alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Jack Johnson v. The State.

*No. 766.*

*Decided June 8.*

Perjury—Indictment—Allegation of Materiality.—An indictment for perjury committed as a witness on the trial of a case assigned the perjury upon a statement of defendant, to the effect, that he did not play or bet at a game played with dice, called “craps,” not at a private residence, negativing said statement, and alleging that the testimony was material to the issue being tried. *Seld,*the indictment sufficiently alleges the materiality of the statement assigned as perjury.

Appeal from the District Court of Hopkins. Tried below before Hon. B. W. Terhtjne.

This appeal is from a conviction for perjury, the punishment being assessed at six years in the penitentiary.

Bo statement of facts in the record.

Bo briefs have come to the hands of the Reporter.

*Mann*Trice, Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.

*556DAVIDSON, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of perjury. Contention was made below that the statement upon which perjury is assigned was not material, and therefore the indictment was insufficient. It is alleged, that on the trial of the cause in which the perjury was committed the defendant testified he did not play or bet at a game played with dice, called “craps,” not at a private residence, when in truth and in fact he did so play or bet at said game, and that this testimony was material to the issue being tried at the time the false statement was made. The indictment sufficiently alleges the materiality of the statement assigned as perjury. The evidence is not before us, hence we can not say the verdict was unauthorized by the testimony.

The judgment is affirmed.

*Affirmed.*

Judges all present and concurring.
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Tuesday, July 25, 1995 (101), Para 101.6 Committees and Subcommittees to Sit]
[Page 1187]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.101.6  committees and subcommittees to sit

