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

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1729 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1729

To amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to provide for the 
  treatment of institutions of higher education as voter registration 
                               agencies.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 26, 2009

    Ms. Schakowsky (for herself and Mr. LaTourette) introduced the 
     following bill; which was referred to the Committee on House 
   Administration, and in addition to the Committee on Education and 
 Labor, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in 
   each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
                jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to provide for the 
  treatment of institutions of higher education as voter registration 
                               agencies.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Student Voter Opportunity To 
Encourage Registration Act of 2009'' or the ``Student VOTER Act of 
2009''.

SEC. 2. TREATMENT OF UNIVERSITIES AS VOTER REGISTRATION AGENCIES.

    (a) In General.--Section 7(a) of the National Voter Registration 
Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 1973gg-5(a)) is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (2)--
                    (A) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph 
                (A);
                    (B) by striking the period at the end of 
                subparagraph (B) and inserting ``; and''; and
                    (C) by adding at the end the following new 
                subparagraph:
                    ``(C) each institution of higher education (as 
                defined in section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 
                1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001)) in the State that receives 
                Federal funds.''; and
            (2) in paragraph (6)(A), by inserting ``or, in the case of 
        an institution of higher education, with each registration of a 
        student for enrollment in a course of study'' after 
        ``assistance,''.
    (b) Amendment to Higher Education Act of 1965.--Section 487(a) of 
the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1094(a)) is amended by 
striking paragraph (23).
                                 <all>
```
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBILITY AND 

ETHICS IN WASHINGTON, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION,

Defendant,

and

CROSSROADS GRASSROOTS POLICY 

STRATEGIES,

Defendant–Intervenor.

Civil Action No. 16-259 (BAH)

Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell

ORDER

Upon consideration of the defendant Federal Election Commission’s (“FEC’s”) Partial 

Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 12, the intervenor Crossroads Grassroots Policy Strategies’ Notice 

of Joinder and Supplementation of Federal Election Commission’s Partial Motion to Dismiss and 

Memorandum in Support Thereof by Crossroads GPS (“Crossroads GPS’s Supplemental Motion 

to Dismiss”), ECF No. 17, the related legal memoranda in support and in opposition, and the 

entire record herein, for the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, it is 

hereby

ORDERED that the FEC’s Partial Motion to Dismiss is DENIED; and it is further

ORDERED that Crossroads GPS’s Supplemental Motion to Dismiss is DENIED with 

respect to Count II and GRANTED with respect to Counts I and III; accordingly, the plaintiffs’ 

Counts I and III are dismissed to the extent that those Counts seek relief under the 

Case 1:16-cv-00259-BAH Document 21 Filed 03/22/17 Page 1 of 2
2

Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) but may proceed under the Federal Election Campaign 

Act (“FECA”); and it is further

ORDERED that the parties shall submit jointly, by April 14, 2017, a schedule to govern 

further proceedings in this matter.

SO ORDERED.

Date: March 22, 2017

__________________________

BERYL A. HOWELL

Chief Judge

Case 1:16-cv-00259-BAH Document 21 Filed 03/22/17 Page 2 of 2
-81 -80 -79 -78 -77 -76 -75

 37

 38

 39

 40

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★

▲ ▲

▲

▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 500

18 12 06 00

05/26

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 26 May 07

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.77 N 77.11 W Meters AGL
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1541 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.1541

                      One Hundred Eleventh Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
             the sixth day of January, two thousand and nine

                                 An Act

 
 To provide for an additional temporary extension of programs under the 
 Small Business Act and the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, and 
                           for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. EXTENSION.
    (a) In General.--Section 1 of the Act entitled ``An Act to extend 
temporarily certain authorities of the Small Business Administration'', 
approved October 10, 2006 (Public Law 109-316; 120 Stat. 1742), as most 
recently amended by section 1 of Public Law 110-235 (122 Stat. 1552), 
is amended by striking ``March 20, 2009'' in each place it appears and 
inserting ``July 31, 2009''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
take effect on March 19, 2009.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
No. 08-5422 

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 


FOR THE DISTRlCT OF COLUM.BIA CIRCUIT 


EM ILY 'S LIST, 

Plailll/ff-Appellall' • 

v. 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, 

Defendall{-Appellee. 

