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

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2541 

To provide funding for multi-jurisdictional anti-gang task forces. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 21, 2009 

Mr. DENT (for himself, Mr. BILBRAY, and Mr. GERLACH) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To provide funding for multi-jurisdictional anti-gang task 

forces. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Anti-Gang Task Force 

5 Act of 2009’’. 

6 SEC. 2. ASSISTANCE FOR MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL ANTI7 GANG TASK FORCES. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Attorney General, in con9 sultation with appropriate State and local officials, shall— 

10 (1) establish anti-gang task forces, consisting of 

11 Federal, State, and local law enforcement authoriVerDate Nov 24 2008 16:32 May 24, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H2541.IH H2541

jlentini on PROD1PC65 with BILLS
2 

•HR 2541 IH

1 ties, for the coordinated investigation, disruption, 

2 apprehension, and prosecution of criminal gangs and 

3 offenders; 

4 (2) direct the reassignment or detailing from 

5 any Federal department or agency (subject to the 

6 approval of the head of that department or agency, 

7 in the case of a department or agency other than the 

8 Department of Justice) of personnel to each task 

9 force; 

10 (3) provide all necessary funding for the oper11 ation of the task force; and 

12 (4) provide all necessary funding for national 

13 and regional meetings of task forces, and all other 

14 related organizations, as needed, to ensure effective 

15 operation of such teams through the sharing of intel16 ligence, best practices and for any other related pur17 pose. 

18 (b) MEMBERSHIP.—The task forces shall consist of 

19 agents and officers, where feasible, from— 

20 (1) the Federal Bureau of Investigation; 

21 (2) the Drug Enforcement Administration; 

22 (3) the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, 

23 and Explosives; 

24 (4) the United States Marshals Service; 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with BILLS
3 

•HR 2541 IH

1 (5) the Directorate of Border and Transpor2 tation Security of the Department of Homeland Se3 curity; 

4 (6) the Department of Housing and Urban De5 velopment; 

6 (7) State and local law enforcement; and 

7 (8) Federal, State, and local prosecutors. 

8 (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There 

9 are authorized to be appropriated $20,000,000 for each 

10 of the fiscal years 2009 through 2012 to carry out this 

11 section. 

Æ 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with BILLS
§ 169.666 Generators and motors. ( a ) Each vessel of more than 65 feet in length having only electrically driven fire and bilge pumps must have two generators. One of these generators must be driven by a means independent of the auxiliary propulsion plant. A generator that is not independent of the auxiliary propulsion plant must meet the requirements of § 111.10-4(c) of this chapter.
( b ) Each generator and motor must be in a location that is accessible, adequately ventilated, and as dry as practicable.
( c ) Each generator and motor must be mounted as high as practicable above the bilges to avoid damage by splash and to avoid contact with low lying vapors.
( d ) Each generator must be protected from overcurrent by a circuit breaker, fuse or an overcurrent relay.
<PAGE>

                                                        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 Technology Funding Venture Partners IV, An
Aggressive Growth Fund, L.P. (the Partnership) Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ending December 31, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I Charles, R. Kokesh,
President, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and
Chairman of Technology Funding Inc. and Managing General Partner of
Technology Funding Limited, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as added Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2. To my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of the Partnership as of and for the
period covered by the Report.


Date:  March 15, 2004  By:     /s/   Charles R. Kokesh
                               --------------------------------
                                     Charles R. Kokesh
                                     President, Chief Executive
                                     Officer, Chief Financial
                                     Officer and Chairman of
                                     Technology Funding Inc. and
                                     Managing General Partner of
                                     Technology Funding Limited

Technology Funding Partners IV, L.P.
(a Delaware limited partnership)

Page 1 of 1
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES – OXLEY ACT OF 2002








Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the undersigned officer of Atrion Corporation (the “Company”), hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








Dated: August 4, 2010                                                         /s/ Emile A. Battat


Emile A. Battat


Chief Executive Officer




The foregoing certification is made solely for purpose of 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and not for any other purpose.
**EXHIBIT 1 EXHIBIT 2**
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                         156,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  396,509
<ALLOWANCES>                                    18,579
<INVENTORY>                                     69,837
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               694,564
<PP&E>                                      19,021,637
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,536,637
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              18,293,585
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,115,089
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                18,293,585
<SALES>                                     10,035,217
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            10,050,298
<CGS>                                          955,893
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  955,893
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             7,830,864
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             589,612
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                673,929
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            673,929
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   673,929
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
# C_2012126EN.01002802.xml

| 28.4.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 126/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.4.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 126/28

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 25 January 2012 — Kedzierski v Commission

(Case F-53/11) (1)

1

2012/C 126/54

Language of the case: French

The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 186, 25.6.2011 p. 37.

1

---
#### § 502.131 Requests; issuance.

Subpoenas for the attendance of witnesses or the production of evidence shall be issued upon request of any party, without notice to any other party. Requests for subpoenas must be submitted in writing to the Office of Administrative Law Judges. The party requesting the subpoena shall tender an original and one copy of such subpoena. Where it appears that the subpoena sought may be unreasonable, oppressive, excessive in scope, or unduly burdensome, the administrative law judge may in his or her discretion, as a condition precedent to the issuance of the subpoena, require the person seeking the subpoena to show the general relevance and reasonable scope of the testimony or other evidence sought. [Rule 131.]

