alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Julia K. Simpson, Respondent, *v.*Isaac Simpson et al., Appellants, Impleaded with Another.

*Simpson*v. *Trust Go. of America,*129 App. Div. 200, affirmed.

(Argued January 10, 1910;

decided January 25, 1910.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered January 6, 1909, which affirmed a judgment of Special Term adjudging the will of Simon M. Simpson, deceased,- to be void.

*Henry Wollman*and *Achilles H. Kohn*for appellants.

*S. Livingston Samuels*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Edward T. Bartlett, Haight, Yann, Werner and Hiscocic, JJ.
§ 2524.50 What are the guidelines for assistance with disaster relief? ( a ) *Purpose.* Disaster relief funds are intended to provide emergency assistance not otherwise available to enable national and community service programs to respond quickly and effectively to a Presidentially-declared disaster.
( b ) *Eligibility.* Any AmeriCorps program (including youth corps, the National Civilian Community Corps, VISTA, and other programs authorized under the Domestic Volunteer Services Act) or grant making entity (such as a State or Federal agency) that is supported by the Corporation may apply for disaster relief grants.
( c ) *Application process.* Eligible applicants must comply with the requirements specified in the Corporation's application materials.
( d ) *Waivers.* In appropriate cases, due to the limited nature of disaster activities, the Corporation may waive specific program requirements such as matching requirements and the provision of AmeriCorps educational awards for participants supported with disaster relief funds.
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1632 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide an exclusion from 

gross income of long-term capital gains on property purchased before 

the end of 2009. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 19, 2009 

Mr. CAMPBELL (for himself, Mr. CHAFFETZ, Mr. KLINE of Minnesota, Mr. 

GOHMERT, Mrs. BLACKBURN, Mr. HUNTER, Mr. SHADEGG, Mr. BARTLETT, Mr. PITTS, Mr. FLEMING, Mr. MCCLINTOCK, Mr. BISHOP of Utah, 

Ms. FALLIN, Mr. LUCAS, Mr. LATTA, Mr. WAMP, Mr. PRICE of Georgia, 

Mr. SMITH of Texas, Mr. AKIN, Mrs. LUMMIS, Mr. FLAKE, Mr. POSEY, 

Mr. MANZULLO, Mr. LUETKEMEYER, Mr. CULBERSON, Mr. GINGREY of 

Georgia, Mr. CONAWAY, Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California, Mr. 

LAMBORN, and Mr. BROUN of Georgia) 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 provide 

an exclusion from gross income of long-term capital gains 

on property purchased before the end of 2009. 

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


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
2 

•HR 1632 IH

1 SECTION 1. EXCLUSION OF LONG-TERM CAPITAL GAINS ON 

2 PROPERTY PURCHASED BEFORE THE END OF 

3 2009. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Part III of subchapter B of chap5 ter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended 

6 by inserting after section 139C the following new section: 

7 ‘‘SEC. 139D. LONG-TERM CAPITAL GAINS ON PROPERTY 

8 PURCHASED DURING LATTER PORTION OF 

9 2009. 

10 ‘‘Gross income shall not include gain from the sale 

11 or exchange of a capital asset held for more than 1 year 

12 if such asset was acquired by purchase (as defined in sec13 tion 179(d)(2)) during the period beginning on the date 

14 of the enactment of this section and ending on December 

15 31, 2009.’’. 

16 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections 

17 for part III of subchapter B of chapter 1 of such Code 

18 is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 

19 139C the following new item: 

‘‘Sec. 139D. Long-term capital gains on property purchased during latter portion of 2009.’’. 

20 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

21 this section shall apply to property purchased after the 

22 date of the enactment of this section. 

