alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

)

LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD, et al., )

)

Plaintiffs, )

)

v. ) Case No. 15-cv-1397 (TSC)

)

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, )

)

Defendant. )

)

ORDER

Before the court are Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 37) and 

Defendant’s cross-motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 42). Upon consideration of the 

motions, the Administrative Record (ECF No. 58), and the arguments at the hearing held on 

January 5, 2017, Plaintiffs’ motion is GRANTED, and Defendant’s cross-motion is DENIED.

Pursuant to 52 U.S.C. § 30109(a)(8)(C), the FEC is ORDERED to reconsider the 

evidence and allegations and issue a new decision consistent with this Opinion “within 30 days, 

failing which the complainant[s] may bring, in the name of such complainant[s], a civil action to 

remedy the violation involved in the original complaint.”

The FEC is FURTHER ORDERED to reconsider the Petition for Rulemaking and issue a 

new decision consistent with this Opinion within sixty days.

Date: February 1, 2017

Tanya S. Chutkan 

TANYA S. CHUTKAN

United States District Judge 

Case 1:15-cv-01397-TSC Document 61 Filed 02/01/17 Page 1 of 1
Editorial Note on Subpart 113.25 of Part 113
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to subpart 113.25 of part 113 appear by CGD-94-108, 61 FR 28288, June 4, 1996.

§ 113.25-15 Distribution panels. Each distribution panel must: ( a ) Be watertight;
( b ) Need a tool to be opened.
Exhibit 32.2

# CERTIFICATION PURSUANT
TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the amendment to the Annual
Report of World Wide Motion Pictures Corporation (the Corporation) on Form 10-KSB
for the period ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the Report), I, Paul D. Hancock, Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors and Finance Committee Chairman of the Corporation, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
§ 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge, 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 Corporation.

|                                                                                                                                   
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Paul D. Hancock
Paul D. Hancock
Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chairman of the Finance Committee
December 22, 2006
Case 1:11-cv-00562-RLW -MG -RBW Document 5 Filed 03/28/11 Page 1 of 1
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 1854 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 9, 2009 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources 

JANUARY 20, 2010 

Committee discharged; referred to the Committee on Environment and Public 

Works 

AN ACT 

To amend the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 

to modify an environmental infrastructure project for 

Big Bear Lake, California. 

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

3 SECTION 1. BIG BEAR LAKE, CALIFORNIA. 

4 Section 219(f)(84) of the Water Resources Develop5 ment Act of 1992 (121 Stat. 1259) is amended to read 

6 as follows: 


dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 1854 RCS 

1 ‘‘(84) BIG BEAR LAKE, CALIFORNIA.— 

2 $9,000,000 for water supply infrastructure improve3 ments for Big Bear Lake, California.’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives December 8, 

2009. 

Attest: LORRAINE C. MILLER, 

Clerk. 


dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack

,

Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh

Elizabeth M. Welch

,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

January 4, 2021 

# Order

Clerk January 4, 2021

160436

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

SC: 160 436

v COA: 34 6775

Oakland CC: 2017

- 26535 5

- FJ

MUHAMMAD ALTANTAWI

,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_______ ______________________________ ____ /

On order of the Chief Justice, the case is ADJOURNED from the January 2021 oral

argument session of the Court

.
§ 108.597 Line-throwing appliance. ( a ) *General.* Each unit in international service must have a line-throwing appliance that is approved under approval series 160.040. Each unit not in international service must carry a line-throwing appliance approved under either approval series 160.040 or 160.031.
( b ) *Stowage.* The line-throwing appliance and its equipment must be readily accessible for use.
( c ) *Additional equipment.* Each unit must carry the following equipment for the line-throwing appliance: ( 1 ) The equipment on the list provided by the manufacturer with the approved appliance; and
( 2 ) An auxiliary line that— ( i ) Has a breaking strength of at least 40 kiloNewtons (9,000 pounds-force);
( ii ) Is, if synthetic, a dark color or certified by the manufacturer to be resistant to deterioration from ultraviolet light; and
( iii ) Is— ( A ) At least 450 meters (1,500 feet) long, if the line-throwing appliance is approved under approval series 160.040; or
( B ) At least 150 meters (500 feet) long, if the line-throwing appliance is approved under approval series 160.031.
#### § 75.214 Metric system of measurement.