[76 FR 10262, Feb. 24, 2011]
Editorial Note on Part 356
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 356 appear at 68 FR 5576, Feb. 4, 2003.

§ 356.49 Penalties. If the owner or the representative or agent of the owner has knowingly falsified or concealed a material fact or knowingly made a false statement or representation with respect to the eligibility of the vessel under 46 U.S.C. 12102(c), in applying for or applying to renew the vessel's fishery endorsement, the following penalties may apply: ( a ) The vessel's fishery endorsement may be revoked;
( b ) A fine of up to $187,602 may be assessed against the vessel owner for each day in which such vessel has engaged in fishing (as such term is defined in section 3 of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1802)) within the exclusive economic zone of the United States; and
( c ) The owner, representative or agent may be subject to additional fines, penalties or both for violation of the proscriptions of 18 U.S.C. 286, 287, and 1001.
[65 FR 44877, July 19, 2000, as amended at 88 FR 1124, Jan. 6, 2023; 88 FR 89560, Dec. 28, 2023]
Exhibit 32

Certification by the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer

Relating to a Periodic Report Containing Financial Statements

Each of, William J. Reuter, Chief Executive Officer, and Drew K. Hostetter, Chief Financial Officer, of Susquehanna Bancshares, Inc. (the
Company), hereby certifies that, based on his knowledge:

(1) The Companys periodic report containing
financial statements on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010 (the Form 10-Q) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2) The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.

Date: As of August 6, 2010



|                        |  |  |  |                        
|----------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER |  |  |  | CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
|                        |  | 
|/s/ William J. Reuter   |  |  |  | /s/ Drew K. Hostetter  
|William J. Reuter       |  |  |  | Drew K. Hostetter
COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS

R

- ZAQ, INC. , BADER OBEID A/K/A BADER M. OBEID D/B/A CARPET MILLS OF AMERICA AND CARPET MILLS,
APPELLANT S , V. MOHAWK SERVICING, LLC , § § § § § § No. 08

- 1 5

- 00 065

- CV

Appeal from the County C ourt at Law No. 2 of Tarrant County, Texas (TC# 2012

- 005830

- 2)

APPELLEE. § MEMO RANDUM OPINION Mohawk Servicing, LLC, Appellee, has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal as moot. We grant the motion and dismiss the appeal

. On March 14, 2013, the trial court entered judgment against Appellants, R

- ZAQ, Inc., Bader Obeid a/k/a Bader M. Obeid d/b/a Carpet Mills of America and Carpet Mills and award ed damages in the amount of $42,929.52 plus pre

- judgment interest and attorney’s fees. Mohawk Servicing subsequently filed a motion for a receivership alleging that Appellants had not paid the judgment and had failed to respond to post

- judgment discovery. On December 3, 2014, the trial
court entered an order appointing a receiver under the Texas Turnover Statute with authority to take possession of and sell Appellants’ non

- exempt assets. See T EX .C IV .P RAC .&R EM .C ODE A NN
. § 31.002(b)(3)(West 2015) ( authorizing a court to appoint a receiver with the authority to- 2

-

take possession of the nonexempt property, sell it, and pay the proceeds to the judgment creditor to the extent required to satisfy the judgment )

. Appellants timely filed notice of appeal indicating the ir intent to appeal the order appointing the receiver. While the appeal was pending, the receiver, with the agreement of the parties, filed an application to close the receivership. The trial court granted that application and entered an order which appr oved the actions taken by the receiver, terminated the receivership, and discharged the receiver. Mohawk Servicing asserts in its motion that the appeal should be dismissed because the termination of the receivership has rendered the appeal moot. Appellants have not filed any response to the motion to dismiss . An appellate court is prohibited from deciding moot controversies. National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Jones , 1 S.W.3d 83, 86 (Tex. 1999)

. A case is moot if a justiciable controversy ceases to exist at any stage of the legal proceedings, including the appeal. In re Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc. , 166 S.W.3d 732, 737 (Tex. 2005)

. We conclude that the order terminating the receivership and discha rging the receiver has rendered the appeal moot. See Rogers v. PLS Water Company , Inc. , No. 14

- 94

- 1135

- CV, 1996 WL 28791 (Tex.App.

-- Houston [14th Dist.] 1996, writ dism’d w.o.j.)(not designated for publication)(holding that order terminating the receivers hip rendered moot the appeal from an order authorizing further action by the receiver and the receiver’s order to seize). Accordingly,

we grant Mohawk Servicing’s m otion and dismiss the appeal.

April 24, 2 015 YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Justice Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Hughes, JJ.
IIB 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2498 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 10, 2009 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 

Public Works 

AN ACT 

To designate the Federal building located at 844 North 

Rush Street in Chicago, Illinois, as the ‘‘William O. 

Lipinski Federal Building’’. 