Æ 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
§ 205.36 State plan requirements. A State plan under title IV-A of the Social Security Act shall, at the option of the State, provide for the establishment and operation, in accordance with an (initial and annually updated) advance automated data processing planning document approved by SSA, of an automated statewide management information system designed effectively and efficiently, to assist management in the administration of an approved AFDC State plan. The submission process to amend the State plan is explained in § 201.3. This system must be designed: ( a ) To automatically control and account for— ( 1 ) All the factors in the total eligibility determination process under the plan for aid, including but not limited to: ( i ) Identifiable correlation factors (such as social security numbers, names, dates of birth, home addresses, and mailing addresses (including postal ZIP codes), of all applicants and recipients of AFDC and the relative with whom any child who is an applicant or recipient is living). ( A ) To assure sufficient compatibility among the systems of different jurisdictions, and
( B ) To permit periodic screening to determine whether an individual is or has been receiving benefits from more than one jurisdiction.
( ii ) Checking records of applicants and recipients of such aid on a periodic basis with other agencies, both intra and inter-state, for eligibility determination, verification and payment as required by other provisions of the Social Security Act.
( 2 ) The costs, quality, and delivery of funds and services furnished to applicants for and recipients of such aid.
( b ) To notify the appropriate State officials of child support, food stamp, social service, and medical assistance programs approved under title XIX whenever a case/recipient for aid and services becomes ineligible or the amount of aid or services is changed.
( c ) To electronically refer and exchange information with programs under titles IV-D and IV-F for purposes of assuring that benefits and services are provided in an integrated manner.
( d ) To provide for security against unauthorized access to, or use of, the data in the system.
[51 FR 13006, Apr. 17, 1986, as amended at 57 FR 47002, Oct. 14, 1992]
**Exhibit 33.3**

**Management’s      Assertion on**

**Compliance      with Regulation AB Criteria**

**ASSERTION      OF COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE SERVICING CRITERIA**

|   | The Bank of New YorkThe                Bank of New York TrustCompany, N.A.                                                                                                                                                                                                                      | The Bank of New YorkThe                Bank of New York TrustCompany, N.A.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            |
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            |
|   | /s/                Robert L.                Griffin                                          Robert                L. GriffinAuthorized                Signer | /s/                Patrick J.                Tadie                                             Patrick                J. TadieAuthorized                Signer |

----
No. 5381.

#### J. C. Colchell v. The State.

Oaa'Inq—Indictment.—It is a rule of criminal pleading that “ if there be exceptions contained in the same clause of an act which creates the offense, the indictment must show negatively that the defendant, or the subject of the indictment, does not come within the exception.” The statute under which this prosecution was had denounces the playing of certain games with dice or dominoes, but excepts such games when played at a private residence. Failing to negative the exception, the indictment in this case is bad.

Appeal from the County Court of Bosque. Tried below before the Hon. R. G. Childress, County Judge.

The opinion discloses the ease. The penalty awarded was a fine of ten dollars.

No brief for the appellant.

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

White, Presiding Judge.

The charge against appellant, as set out in the indictment, is that he “bet intoxicating liquors at a game played with dice; against the peace and dignity of the State.” This indictment was evidently brought under Article 364, Penal Code, as amended by Act approved March 5, 1881. (Gen. Laws, Reg. Sess., 17th Leg., p. 17.)

In the enacting clause of the amendment, and as part of the same, it is expressly “provided” that “no person shall be indicted under this section for playing any of said games with dice or dominoes at a private residence.” (Long v. The State, 22 Texas Ct. App., 194; Rosales v. The State, Id., 673.)

It is a rule of criminal pleading thoroughly established that, “ if there be exceptions contained in the same clause of an Act which creates the offense, the indictment must show negatively that the" defendant, or the subject of the indictment, does not come within the exception.” (5 Texas Ct. App., 263.) As announced in The State v. Clayton, 43 Texas, 410, the rule is that *585“an indictment charging an offense created by a statute which, in its enacting clause, excepts from its operation those who under circumstances specified do the act which would otherwise be penal, must show by negative averments that the defendant is not within any of the exceptions mentioned in the statute.” (See also McFain v. The State, 41 Texas, 385; Moseley v. The State, 18 Texas Ct. App., 311.)

