unlawful sale of liquor to a minor, the point at issue being the defendant’s knowledge of the purchaser’s minority, the State was permitted, over objection, to ask a witness if, at the time of the alleged offense, the purchaser, by reason of his physical appearance, would be taken by a person of ordinary observation to be a minor; and the witness was permitted to answer in the affirmative. *Held,*error.

Appeal from the County Court of Montague. Tried below before the Hon. Griffin Ford, County Judge.

The conviction was for the unlawful sale of intoxicating liquor to a minor, and the penalty imposed was a fine of twenty-five dollars.

The age of the purchaser was shown to be fifteen years at the time the liquor was sold to him by the defendant, but there was no proof that his minority was known to the defendant.

Ho brief for the appellant.

*W. L. Davidson,*Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

Hurt, Judge.

This was a conviction for selling liquor to a minor. Upon the trial the State’s counsel propounded to the witness the following question: “From physical appearance in last August, was W. C. Strong a minor, or did he appear to be so to a man of ordinary observation?” To which the witness answered: “At that time a person of ordinary observation and intellect would have taken him to be a minor, from his physical appearance.” Counsel for appellant objected to both the question and the answer. Both were improper, and in permitting both or either there was error. The age, appearance, etc., of the minor might very properly be shown; but it is not permissible for the witness to give his opinion as to how others would be impressed by these physical marks of age. It was the province of the jury to determine whether from these the defendant knew that the party was in fact a minor.

*265Opinion delivered April 13, 1887.

For this error the judgment must be reversed and the cause remanded.

*Reversed and remanded.*
SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION { CONVENEDJANUARY3 2001 

SECOND SESSION { 

EXECUTIVE CALENDAR 

Wednesday, March 28, 2001 

PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF GARY SISCO, 

SECRETARY OF THE SENATE 

By Michelle Haynes, Execut1ve Clerk 
1 

RESOLUTIONS 

CALENDAR Ex.RES REPORTED 

No. No. SUBJECT BY 

I 

I 

I 
2 

TREATIES 

CALENDAR TREATY REPORTED 

No. Doc. No. SUBJECT BY 

-
3 

NOMINATIONS 

CALENDAR MESSAGE REPORTED 

No No NOMINEE, OFFICE, AND PREDECESSOR BY 

[NEW REPORTS] 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

* 23 186 GrantS. Green, Jr., ofVirginia, to be an Under Mar 27,2001 Reported by Mr. 

Secretary of State (Management), vice Bonnie Helms, Committee on Foreign 

R. Cohen. Relations, without printed report. 

I 

* s~gnifies nommee's comm~tment to respond to requests to appear and test~fy before any duly const~tuted comm~ttee of the Senate 
4 

NOMINATIONS PLACED ON THE SECRETARY'S DESK
EXHIBIT 99.2
                                                                    ------------

                            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 Quarterly Report of Insilco Holding Co. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2002, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Michael R. Elia, 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; and

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



                                                 /s/ Michael R. Elia
                                                 -----------------------------
                                                 Michael R. Elia
                                                 Chief Financial Officer
                                                 November 14, 2002
PUBLIC LAW 109–249—JULY 27, 2006 120 STAT. 651

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 5117

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 109–500 (Comm. on Financial Services).

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 152 (2006):

June 13, considered and passed House.

July 18, considered and passed Senate.

Æ

Public Law 109–249

109th Congress

An Act

To exempt persons with disabilities from the prohibition against providing section

8 rental assistance to college students.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. EXEMPTION OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES FROM SECTION 8 RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROHIBITION.

Subsection (a) of section 327 of Public Law 109–115 (119 Stat.

2466) is amended—

(1) in paragraph (5), by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end;

(2) by redesignating paragraph (6) as paragraph (7); and

(3) by inserting after paragraph (5) the following new paragraph:

‘‘(6) is not a person with disabilities, as such term is defined

in section 3(b)(3)(E) of the United States Housing Act of 1937

(42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)(3)(E)) and was not receiving assistance

under such section 8 as of November 30, 2005; and’’.

Approved July 27, 2006.

Housing.