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. 


Case No. I :05-cv-00049 (CKK) 


REPRESENTATION OF AMICI CURIAE CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER AND 


DEMOCRACY 21 THAT ALL PARTIES CONSENT TO THEIR 


AMICI PARTICIPATION IN THIS APPEAL 


Amici Campaign Legal Center and Democracy 21, through their undersigned 

counsel, pursuant to Circuit Rule 29(b) of this Court, submit this written representation 

that all parties to this appeal have consented to their participation as amici curiae. 

Consent from Plaintiff-Appellant EMILY's UST was obtained from Robert F. Bauer, 

Esq. Consent from Defendant-Appellee Federal Election Commission was obtained from 

Vivian Clair, Esq. 
Respectfully submined, 

. GERALD HEBERT 

~ (D.C. Bar No. 447676) 


PAULS. RYAN 


(D.C Bar No. 5025 14) 


THE CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER 


1640 Rhode Island Ave. NW, Suite 650 


Washington, DC 20036 


Tel : (202) 736-2200 


Fax : (202) 736-2222 


Donald J. Simon 

(D.C Bar No. 256388) 


SONOSKY, CHAMBERS, SACHSE, 


ENDRES ON & PERRY, LLP 


1425 K Street, N.W. 


Suite 600 


Washington, D.C 20005 


(202) 682-0240 


Fred Wenheimer 

(D.C Bar No. 1542 11) 


DEMOCRACY 2 1 


18751 Street, N.W . 


Suite 500 


Washington, D.C. 20005 


(202) 429-2008 


Counsel for Amici Curiae 

Dated: November 14,2008
N. Y. SUPERIOR COURT.

#### The Charlotte, Columbia *&*Augusta R.R. Co., agt. Morris K. Jesup, *et al.*

*Special Term,*

*February,*1871.

It is only where an article is contracted for to be applied to a particular purpose, and in such manner that the buyer necessarily trusts to the judgment or skill of the manufacturer or dealer, and not to his own, that there is an *implied ‘warranty*that it shall be reasonably fit for the purpose to which it is to be applied.

Demurrer to complaint.

Foster & Thompson, *and*T. C. T. Buckley, *for demurrer.*

Ward, Jones & Whitehead, *in*opposition.

Freedman, J.

Where a known, defined and described article is actually supplied according to contract, there is not, as a general rule, an implied warranty that it shall answer the particular purpose intended by the buyer, although that may have been communicated to the seller *(Chanter*agt. Hopkins, 4 *M. & W.,*393 ; *Ollivant*agt. *Bayley,*5 *Q. B.,*288.)

It is only where an article is contracted for to be applied to a particular purpose, and in such manner that the buyer necessarily trusts m the judgment or skill of the manufacturer or dealer, and not to his own, that there is an implied term or warranty that it shall be reasonably fit for the' purpose to which it is to be applied. *(Brown*agt. *Edgington, 2 M. &*G., 279 ; *Jones*agt. *Bright,*5 *Bing.,*533; *Story on Sales,*§ 371).

The complaint does not set forth any such contract, and *448under the contract, which is pleaded, the acceptance ot the goods and their retention, after a reasonable time and opportunity for examination had elapsed, must be held an admission of due performance by the seller, and a waiver on the part of the buyers of all defects in the quality of the goods *(Reed*agt. *Randall,*29 *N. Y.,*362 ; *Weaver*agt. *Wisner,*51 *Barb.,*641; *Leavanworth*agt. *Parker,*52 *Barb.,*135; *Sprague*agt. *Blake,*20 *Wend.,*64.)

Defendants are entitled to judgment upon the demurrer, but plaintiffs may have leave to amend upon payment of costs.