Opinion delivered June 11, 1887.

Because the indictment does not negative the exception contained in the enacting clause of the statute creating the offense, it is fatally defective, and the judgment is reversed and the prosecution is dismissed.

*Reversed and*dismissed„
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### National Transportation Safety Board

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Vicky D'Onofrio, (202) 314-6410.

Dated: January 27, 2006.

Vicky D'Onofrio,

Federal Register Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. 06-938  Filed 1-27-06; 1:52 pm]

BILLING CODE 7533-01-M
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. §1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Amendment #1 on Form 10-K/A of EnteroMedics Inc.(the “Company”) for the period ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Greg S. Lea, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

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

2. The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

 

November 20, 2008
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. William B. Rafferty, Appellant, *v.*The Board of Education of the City of New York et al., Respondents.

*People ex rel. Rafferty*v. *Board of Education, N. Y. Gity,*133 App. Div. 894, affirmed.

(Argued November 9, 1909;

decided November 23,1909.)

Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered June 2o, 1909, which affirmed an order of Special Term dismissing an alternative writ of mandamus directing the defendants to show cause why the relator should not be rated as principal of a public elementary school of twelve or more classes.

*Charles II. Strong*for appellant.

*Francis K.*Pendleton, *Corporation Counsel (Stephen O'Brien, Theodore Oonnoly*and *Charles McIntyre*of counsel), for respondents.

Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Haight, Vann, Werner, Willard Bartlett, Hisoook and Chase, JJ.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7854

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JAMES EDWARD ELLERBE, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (CR-97-100) Submitted: March 25, 1999 Decided: March 31, 1999 Before WILKINS and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished opinion per curiam opinion.James Edward Ellerbe, Appellant Pro Se. John Samuel Bowler, Assistant United States Attorney, Anne Margaret Hayes, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: James Ellerbe filed an untimely notice of appeal. We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. The time periods for filing notices of appeal are governed by Fed. R. App. P. 4. These periods are “mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corrections , 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson , 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). A post-conviction motion for return of property filed under Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(e) is a civil action. See United States v. Garcia , 65 F.3d 17, 20 (4th Cir. 1995). In civil actions in which the United States or an officer or agency thereof is a party, a party is accorded sixty days within which to file in the district court a notice of appeal from judgments or final orders. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1). The only exceptions to the appeal period are when the district court extends the time to appeal under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). The district court entered its order on October 1, 1998; Ellerbe’s notice of appeal was dated December 6, and filed on December 14, 1998, both of which are beyond the sixty-day appeal period. Ellerbe’s failure to note a timely appeal or obtain anextension of the appeal period leaves this court without jurisdiction to consider the merits of Ellerbe’s appeal. We therefore dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma-3 terials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
ORDER OF MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION PANEL

Order Pronounced March 27, 2015 

15-0113 IN RE CHESAPEAKE BARNETT ROYALTY LITIGATION 

A stay was issued in the captioned matter on February 13, 2015. The stay 

covered 73 cases filed by the McDonald law firm and 24 cases filed by other counsel. 

The stay of the 24 cases is hereby lifted. It remains in effect for the other 73.
#### § 164.102 Statutory basis.

The provisions of this part are adopted pursuant to the Secretary's authority to prescribe standards, requirements, and implementation specifications under part C of title XI of the Act, section 264 of Public Law 104-191, and sections 13400-13424 of Public Law 111-5.