The Metric Conversion Act, as amended by the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act, 15 U.S.C. 205, declares that the metric system is the preferred measurement system for United States trade and commerce. HHS awarding agencies will follow the provisions of Executive Order 12770.

[79 FR 75889, Dec. 19, 2014. Redesignated at 81 FR 3015, Jan. 20, 2016]
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

____________________________________

)

CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, ) Civil Action No. 1:11-cv-00766 (ABJ)

)

Defendant, ) NOTICE OF APPEAL

)

HISPANIC LEADERSHIP FUND, )

)

Intervenor Defendant, )

)

CENTER FOR INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM, )

)

Intervenor Defendant. )

____________________________________)

NOTICE OF APPEAL BY INTERVENOR DEFENDANT

HISPANIC LEADERSHIP FUND

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Intervenor Defendant, Hispanic Leadership Fund

(“HLF”), appeals to United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit from the

judgment of the district court, dated November 25, 2014, (Dkt. Nos. 99 (Order) and 100 

(Memorandum Opinion)) granting Plaintiff Van Hollen’s motion for summary judgment, 

denying Defendant Federal Election Commission’s cross motion for summary judgment, and 

denying Intervenor Defendant Center for Individual Freedom’s cross-motion for summary 

Case 1:11-cv-00766-ABJ Document 103 Filed 01/12/15 Page 1 of 3
2

judgment, and vacating 11 C.F.R. § 104.20(c)(9), as well as from all orders and rulings merged 

therein.

Respectfully submitted,

_____/s/_Jason Torchinsky______

Jason Torchinsky (D.C. Bar No. 976033)

jtorchinsky@hvjlaw.com

Michael Bayes

jmbayes@hvjlaw.com

Christopher Winkelman

cwinkelman@hvjlaw.com

HOLTZMAN VOGEL JOSEFIAK PLLC

45 North Hill Drive

Suite 100

Warrenton, VA 20186

Tel: (540) 341-8808

Fax: (540) 341-8809

Counsel for Hispanic Leadership Fund

 

Dated: January 12, 2015

Case 1:11-cv-00766-ABJ Document 103 Filed 01/12/15 Page 2 of 3
3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on January 12, 2015, I electronically filed the foregoing Notice of 

Appeal by Intervenor Defendant Hispanic Leadership Fund, with the Clerk of the Court for the 

United States District Court for the District of Columbia Circuit using the CM/ECF system, 

thereby serving all persons required to be served. 

_____/s/_Jason Torchinsky______

Jason Torchinsky (D.C. Bar No. 976033)

jtorchinsky@hvjlaw.com

Case 1:11-cv-00766-ABJ Document 103 Filed 01/12/15 Page 3 of 3
§ 800.107 Levels of coverage. ( a ) *Silver and gold levels of coverage required.* An MSP issuer must offer at least one MSP option at the silver level of coverage and at least one MSP option at the gold level of coverage on each Exchange in which the issuer is certified to offer an MSP option pursuant to a contract with OPM.
( b ) *Bronze or platinum metal levels of coverage permitted.* Pursuant to a contract with OPM, an MSP issuer may offer one or more MSP options at the bronze level of coverage or the platinum level of coverage, or both, on any Exchange or SHOP in any State.
( c ) *Child-only plans.* For each level of coverage, the MSP issuer must offer a child-only MSP option at the same level of coverage as any health insurance coverage offered to individuals who, as of the beginning of the plan year, have not attained the age of 21.
( d ) *Plan variations for the reduction or elimination of cost-sharing.* An MSP issuer must comply with section 1402 of the Affordable Care Act, as well as any applicable standards set by OPM or HHS.
( e ) *OPM approval.* An MSP issuer must submit the levels of coverage plans and plan variations to OPM for review and approval by OPM.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-6400
JERRY BRADLEY, Petitioner - Appellant, versus GEORGE HINKLE, Respondent - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at R oanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CA-96-757-R) Submitted: August 14, 1997 Decided: August 21, 1997 Before NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge, and BUTZNER and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.Jerry Bradley, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Drummond Bagwell, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge andfind no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Bradley v. Hinkle , No. CA-96-757-R (W.D. Va. Feb. 3, 1997).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
<PAGE>

