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

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1796 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1796

 To amend section 1951 (commonly called the Hobbs Act) of title 18 of 
           the United States Code to prevent union violence.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              June 8, 1995

  Mr. Crane introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend section 1951 (commonly called the Hobbs Act) of title 18 of 
           the United States Code to prevent union violence.
    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 ``Freedom from Union Violence Act''.

SEC. 2. FREEDOM FROM UNION VIOLENCE.

    Section 1951 of title 18 of the United States Code is amended--
            (1) so that subsection (b)(2) reads as follows:
            ``(2) The term `extortion' means the obtaining of property 
        from another, with his or her consent, induced by use of actual 
        or threatened force, violence, or fear thereof, or wrongful use 
        of fear not involving force or violence, or under color of 
        official right.''; and
            (2) so that subsection (c) reads as follows:
    ``(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed as indicating an 
intent on the part of the Congress--
            ``(1) to repeal, modify, or affect section 6 of the Act 
        entitled `An Act to supplement existing laws against unlawful 
        restraints and monopolies, and for other purposes' (approved 
        October 15, 1914 (15 U.S.C. 17)) or section 20 of such Act (29 
        U.S.C. 52), the Act entitled `An Act to amend the Judicial Code 
        and define and limit the jurisdiction of courts sitting in 
        equity, and for other purposes', approved March 23, 1932 (29 
        U.S.C. 101 et seq.), the National Labor Relations Act (29 
        U.S.C. 151 et seq.), or the Railway Labor Act (45 U.S.C. 151 et 
        seq.); or
            ``(2) to exclude Federal jurisdiction over the offenses 
        defined in this section on the ground that the conduct is also 
        a violation of State or local law, or that the conduct, if it 
        involves force, violence, or fear thereof, takes place in the 
        course of a legitimate business or labor dispute or in pursuit 
        of a legitimate business or labor objective.''.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit 31.2****CERTIFICATION**PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER’S CERTIFICATION:I, Patrick G. Mackey, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this Annual Report.  2. Based on my knowledge, this Annual Report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this Annual Report.  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this Annual Report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, theperiods presented in this Annual Report.  4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Securities ExchangeAct Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant, and we have: a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this Annual Report, is being prepared;  b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this Annual Report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this Annual Report, based on such evaluation; and  c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recentfiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the Audit Committee of the registrant’s Board of Directors (or personsperforming the equivalent function): a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and  b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.Date: September 27, 2005          /s/ Patrick G. Mackey     Patrick G. Mackey  Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer  (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
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: 4
Federal Reserve Bank of: Cleveland

## Filings received during the week ending July 30, 2011

|Filer                                                 | Filing Type    | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                         | End of Comment Period                                  
|----------------------------------------------------- | -------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------
|COMMERCIAL AND SAVINGS BANK OF MILLERSBURG, OHIO, THE | * 18C          | The Commercial & Savings Bank, Millersburg, Ohio to purchase assets and assume liablities of two branches of Premier Bank & Trust, N.A., Wooster, Ohio. | Newspaper:Not availableFederal Register:Not applicable 
|Newspaper:                                            | Not available 
|Federal Register:                                     | Not applicable
|HEARTLAND BANK                                        | Premises       | Request by Heartland Bank, Gahanna, OH to exceed the limit of investment in premises detailed in Section 208.21 of Regulation H.                        | Newspaper:Not applicableFederal Register:Not applicable
|Newspaper:                                            | Not applicable
|Federal Register:                                     | Not applicable

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

|Institution / Location          | RSSDID | Exam Date  | CRAPublic Date | CRARating | Exam Method
|------------------------------- | ------ | ---------- | -------------- | --------- | -----------
|HOCKING VALLEY BK, ATHENS, OHIO | 230610 | 04/11/2011 | 07/12/2011     | S         | Small Bank 

## 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
#### § 550.602 Penalty.

A common carrier that accepts or handles cargo for carriage under a tariff or service contract that has been suspended under § 550.505 or § 550.601 of this part, or after its right to use another tariff or service contract has been suspended under those sections, is subject to a civil penalty of not more than $50,000 for each day that it is found to be operating under a suspended tariff or service contract.