[78 FR 5692, Jan. 25, 2013]
Exhibit 10.31  Pursuant to the unanimous vote of the Board of
Directors (Board) of Information Services Group, Inc. on March 7,
2008, in order to permit the granting of equity awards by committees of the
Board, subject to certain limitations, the Board agreed to amend Section 4(a) of
the 2007 Information Services Group, Inc. Equity Incentive Plan by adding
the following proviso to the end of such section:  ; provided,
further, however, that the Board may, to the extent permitted under
applicable law, delegate such power and authority, otherwise delegated to the
Committee, to any committee of the Board, including a committee composed of a
member of the Board, to grant equity-based awards to certain employees of ISG
pursuant to the terms of the Plan, other than any directors or officers of
ISG as defined under Section 16 of the Act or any covered employees as
defined under Section 162(m) of the Code.
#### § 400.7 Submittal of the State plan and plan amendments for Governor's review.

A plan or plan amendment under title IV of the Act must be submitted to the State Governor or his or her designee, for review, comment, and signature before the plan is submitted to ORR.

[51 FR 3913, Jan. 30, 1986]
EXHIBIT 35.1
                    SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT (ITEM 1123)

                        RESIDENTIAL FUNDING COMPANY, LLC

                RASC SERIES 2006-KS7 TRUST (THE "ISSUING ENTITY")

The undersigned,  a duly authorized officer of Residential Funding Company, LLC,
as servicer (the  "Servicer")  pursuant to the Pooling and Servicing  Agreement,
dated as of August  1, 2006 (as  amended  from time to time,  the  "Agreement"),
among  Residential  Asset  Securities  Corporation,  as  depositor,  Residential
Funding  Company,  LLC (formerly  Residential  Funding  Corporation),  as master
servicer,  and U.S. Bank  National  Association,  as trustee,  and Clayton Fixed
Income Services, Inc., as credit risk manager, does hereby certify that:

1. A review of the  Servicer's  activities  during  the  period  covered  by the
Issuing Entity's report on Form 10-K and of the Servicer's performance under the
Agreement has been made under my supervision.

2. To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled
all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material  respects  throughout
such  period.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate this 26th
day of March 2007.

By:   /s/ Anthony N. Renzi
      Name:  Anthony N. Renzi
      Title: Managing Director
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 03-1016 

________________________________________________________________________ 

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT 

Article 98 

 Agreement between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and COTE D’IVOIRE 

Signed at Abidjan June 30, 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.” 
COTE D’IVOIRE 

International Criminal Court: Article 98 

Agreement signed at Abidjan June 30, 2003; 

 Entered into force October 16, 2003.
§ 73.735-201 Employees and supervisors. ( a ) Employees and special Government employees shall be responsible for observing all generally accepted rules of conduct and the specific provisions of law and the regulations of this part that apply to them. They are required to become familiar with these regulations and to exercise informed judgments to avoid misconduct or conflicts of interest. They shall secure approvals when required and file financial disclosure reports or statements in accordance with the provisions of this part. Failure to observe any of these regulations may be cause for disciplinary action. Some of the provisions are required by law and carry criminal penalties which are in addition to any disciplinary action which could be taken. When employees have doubts about any provision, they should consult their supervisor, personnel office, or the Department Ethics Counselor or a deputy counselor.
( b ) Supervisors, because of their day-to-day relationships with employees, are responsible to a large degree for making sure high standards of conduct are maintained. They must become familiar with the Department's standards of conduct regulations and apply the standards to the work they do and supervise. Supervisors shall take suitable action, including disciplinary action in accordance with subpart L of these regulations, when violations occur.
#### § 286.95 What, if any, are the special rules concerning counting work for two-parent families?

Parents in a two-parent family may share the number of hours required to be considered as engaged in work.
§ 1226.6 General. ( a ) All volunteers, full and part time, are subject to the prohibitions on expenditure of federal funds for partisan and nonpartisan electoral activities, voter registration activities and transportation of voters to the polls, and efforts to influence the passage or defeat of legislation, as contained in section 403 of the Act.
( b ) Full time volunteers, and certain part time volunteers as specified herein, are also subject to the restrictions in subchapter III, chapter 73 of title 5, United States Code, commonly referred to as the Hatch Act, as provided in section 415(b) of the Act.