                                                                     EXHIBIT 21

                              GENSYM CORPORATION

                        Subsidiaries of the Registrant

              Name                      Jurisdiction of
              ----                      Incorporation
                                        -------------
              Gensym International
                Corporation             Delaware
              Gensym Securities
                Corporation             Massachusetts
              Gensym FSC                U.S. Virgin Islands
              Gensym Holding Company    Delaware
              Gensym B.V.               The Netherlands
              Gensym Canada Ltd.        Canada
              Gensym GmbH               Germany
              Gensym S.A.               France
              Gensym Ltd.               United Kingdom
              Gensym Srl.               Italy
              Gensym MENA               Tunisia
              Gensym AB                 Sweden
              Gensym Japan Corporation  Japan
              Gensym Asia Pacific Pte,
                Ltd.                    Singapore
Attachment 008

This page has been omitted as Confidential Business Information
Memorandum

November 19 , 2015

To: Docket EPA

- R09

- OAR

- 2015

- 0204

From: Wienke Tax, EPA Region 9, Air Planning Office

Subject: Conference Call s with Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach on EPA’s

Proposed Approval of South Coast 2006 PM 2.5 Moderate Area Attainment Plan and Reclassification (80 FR 63640, October 20, 2015 )

Attendees:

EPA, OAR: Deborah Jordan, Senior Policy Advisor, Office of the Acting Assistant

Administrator

EPA Region 9: Elizabeth Adams, Acting Director, Air Division

Nina Spie gelman, Office of Regional Counsel Jeanhee Hong, Office of Regional Counsel Wienke Tax, Air Planning Office Port of Los Angeles: David Libatique ; Eve O’Toole ; Rich Gold ; Gene Seroka Port of Long Beach: Michael Christensen City of Los Angeles: Joy Cro se

EPA held a conference call on November 2, 2015 with David Libatique and Joy Crose, at their request, to discuss their questions concerning EPA’s October 20, 2015 proposed action on the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) moderate area attainment plan for the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS and proposed reclassification to Serious. Ms. Crose and Mr. Libatique asked EPA to explain the reason for EPA’s proposal t o approve the SCAQMD’s

commitment concerning backstop measures for ports and port

- related facilities. EPA explained the Agency’s role in the state implementation plan process under the Clean Air

Act and noted that the Agency would consider public comments and any necessary clarifications before taking final action

. Ms. Crose also expressed concern about the lack of opportunity for the p orts to comment on the District’s commitment

. EPA encouraged the ports to submit comments during EPA’s pending public comm ent period on this proposed

action.

EPA held a second meeting/call on November 6, 2015 with representatives of the P ort of Los Angeles (P OLA ) and Port of Long Beach (POLB) , at their request, to discuss the sam e proposed action. Representatives of t he ports expressed their desire to continue the ongoing collaborative approach to reducing emissions at POLA and POLB and indicated that the adoption of a backstop rule could cause the collaboration approach to fail. EPA again encouraged the ports to submit c omments during EPA’s pending public comment period on this proposed action.

Attachment: Attendee List, November 6, 2015 EPA

- Ports of LA/LB meeting
**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 Natural Nutrition, Inc., (the “Company”)
      on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2008 as filed with
      the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the
      undersigned hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
      pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his
      knowledge:




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 operation of the
      Company.