[64 FR 8009, Feb. 18, 1999]
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Monday, June 19, 1995 (82), Para 82.2 Approval of the Journal]
[Page 1014]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.82.2  approval of the journal

  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. SHAYS, announced he had examined and 
approved the Journal of the proceedings of Friday, June 16, 1995.
  Pursuant to clause 1, rule I, the Journal was approved.
```
### SAT Report PMN Number: P-14-0178 SAT Date: 12/31/2013 Print Date: 1/31/2014

Related cases : Health related cases: Ecotox related cases : Analogs:

Concern levels : Type of Concern: Health Eco Comments Level of Concern: 2 3

Persistence Bioaccum Toxicity Comments 1 11

Exposure Based Review : Health: N o Ecotox: Yes
Routes of exposure : Health: Dermal Inhalation Ecotox: All releases to water Fate: ; Keywords : Keywords: IRR/CORROSION, LUNG, AQUATOX-A,C Summary of Assessment :
Fate : Fate Summary: FATE:
S = Disp. VP < 1.0E-6 torr at 25 C (E) BP > 400 C (E) H < 1.00E-8 (E) POTW removal (%) = 90 via sorption Time for complete ultimate aerobic biodeg = wk-mo Sorption to soils/sediments = v.strongPBT Potential: P1B1 *CEB FATE: Migration to ground water = negl

Health : Health Summary: Absorption is nil through the skin, moderate through the GI tract, and good through the lungs based on analogs. There is concern for irritation and p ossible corrosion based on the and concern for lung effects if respirable particles are inhaled based on t properties of the PMN material.

Ecotox : Test Organism Test Type Test End Point Predicted Measured Comments

fish 96-h LC50 0.37 daphnid 48-h LC50 0.068 green algal 96-h EC50 0.025 fish

_ chronic value 0.005 daphnid

_ chronic value 0.008
algal

_ chronic value 0.011
Sewage Sludge 3-h EC50

_ Sewage Sludge

_ Chronic Value _

Ecotox Values Comments: Predictions are based on SARs for ; SAR chemical class = ; log Kow 5.45 (EPI); liquid with mp unknown (P); S = 0.74 mg/L or dispersible (P); effective concentrations based on 100% active ingredients and mean measured concentrations; hardness <150.0 mg/L as CaCO3; and TOC <2.0 mg/L;
Factors Values Comments Assessment Factor 10 Concentration of Concern ( p pb) 1

SARs amide, Ecotox Category N one
Ecotox Factors Comments:
SAT Chair: L Keifer 564-8916
Exhibit 32   CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002    In connection with the Annual Report of Oak Ridge Micro-Energy, Inc. (the Registrant) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Annual Report), I, Mark L. Meriwether, President of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  (1) The Annual 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 Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.  Date:April 15, 2011By:/s/Mark L. MeriwetherMark L. Meriwether, President and Director
<PAGE>

                                                                     Exhibit 3.4

                            CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT

                                       TO

                AMENDED AND RESTATED CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION

                                       OF

                           PSYCHIATRIC SOLUTIONS, INC.



     PSYCHIATRIC SOLUTIONS, INC., a corporation organized and existing under the
General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware (the "Corporation"), does
hereby certify:

     FIRST: The name of the Corporation is Psychiatric Solutions, Inc.

     SECOND: The Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the
Corporation was filed with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware on
March 9, 1998, and was amended on August 5, 2002, August 30, 2002 and March 21,
2003.

     THIRD: The Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the
Corporation is hereby amended so that Section A of ARTICLE V reads in its
entirety as follows:

     "A. This Corporation is authorized to issue two classes of shares to be
     designated, respectively, "Common Stock" and "Preferred Stock." The total
     number of shares of stock that the Corporation is authorized to issue is
     One Hundred Twenty-Six Million One Hundred Eighty-Six Thousand Five Hundred
     Thirty (126,186,530) shares, of which One Hundred Twenty-Five Million
     (125,000,000) shares shall be Common Stock, each having a par value of one
     cent ($0.01) per share, and One Million One Hundred Eighty-Six Thousand
     Five Hundred Thirty (1,186,530) shares shall be Preferred Stock, each
     having a par value of one cent ($0.01) per share."

     FOURTH: The above amendment to the Amended and Restated Certificate of
Incorporation of the Corporation was duly adopted and approved at a meeting of
the members of the Board of Directors and duly adopted and approved at a special
meeting of the stockholders in accordance with the provisions of Section 242 of
the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certificate on this
15th day of December, 2005.

                               PSYCHIATRIC SOLUTIONS, INC.


                               By:   /s/ Christopher L. Howard
                                     -------------------------
                               Name:   Christopher L. Howard
                               Title:  Executive Vice President, General Counsel
                                       and Secretary
§ 95.17-1 Application. ( a ) Where a foam extinguishing system is installed, the provisions of this subpart, with the exception of § 95.17-90, shall apply to all installations contracted for on or after November 19, 1952. Installations contracted for prior to November 19, 1952, shall meet the requirements of § 95.17-90.
§ 1544.301 Contingency plan. Each aircraft operator must adopt a contingency plan and must: ( a ) Implement its contingency plan when directed by TSA.
( b ) Ensure that all information contained in the plan is updated annually and that appropriate persons are notified of any changes.
( c ) Participate in an airport-sponsored exercise of the airport contingency plan or its equivalent, as provided in its security program.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6844

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