July 27, 2006

[H.R. 5117]
**Exhibit 23**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-138225) pertaining to the GateHouse Media, Inc. Omnibus Stock Incentive Plan, of our reports dated March 4, 2010, with respect to theconsolidated financial statements and schedule of GateHouse Media, Inc. and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of GateHouse Media, Inc., included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31,2009. 

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP 

Buffalo, New York 

March 4, 2010
PUBLIC LAW 109–252—AUG. 1, 2006 120 STAT. 655

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 2977:

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD:

Vol. 151 (2005): July 25, 26, considered and passed House.

Vol. 152 (2006): July 20, considered and passed Senate.

Æ

Public Law 109–252

109th Congress

An Act

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 306 2nd

Avenue in Brockway, Montana, as the ‘‘Paul Kasten Post Office Building’’.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

The facility of the United States Postal Service located at

306 2nd Avenue in Brockway, Montana, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Paul Kasten Post Office Building’’.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper,

or other record of the United States to the facility referred to

in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Paul Kasten

Post Office Building’’.

Approved August 1, 2006.

Aug. 1, 2006

[H.R. 2977]
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 216 (Wednesday, November 8, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Page 65524]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-9142]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL RETIREMENT THRIFT INVESTMENT BOARD


Sunshine Act; Notice of Meeting

Time and Date: 9 a.m. (EST), November 20, 2006.

Place: 4th Floor Conference Room, 1250 H Street, NW., Washington, DC.

Status: Parts will be open to the public and parts closed to the 
public.

Matters to Be Considered: 

Parts Open to the Public

1. Approval of the minutes of the October 16, 2006 Board member 
meeting.
2. Thrift Savings Plan activity report by the Executive Director.
3. Participant Survey Update.
4. Analysis of Investment Funds Report.
5. Pension Protection Act Report.
6. 2007 Board Meeting Changes.
7. DOL Audit Report.
8. GAO Review of FRTIB Report.

Parts Closed to the Public

9. Procurement
10. Security

Contact Person for More Information: Thomas J. Trabucco, Director, 
Office of External Affairs, (202) 942-1640.

    Dated: November 6, 2006.
Thomas K. Emswiler,
Secretary to the Board, Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board.
[FR Doc. 06-9142 Filed 11-6-06; 12:24 pm]
BILLING CODE 6760-01-P
§ 1324.17 Responsibilities of agencies hosting local Ombudsman entities. ( a ) The agency in which a local Ombudsman entity is organizationally located shall be responsible for the personnel management, but not the programmatic oversight, of representatives, including employee and volunteer representatives, of the Office.
( b ) The agency in which a local Ombudsman entity is organizationally located shall not have personnel policies or practices which prohibit the representatives of the Office from performing the duties, or from adhering to the access, confidentiality, and disclosure requirements of section 712 of the Act (42 U.S.C. 3058g), as implemented through this rule and the policies and procedures of the Office. ( 1 ) Policies, procedures, and practices, including personnel management practices of the host agency, which the Ombudsman determines conflict with the laws or policies governing the Ombudsman program shall be sufficient grounds for the refusal, suspension, or removal of the designation of local Ombudsman entity by the Ombudsman.
( 2 ) Nothing in this provision shall prohibit the host agency from requiring that the representatives of the Office adhere to the personnel policies and procedures of the agency which are otherwise lawful.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 34 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.Con.Res.34
                                           Agreed to May 6, 2024        

                     One Hundred Eighteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
         the third day of January, two thousand and twenty four

                          Concurrent Resolution

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring),

SECTION 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF JOINT COMMITTEE.

    There is established a Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural 
Ceremonies (in this resolution referred to as the ``joint committee'') 
consisting of 3 Senators and 3 Members of the House of Representatives, 
to be appointed by the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the 
House of Representatives, respectively. The joint committee is 
authorized to make the necessary arrangements for the inauguration of 
the President-elect and Vice President-elect of the United States on 
January 20, 2025.

SEC. 2. SUPPORT OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE.