Date:November
                13, 2008
            By:
            /s/*Timothy
                J. Connolly*Name:
            Timothy
                J. ConnollyTitle:
            Chief
                Executive Officer and Interim Chief Financial
                Officer




A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
      authentications, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
      in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
      by Section 906, 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.
§ 1.03-10 Definition of terms used in this subpart. ( a ) The term *recognized classification society* means the American Bureau of Shipping or other classification society recognized by the Commandant.
( b ) The term *new vessel* means: ( 1 ) For vessels which require a Certificate of Inspection, a new vessel is a vessel which has not received an initial Certificate of Inspection.
( 2 ) For vessels which do not require a Certificate of Inspection, a new vessel is a vessel which has not received a Load Line assignment.
( c ) The term *existing vessel* means a vessel which is not a new vessel.
111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2004 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 4282 Beach Street in Akron, Michigan, as 

the ‘‘Akron Veterans Memorial Post Office’’. 

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

•HR 2004 EH

1 SECTION 1. AKRON VETERANS MEMORIAL POST OFFICE. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

3 Postal Service located at 4282 Beach Street in Akron, 

4 Michigan, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Akron 

5 Veterans Memorial Post Office’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

9 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Akron Veterans Me10 morial Post Office’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 8, 

2009. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2004 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postrial Post Office’’. Akron, Michigan, as the ‘‘Akron Veterans Memo- al Service located at 4282 Beach Street in
BEFORE THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

In the Matter of ) 

) All-12 

Vermont Democratic Party ) Agenda Document No. 14-14 

CERTinCATION 

I, Shawn Woodhead Werth, recording secretary for the Federal Election Commission 

open meeting on March 06,2014, do hereby certify that the Commission decided by a vote of 6-

0 to approve Agenda Document No. 14-14, the Proposed Fmal Audit Report on the Vermont 

Democratic Party. 

Commissioners Goodman, Hunter, Petersen, Ravel, Walther, and Weintraub voted 

affinnatively for the decision. 

Attest: 

Date . Shawn Woodhead Werth 

Secretary and Clerk of the Commission
2:14-cr-20384-GCS-RSW Doc # 12 Filed 08/19/14 Pg 1 of 1 Pg ID 33
i i i i i i



### MEM ORA ND UM OP INION
No. 04-09-00364- CV J ose ESCOB EDO , Appellant
v . J osie Caballer o M ED ILLI N , Alfonso Caballer o, and Da vid Caballero, Appellee s Fr om the 408th J udicial District Court, Be x ar County , Texas

Trial Court No. 2006-CI -04003 Honora ble Andy Mireles, Judge Pre siding PER C URI AM Sitt ing: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

Kar en Ang elini, J ustice Marialy n Ba rnar d, J ustice Deliver ed and F iled: October 28, 2009 MOTI ON TO D I SMI SS GR ANTED A ND APPEALDI SMI SSED Appellant filed a mot ion to dism iss this appea l. We gr ant the motion. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 42 .1 (a )( 1) . N o c os ts s ha ll b e a sse sse d a g a ins t a pp e lla nt b e c a us e he is i nd ig e nt.

PER C URI AM
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

The undersigned, Michael
Gilligan, Principal Financial Officer of DB Commodity Services LLC, the Managing Owner of PowerShares DB US Dollar Index Bearish Fund (the Fund), a series of PowerShares DB US Dollar Index Trust, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Funds Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Annual 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 Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Fund.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                         |  |                            
|------------------------ |  | ---------------------------
|Dated: February 24, 2010 |  | /s/ Michael Gilligan       
|                         |  | Michael Gilligan           
|                         |  | Principal Financial Officer
#### § 83.13 State law and licensure requirements.

The obligation of an entity to comply with this part is not obviated or alleviated by any State or local law which would render an applicant for or student enrolled in a training program ineligible on the basis of sex for any license or certificate requisite to the practice of the health profession for which such applicant seeks, or student pursues, training.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 20-0379

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

CLAYTON LEE WELLKNOWN,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including September 7, 2021, within which to prepare, 

file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Jim Rice

Justice, Montana Supreme Court

July 29 2021

07/29/2021

Case Number: DA 20-0379