---

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

I, K. Ian Matheson, the Chief Executive Officer of Royal Mines
And Minerals Corp. (the Company), hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that, to the best of my knowledge:

| | (i)  | the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company, for the
      fiscal year ended April 30, 2011, and to which this certification is
      attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the Report) fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
      1934, as amended; and
| | ---- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |      |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   
| | (ii) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
      in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.                                                                                                                                                  

| | By:    | /s/ K. Ian Matheson                  
| | ------ | -------------------------------------
| |        |                                      
| | Name:  | K. IAN MATHESON                      
| |        |                                      
| | Title: | Chief Executive Officer and President
| |        |                                      
| | Date:  | July 29, 2011                        
| |        |                                      

A signed original of this written statement required by
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 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.

This certification accompanies the Form 10-K to which it
relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is
not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the
Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made
before or after the date of the Form 10-K), irrespective of any general
incorporation language contained in such filing.

---
#### Robert V. V. Sewell, Appellant, *v.*Adelia S. Underhill, Respondent.

(Submitted February 7, 1910;

decided February 15, 1910.)

Motion for re-argument denied, with ten dollars costs. (See 197 N. Y. 168.)
§ 4.2 Other process directed to the Department or Secretary. Subpoenas and other process (other than summonses and complaints) that are required to be served on the Department of Health and Human Services or the Secretary of Health and Human Services in his official capacity should be served as follows: ( a ) If authorized by law to be served by mail, any mailed process should be sent to the General Counsel, Department of Health and Human Services, 200 Independence, S.W., Washington, DC 20201.
( b ) If served by an individual, the process should be delivered to the staff in the Office of Legal Resources, Office of the General Counsel, Room 700E, 200 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20201, or in the absence of that staff, to any staff member of or individual assigned to the Immediate Office of the General Counsel, up to and including any Deputy General Counsel.
[48 FR 24079, May 31, 1983,as amended at 73 FR 48151, Aug. 18, 2008]
§ 75.401 Application. ( a ) *General.* These principles must be used in determining the allowable costs of work performed by the non-Federal entity under Federal awards. These principles also must be used by the non-Federal entity as a guide in the pricing of fixed-price contracts and subcontracts where costs are used in determining the appropriate price. The principles do not apply to: ( 1 ) Arrangements under which Federal financing is in the form of loans, scholarships, fellowships, traineeships, or other fixed amounts based on such items as education allowance or published tuition rates and fees.
( 2 ) For IHEs, capitation awards, which are awards based on case counts or number of beneficiaries according to the terms and conditions of the Federal award.
( 3 ) Fixed amount awards. See also §§ 75.2 *Fixed amount awards* and 75.201.
( 4 ) Federal awards to hospitals (see appendix IX to part 75).
( 5 ) Other awards under which the non-Federal entity is not required to account to the Federal Government for actual costs incurred.
( b ) *Federal Contract.* Where a Federal contract awarded to a non-Federal entity is subject to the Cost Accounting Standards (CAS), it incorporates the applicable CAS clauses, Standards, and CAS administration requirements per the 48 CFR Chapter 99 and 48 CFR part 30 (FAR part 30). CAS applies directly to the CAS-covered contract and the Cost Accounting Standards at 48 CFR parts 9904 or 9905 takes precedence over the cost principles in this subpart E with respect to the allocation of costs. When a contract with a non-Federal entity is subject to full CAS coverage, the allowability of certain costs under the cost principles will be affected by the allocation provisions of the Cost Accounting Standards (*e.g.,* CAS 414-48 CFR 9904.414, and CAS 417-48 CFR 9904.417), apply rather the allowability provisions of § 75.449. In complying with those requirements, the non-Federal entity's application of cost accounting practices for estimating, accumulating, and reporting costs for other Federal awards and other cost objectives under the CAS-covered contract still must be consistent with its cost accounting practices for the CAS-covered contracts. In all cases, only one set of accounting records needs to be maintained for the allocation of costs by the non-Federal entity.
( c ) *Exemptions.* Some nonprofit organizations, because of their size and nature of operations, can be considered to be similar to for-profit entities for purpose of applicability of cost principles. Such nonprofit organizations must operate under Federal cost principles applicable to for-profit entities located at 48 CFR 31.2. A listing of these organizations is contained in appendix VIII to part 75. Other organizations, as approved by the cognizant agency for indirect costs, may be added from time to time.