FRANESIOUR B. KEMACHE-WEBSTER, a/k/a Bryan Webster,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, Senior District Judge. 

(8:10-cr-00654-RWT-1; 8:14-cv-02005-RWT)

Submitted: September 9, 2015 Decided: September 14, 2015

Before SHEDD, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Franesiour B. Kemache-Webster, Appellant Pro Se. Kristi Noel 

O’Malley, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenbelt, 

Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Franesiour B. Kemache-Webster seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) 

motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or 

judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not 

issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a 

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the 

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies 

this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would 

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional 

claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 

484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 

(2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural 

grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive 

procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a 

debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 

529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that 

Kemache-Webster has not made the requisite showing. 

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss 

the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts 

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 
3

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

DISMISSED
|                   |
|-------------------|
|                   |  |  |  |  |
| 1.                | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 2 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012 of Inuvo, Inc.; |   |
| 2.                | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report. |
|              |   |   |
| February 25, 2014 |   | /s/ Richard K. HoweRichard K. Howe, Chief Executive Officer, principal executive officer |
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 January 1, 2011

|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       

* 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
#### § 1243.1 Revenues, expenses and income.

Commencing with reports for the 3 months beginning January 1, 1972, and for subsequent quarters thereafter, until further ordered, all class I railroads, except switching and terminal companies, subject to the provisions of Part I of the Interstate Commerce Act, be, and they are hereby, required to compile and file quarterly reports of revenues, expenses and income in accordance with quarterly report Form RE&I, and instructions thereon. Such quarterly reports shall be submitted, in paper or electronically, to the Office of Economics, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, DC, within 30 days after the end of the quarter to which they relate.

[37 FR 5503, Mar. 16, 1972, as amended at 67 FR 57534, Sept. 11, 2002; 81 FR 8856, Feb. 23, 2016]
§ 1185.1 Definitions and scope of regulations. ( a ) This part addresses the requirement of 49 U.S.C. 11328 authorization of the Surface Transportation Board (STB) needed for a person to hold the position of officer or director of more than one rail carrier, except where only Class III carriers are involved. STB authorization is not needed for individuals seeking to hold the positions of officers or directors only of Class III railroads. 49 U.S.C. 11328(b).
( b ) When a person is an officer of a Class I railroad and seeks to become an officer of another Class I railroad, an application under 49 U.S.C. 11328(a) (or petition for individual exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502) must be filed. All other “interlocking directorates” have been exempted as a class from the prior approval requirements of 49 U.S.C. 11328(a), pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 10502 and former 49 U.S.C. 10505. For such interlocking directorates exempted as a class, no filing with the STB is necessary to invoke the exemption.
( c ) An *interlocking directorate* exists whenever an individual holds the position of officer or director of one rail carrier and assumes the position of officer or director of another rail carrier. This provision applies to any person who performs duties, or any of the duties, ordinarily performed by a director, president, vice president, secretary, treasurer, general counsel, general solicitor, general attorney, comptroller, general auditor, general manager, freight traffic manager, passenger traffic manager, chief engineer, general superintendent, general land and tax agent or chief purchasing agent.
( d ) For purposes of this part, a *rail carrier* means a person providing common carrier railroad transportation for compensation (except a street, suburban, or interurban electric railway not operating as part of the general system of rail transportation), and a corporation organized to provide such transportation.
#### EDITH BUTLER AND WILBUR BUTLER, PLAINTIFFS, v. WILLIAM HOHNSTRATER AND SIGGE SCHILLER, DEFENDANTS.

Decided October 16, 1929.

Before Gummere, Chief Justice, and Justices Parker and Bodine.

Eor the plaintiffs, *Charles A. Otto, Jr. (Louis C. Lehman, Jr.,*of counsel).

*899Eor the defendant William Hohnstrater, *McCarter & English.*

Eor the defendant Sigge Schiller, *Earley, Cox & Walburg.*

Pee Curiam.

The plaintiffs recovered verdicts against the defendants.

Onr examination of the testimony leads us to the conclusion that the negligence of the drivers of the cars of both defendants was clearly established, and that the damages awarded were supported by the evidence produced at the trial.

Both rules will be dismissed.
#### § 1101.3 Construction.

The rules of construction contained in chapter 1 of title 1 of the United States Code (1 U.S.C. 1 *et seq.*) apply in this chapter. Among other things, they provide that the singular includes the plural, and vice versa; that the masculine includes the feminine; that the word “person” includes corporations, associations, and the like; that “county” includes parish and similar subdivisions; and that “company” includes successors and assigns.