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


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 2498 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

2 The Federal building located at 844 North Rush 

3 Street in Chicago, Illinois, shall be known and designated 

4 as the ‘‘William O. Lipinski Federal Building’’. 

5 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

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

7 paper, or other record of the United States to the Federal 

8 building referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be 

9 a reference to the ‘‘William O. Lipinski Federal Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 9, 

2009. 

Attest: LORRAINE C. MILLER, 

Clerk. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

# District: 8
Federal Reserve Bank of: St. Louis

## Filings received during the week ending October 11, 2008

|Filer                    | Filing Type   | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               | End of Comment Period                                
|------------------------ | ------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -----------------------------------------------------
|KIRKSVILLE BANCORP, INC. | CIC           | Notice by Douglas and Theresa Kelly, Kirksville, Missouri; Ray E. Cahalan Family Trust with Theresa Kelly and Jacqulene Niedergerke as co-trustees, Kirksville, Missouri; Gary Kelly, Aspen, Colorado; and William and Kathleen Moffett, Golden, Colorado, as a group acting in concert to retain control of Kirksville, Bancorp, Inc., Kirksville, Missouri. | Newspaper:Not availableFederal Register:Not available
|Newspaper:               | Not available
|Federal Register:        | Not available

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

|Institution / Location | RSSDID | Exam Date | CRAPublic Date | CRARating | Exam Method
|---------------------- | ------ | --------- | -------------- | --------- | -----------
|NONE                  

## CRA Examinations scheduled for     Quarter of

|Institution | Location
|----------- | --------
|NONE       

* Subject to the provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act

Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

---

Home Banking information and regulation  Accessibility Contact 
  us
§ 5.57 Acting under authority of Coast Guard credential or endorsement. ( a ) A person employed in the service of a vessel is considered to be acting under the authority of a credential or endorsement when the holding of such credential or endorsement is: ( 1 ) Required by law or regulation; or
( 2 ) Required by an employer as a condition for employment.
( b ) A person is considered to be acting under the authority of the credential or endorsement while engaged in official matters regarding the credential or endorsement. This includes, but is not limited to, such acts as applying for renewal, taking examinations for raises of grade, requesting duplicate or replacement credentials, or when appearing at a hearing under this part.
( c ) A person does not cease to act under the authority of a credential or endorsement while on authorized or unauthorized shore leave from the vessel.
[CGD 82-002, 50 FR 32184, Aug. 9, 1985, as amended by USCG-2006-24371, 74 FR 11214, Mar. 16, 2009]
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:
Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

# District: 1
Federal Reserve Bank of: Boston

## Filings received during the week ending September 22, 2007

|Filer | Filing Type | Filing Proposal | End of Comment Period
|----- | ----------- | --------------- | ---------------------
|NONE 

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

|Institution / Location | RSSDID | Exam Date | CRAPublic Date | CRARating | Exam Method
|---------------------- | ------ | --------- | -------------- | --------- | -----------
|NONE                  

## CRA Examinations scheduled for     Quarter of

|Institution | Location
|----------- | --------
|NONE       

Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:
Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

---

Home Banking information and regulation  Accessibility Contact 
  us
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

David St. Ann, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Todd McLean, et al., 

Defendants. 

________________________________/

Case No. 15-cv-11770 

Judith E. Levy 

United States District Judge 

Mag. Judge Anthony P. Patti 

AMENDED ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE PATTI’S 

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [58] 

 On January 3, 2018, Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti issued a 

Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 58) recommending that the Court 

grant in part and deny in part defendants’ motion for summary 

judgment. (Dkt. 48.) Magistrate Judge Patti recommends that the 

Court dismiss with prejudice plaintiff’s claims regarding a 

constitutional right to a particular security classification, dismiss 

without prejudice plaintiff’s claims against defendant Buczek for failure 

to exhaust his administrative remedies, and not dismiss plaintiff’s 
2 

claims for retaliation and intentional infliction of emotional distress. 

(Dkt. 58 at 17-18.) 

 The parties were required to file specific written objections within 

14 days of service. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2); E.D. Mich. L.R. 72.1(d). No 

objections were filed. The court has nevertheless thoroughly reviewed 

the Report and Recommendation, and concurs in the reasoning and 

result. Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that: 

 The Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED; 

 Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Dkt. 38) is GRANTED 

IN PART AND DENIED IN PART; 

 Plaintiff’s claims asserting a constitutional right to a particular 

security classification are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; 

 Plaintiff’s claims against defendant Buczek are DISMISSED 

WITHOUT PREJUDICE; and 

 Plaintiff’s claims for retaliation and intentional infliction of 

emotional distress are NOT DISMISSED. 

 IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: January 25, 2018 s/Judith E. Levy 

Ann Arbor, Michigan JUDITH E. LEVY 

United States District Judge 
3 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was served 

upon counsel of record and any unrepresented parties via the Court’s 

ECF System to their respective email or First Class U.S. mail addresses 

disclosed on the Notice of Electronic Filing on January 25, 2018. 

s/Shawna Burns 

SHAWNA BURNS 

Case Manager