Exhibit 32.01







CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350







In connection with the Annual Report of Double-Take Software, Inc. (the “registrant”) on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “report”), we, Dean Goodermote and S. Craig Huke, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, respectively, of the registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to our knowledge:







(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 results of operations of the registrant.





/s/Dean Goodermote


/s/ S. Craig HukeName: Dean Goodermote


Name: S. Craig HukeTitle: Chief Executive Officer


Title: Chief Financial Officer
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 03-702.1 

________________________________________________________________________ 

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT 

Article 98 

 Agreement between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and ZAMBIA 

Signed at Lusaka July 1, 2003 

 

 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
ZAMBIA 

International Criminal Court: Article 98 

Agreement signed at Lusaka July 1, 2003; 

 Entered into force July 2, 2003.
§ 61.3 Implementation of this part. ( a ) *National Park Service policy of management by exception.* The National Park Service (NPS) will administer the regulations in this part in such a way (and where feasible) as to: ( 1 ) Limit the use of direct Federal management review procedures to high risk situations, to new programs, or to activities that are appropriate for the Federal Government to oversee;
( 2 ) Presume that State, tribal, and local government historic preservation officials manage their programs in an accountable way unless situations indicate the contrary; and
( 3 ) Rely to the maximum extent feasible on State, tribal, and local government systems of financial and program management that meet Federal standards. At the discretion of the Secretary, each State, tribal, and local government may substitute its own fiscal audit and management systems for the Secretary's comparable fiscal audit and management requirements, so long as the State, tribal, or local government system establishes and maintains accounting standards substantially similar to Federal standards and provides for independent peer review.
( b ) *The Secretary's Standards.* NPS will use the Secretary's Standards as technical performance standards for matters covered by this part. NPS may also use as technical performance standards (for matters covered by this part) additional guidance that NPS identifies and provides from time to time after appropriate consultation and notice.
( c ) Each State historic preservation program staff member, State Historic Preservation Review Board (Review Board) member, and certified local government (CLG) historic preservation review commission (Commission) member whom the Secretary has approved as meeting “the Secretary's (Historic Preservation) Professional Qualifications Standards” will retain that status, regardless of subsequent revisions to those Standards, until such time as that individual no longer works in that program, or serves on that Review Board, or serves on that Commission with which that individual was affiliated as of the date of that individual's approval.
( d ) You may obtain publications and other information mentioned in this part by contacting: Heritage Preservation Services, National Center for Cultural Resource Stewardship and Partnership Programs, National Park Service, 1849 C Street NW (NC Suite 200), Washington, D.C. 20240 or via the National Park Service Home Page for cultural programs at *http://www.cr.nps.gov .*
#### § 2556.415 May AmeriCorps remove a VISTA from a project without the sponsor's request for removal?

Of its own accord, AmeriCorps may remove a VISTA from a project assignment without the sponsor's request for removal.
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 03-717 

________________________________________________________________________ 

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT 

Article 98 

 Agreement between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and SEYCHELLES 

Signed at Victoria June 4, 2003 

 

 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
SEYCHELLES 

International Criminal Court: Article 98 

 Agreement signed at Victoria June 4, 2003; 

 Entered into force July 17, 2003.
#### § 4.4 Acknowledgement of mailed process.

The Department will not provide a receipt or other acknowledgement of process received, except for a return receipt associated with certified mail and, where required, the acknowledgement specified by Rule 4(c)(2)(C) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
#### Frank L. Young et al., as Executors of Mary D. Jones, Deceased, et al., Respondents, *v.*William M. Dubois, Appellant, and Fannie M. Fox et al., Respondents.

*Young*v. *Dubois,*130 App. Div. 902, affirmed.

(Argued December 16, 1909;

decided January 4, 1910.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered March 8, 1909, which affirmed a judgment of Special Term construing the will of Mary D. Jones, deceased.

*Charles Haines*for appellant.

*Carl A. Hansmann*and *R. E. Dwight*for respondents.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Edward T. Bartlett, Yann, Willard Bartlett, Hisoook and Chase, JJ.