    The joint committee--
        (1) is authorized to utilize appropriate equipment and the 
    services of appropriate personnel of departments and agencies of 
    the Federal Government, under arrangements between the joint 
    committee and the heads of those departments and agencies, in 
    connection with the inaugural proceedings and ceremonies; and
        (2) may accept gifts and donations of goods and services to 
    carry out its responsibilities.
Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.
Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.
```
§ 160.530 Sanctions. The ALJ may sanction a person, including any party or attorney, for failing to comply with an order or procedure, for failing to defend an action or for other misconduct that interferes with the speedy, orderly or fair conduct of the hearing. The sanctions must reasonably relate to the severity and nature of the failure or misconduct. The sanctions may include— ( a ) In the case of refusal to provide or permit discovery under the terms of this part, drawing negative factual inferences or treating the refusal as an admission by deeming the matter, or certain facts, to be established;
( b ) Prohibiting a party from introducing certain evidence or otherwise supporting a particular claim or defense;
( c ) Striking pleadings, in whole or in part;
( d ) Staying the proceedings;
( e ) Dismissal of the action;
( f ) Entering a decision by default;
( g ) Ordering the party or attorney to pay the attorney's fees and other costs caused by the failure or misconduct; and
( h ) Refusing to consider any motion or other action that is not filed in a timely manner.
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).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

EDWIN ADONAY MENDOZA,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 09-71710

Agency No. A094-452-765

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted December 6, 2010** 

Before: GOODWIN, RYMER, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.

Edwin Adonay Mendoza, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal

from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum and

withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review

FILED

DEC 13 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 09-71710

for substantial evidence factual findings. Santos-Lemus v. Mukasey, 542 F.3d 738,

742 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny the petition for review.

Mendoza contends he suffered harm from gang members during several

incidents on account of his imputed political opinion. Substantial evidence

supports the BIA’s finding that the robberies were criminal in nature or to recruit

him, and thus that Mendoza failed to establish the required nexus to a protected

ground. See Gormley v. Ashcroft, 364 F.3d 1172, 1177 (9th Cir. 2004) (random

criminal acts bore no nexus to a protected ground); Santos-Lemus v. Mukasey, 542

F.3d at 745-46 (rejecting petitioner’s contention that “the gang held any sort of

belief system that they perceived [petitioner] to oppose”); Parussimova v.

Mukasey, 555 F.3d 734, 740-41 (9th Cir. 2009) (“[t]he Real ID Act requires that a

protected ground represent ‘one central reason’ for an asylum applicant’s

persecution”). Accordingly, Mendoza’s asylum and withholding of removal

claims fail. See Ochoa v. Gonzales, 406 F.3d 1166, 1172 (9th Cir. 2005).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
Schlemmer, Kevin (OST) 

From: Jeff Pedersen [jpeclersen48@verizon.net] 

Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 8:58 AM 

To: Schlemmer, Kevin (OST) 

I am writing to you to urge your approval of the Gulfstream proposal, which includes service to Franklin, Pa., Venango 

Regional Airport. Our area needs air transportation. Gulfstream has brought dependable air transportation back to 

Franklin. I believe that the previous carrier did a huge amount of damage to the airport by having almost daily delays and 

cancelled flights. They were very undependable and caused passengers to look else where. Gulfstream is a large 

improvement and has made Venango Regional an airport you can count on. 

Again, I hope this proposal is approved. Thank you. 

Jeff Pedersen 

4 West Third St 

Oil City, Pa. 16301 -:; 

814-758-0940 -a 

•-C: J 

C 3
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 Yanglin Soybean, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-K/A  for the year ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Shaocheng Xu, Chief Financial 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:
      May 8, 2009
                By:
                /s/
      SHAOCHENG XUShaocheng
      XuChief
      Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-1894

In re: NORMAN TYRONE DAIS,

Petitioner.

On Petition for a Writ of Mandamus.

(4:03-CR-00386-TLW-1)

Submitted: September 28, 2010 Decided: October 1, 2010

Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Norman Tyrone Dais, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Norman Tyrone Dais petitions for a writ of mandamus 

seeking an order directing the district court to give him a copy 

of an order dated May 23, 2010. Because we are not able to 

discern what order Dais wants, we conclude he is not entitled to 

mandamus relief.

Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used 

only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United States 

Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); United States v. 

Moussaoui, 333 F.3d 509, 516-17 (4th Cir. 2003). Further, 

mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a 

clear right to the relief sought. In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan 

Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988).

The relief sought by Dais is not available by way of 

mandamus. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of 

mandamus. 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.

PETITION DENIED
S. Con. Res. 44 Agreed to December 18, 2024

One Hundred Eighteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and twenty four 

Concurrent Resolution 

Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), That in the enrollment of the bill H.R. 5009, the Clerk 

of the House of Representatives shall make the following corrections: 

(1) In the table of contents in section 2(b), strike the 

item relating to section 5705 and insert the following: 

Sec. 5705. Readmission requirements for servicemembers. 

(2) In the table of section 601 regarding basic pay for 

enlisted members, in the entry relating to a member in pay 

grade E–5 with over 2 years, strike ‘‘3,317.10’’ and insert 

‘‘3,466.50’’. 

(3) In such table, in the entry relating to a member in 

such pay grade with over 3 years, strike ‘‘3,480.90’’ and insert 

‘‘3,637.50’’. 

(4) In such table, in the entry relating to a member in 

such pay grade with over 4 years, strike ‘‘3,638.40’’ and insert 

‘‘3,802.20’’. 

(5) In such table, in the entry relating to a member in 

such pay grade with over 6 years, strike ‘‘3,789.00’’ and insert 

‘‘3,959.40’’. 

(6) In such table, in the entry relating to a member in 

such pay grade with over 8 years, strike ‘‘3,964.20’’ and insert 

‘‘4,142.40’’. 

(7) In the table of contents preceding section 5701, strike 

the item relating to section 5705 and insert the following: 

Sec. 5705. Readmission requirements for servicemembers. 

(8) Strike section 5705 and insert the following: 

SEC. 5705. READMISSION REQUIREMENTS FOR SERVICEMEMBERS. 

Subsection (a) of section 484C of the Higher Education Act 

of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1091c(a)) is amended to read as follows: 

‘‘(a) DEFINITION OF SERVICE IN THE UNIFORMED SERVICES.— 

In this section, the term ‘service in the uniformed services’ means 

service (whether voluntary or involuntary) on active duty in the 

Armed Forces, including such service by a member of the National 

Guard or Reserve.’’. 

(9) Amend the title so as to read: ‘‘An Act to authorize 

appropriations for fiscal year 2025 for military activities of 
S. Con. Res. 44—2 

the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for 

defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe 

military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other 

purposes.’’. 

Attest: 

Secretary of the Senate. 

Attest: 

Clerk of the House of Representatives.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 11 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. CON. RES. 11

  Expressing the need for the Senate to provide advice and consent to 
 ratification of the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                 May 31 (legislative day, May 30), 2023

 Mr. Padilla submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
             referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
  Expressing the need for the Senate to provide advice and consent to 
 ratification of the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity.

Whereas human actions are contributing to an unprecedented and increasing loss 
        of biodiversity worldwide;
Whereas nearly 1,000,000 species could be threatened with extinction;
Whereas every United Nations member state has ratified the Convention on 
        Biological Diversity, done at Rio de Janeiro June 5, 1992, with the 
        exception of the United States;
Whereas the United States signed the Convention on Biological Diversity in 1993 
        but has not ratified the treaty;
Whereas the United States, under current domestic law, is already legally 
        compliant with the obligations of the Convention;
Whereas Federal agencies often design their plans to align with Convention on 
        Biological Diversity initiatives;
Whereas the absence of the United States from the Convention on Biological 
        Diversity limits the United States to holding the status of an 
        ``observer'' to deliberations and decision making processes of the 
        Convention on Biodiversity;
Whereas, not being party to the Convention on Biological Diversity, the United 
        States does not have a vote within the convention, which diminishes our 
        voice and influence;
Whereas the decisions and rules made by the Convention on Biological Diversity 
        affect both national security and economic interests of the United 
        States in spite of the United States non-party status;
Whereas the United States is one of the world's largest contributors in 
        international conservation funding and biological diversity expertise; 
        and
Whereas we are inextricably interconnected on this planet, and the work of the 
        Convention on Biological Diversity has a direct impact on all Americans: 
        Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That it is in the national interest for the Senate to provide its 
advice and consent for the ratification of the Convention on Biological 
Diversity, which was signed by the United States in New York on June 4, 
1993.
                                 <all>
```