  On motion of Mr. HOKE, by unanimous consent, the following committees 
and their subcommittees were granted permission to sit during the 5-
minute rule today: the Committee on Agriculture, the Committee on 
Banking and Financial Services, the Committee on Commerce, the Committee 
on Economic and Educational Opportunities, the Committee on Government 
Reform and Oversight, the Committee on House Oversight, the Committee on 
International Relations, the Committee on the Judiciary, the Committee 
on Resources, the Committee on Science, the Committee on Transportation 
and Infrastructure, and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
```
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 162 (Wednesday, August 22, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47084-47085]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-4102]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

OVERSEAS PRIVATE INVESTMENT CORPORATION


Submission of OMB Review; Comments Request

AGENCY: Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC).

ACTION: Request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 
Chapter 35), agencies are required to publish a Notice in the Federal 
Register notifying the public that the Agency has prepared an 
information collection request for OMB review and approval and has 
requested public review and comment on the submission. Comments are 
being solicited on the need for the information; the accuracy of the 
Agency's burden estimate; the quality, practical utility and clarity of 
the information to be collected; and on ways to minimize the reporting 
burden, including automated collection techniques and uses of other 
forms of technology. The proposed form under review, OMB control number 
3420-0015, is summarized below.

DATES: Comments must be received within 30 calendar-days of publication 
of this Notice. (The 60-day notice was posted on June 19, 2007, Vol. 
72, No. 117.)

ADDRESSES: Copies of the subject form and the request for review 
prepared for submission to OMB may be obtained from the Agency 
Submitting Officer. Comments on the form should be submitted to the 
Agency Submitting Officer.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Agency Submitting Officer: Essie 
Bryant, Records Management Officer, Overseas Private Investment 
Corporation, 1100 New York Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20527; (202) 
336-8563.

Summary of Form Under Review

    Type of Request: Revised Form.
    Title: Application for Financing.
    Form Number: OPIC-115.
    Frequency of Use: One per investor, per project.
    Type of Respondents: Business or other institution (except farms); 
individuals.
    Description of Affected Public: U.S. companies or citizens 
investing overseas.
    Reporting Hours: 3.15 hours per project.
    Number of Responses: 150 per year.
    Federal Cost: $21,975.
    Authority for Information Collection: Section 231 and 234(b) and 
(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended.

[[Page 47085]]

    Abstract (Needs and Uses): The OPIC 115 form is the principal 
document used by OPIC to determine the investor's and the project's 
eligibility for debt financing, assess the environmental impact and 
developmental effects of the project, measure the economic effects for 
the United States and the host country economy, and collect information 
for underwriting and worker rights analysis.

    Dated: August 15, 2007.
John Crowley, III,
Senior Administrative Counsel, Department of Legal Affairs.
[FR Doc. 07-4102 Filed 8-21-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3210-07-M
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2200 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2200

 To provide for a reduction in regulatory costs by maintaining Federal 
 average fuel economy standards applicable to automobiles in effect at 
                  current levels until changed by law.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             August 4, 1995

Mr. Upton (for himself and Mr. Brown of Ohio) introduced the following 
         bill; which was referred to the Committee on Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To provide for a reduction in regulatory costs by maintaining Federal 
 average fuel economy standards applicable to automobiles in effect at 
                  current levels until changed by law.
    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. AVERAGE FUEL ECONOMY STANDARDS.

    The average fuel economy standards established, whether directly or 
indirectly, under regulations promulgated by the Secretary of 
Transportation under section 32901 et seq. of title 49, United States 
Code, prior to the date of the enactment of this Act for automobiles 
(as defined in section 32901 of such title) shall continue to apply 
without amendment, change, or other modification of any kind for the 
model years and the applicable automobiles specified in the regulation 
last promulgated for such automobiles and for each model year 
thereafter until such regulations are specifically amended or otherwise 
changed by law enacted after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Filed 9/27/05 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2005 ND159

State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee

v.

Anthony James Moore, Defendant and Appellant

No. 20050133

Appeal from the District Court of Cass County, East Central Judicial District, the Honorable Frank L. Racek, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Anthony J. Moore, pro se, North Dakota State Penitentiary, P.O. Box 5521, Bismarck, N.D. 58506-5521, defendant and appellant.

Birch P. Burdick, State’s Attorney, P.O. Box 2806, Fargo, N.D. 58108-2806, for plaintiff and appellee.

State v. Moore

No. 20050133

Per Curiam.

[¶1]Anthony James Moore appeals from the district court’s denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence.  Moore argues: (1) he was improperly required to register as a sexual offender for life under a statute that does not apply to him; (2) he was required to register as a sexual offender erroneously because he is "actually innocent"; and, (3) he was denied due process by being sentenced to pay restitution without receiving notice.

[¶2]Moore's claims are frivolous and completely without merit.  We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1).

[¶3]Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Carol Ronning Kapsner

Mary Muehlen Maring

Daniel J. Crothers

Dale V. Sandstrom
# EUR-Lex - 52004AP0390 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 52004AP0390

**European Parliament decision on the nomination of Josef Bonnici for the office of Member of the Court of Auditors (C5-0203/2004 — 2004/0809F(CNS)) **

*
Official Journal 085 E , 07/04/2005 P. 0054 - 0054 *

P5_TA(2004)0390

Appointment of Josef Bonnici as a Member of the European Court of Auditors

European Parliament decision on the nomination of Josef Bonnici for the office of Member of the Court of Auditors (C5-0203/2004 — 2004/0809F(CNS))

The European Parliament,

- having regard to Article 247(3) of the EC Treaty, and Article 160b(3) of the EAEC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C5-0203/2004),

- whereas at its meeting on 6 April 2004 the Committee on Budgetary Control heard the Council's nominee for the office of Member of the Court of Auditors, and at its meeting on 3 May 2004 considered the nominee's qualifications in the light of the criteria laid down by Articles 45b of the ECSC Treaty, 247(2) of the EC Treaty and 160b of the EAEC Treaty,

- having regard to Rule 35 of its Rules of Procedure,

- having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A5-0283/2004),

1. Delivers a favourable opinion on the appointment of Josef Bonnici as a Member of the Court of Auditors;

2. Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and, for information, to the Court of Auditors, the other institutions of the European Communities and the Audit Offices of the Member States.

--------------------------------------------------
over financial reporting that occurred during the Registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter(the Registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting;5. The Registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the Registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe Registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who havea significant role in the Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: August 13, 2009       */s/ Robert R. Jones, III* Robert R. Jones, III    President and CEO
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the Court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

For the Fifth Circuit

No. 96-41191

Summary Calendar

LESLIE SUNDELL,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

VERSUS

CISCO SYSTEMS INCORPORATED,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Southern District of Texas

(G-96-CV-576)

March 20, 1997

Before JONES, DeMOSS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The appel lant, Leslie Sundell, filed suit against Cisco

Systems, Inc. in the United States District Court for the Southern

District of Texas, Galveston Division

. A few days after filing

such suit, and before service of process upon the defendant or any

a nswer by defendant, counsel for Sundell discovered that he had

erroneously drafted the original complaint for fi ling in the

Galveston Division when he had intended to file it in the Houston2

Division. Several days later, counsel for the appellant filed a

motion to transfer the case from the Galveston Division to the

Houston Division. The district court denied such motion and

dismissed the suit without prejudice.

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(b), the district cou rt has broad

discretion in deciding whether to transfer a civil action from a

division in which it is pending to any other division in the same

district. Likewise, under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), the district court

is directed to dismiss a case which is filed in the wrong division

or district for venue purposes or to transfer such case to any

district or division in which it could have been properly brought.

We read § 1406 as again giving t he district court discretion to

decide which course of action to follow.

We find nothing in the record of this case upon which we could

say the district court abused its discretion. Accordingly, the

entry of final judgment without prejudice is

AFFIRMED

.
-----Original Message----- 

From: Kevin.Macdonald@maine.gov [mailto:Kevin.Macdonald@maine.gov] 

Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 11:23 AM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 26, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

Kevin Macdonald 

P. O. Box 198 

Belgrade Lakes, ME 04918
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-14-0000900 28-JUN-2017 08:02 AM
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2008-5173

INFORMATION SYSTEMS & NETWORKS CORPORATION,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims in 02-CV-796,

Judge Francis M. Allegra.

ON MOTION

ORDER

Upon consideration of the United States' motion for leave to file a supplemental

appendix,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

The motion is granted.

FOR THE COURT

MAR 11 2009

/s/ Jan Horbalv

Date

cc:	Norman H. Singer, Esq.

Steven M. Mager, Esq.

s8

Jan Horbaly

Clerk

US. COURTSWPEALS FOR

THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

MAR 1 1 2009

Jah,:kaitha.•

CLERK
§ 180.351 Qualification of IBCs. ( a ) *General.* Each IBC used for the transportation of hazardous materials must be an authorized packaging.
( b ) *IBC specifications.* To qualify as an authorized packaging, each IBC must conform to this subpart, the applicable requirements specified in part 173 of this subchapter, and the applicable requirements of subparts N and O of part 178 of this subchapter.
[Amdt. 180-5, 59 FR 38079, July 26, 1994, as amended at 66 FR 45391, Aug. 28, 2001]
-----Original Message----- 

From: stephanie.harmon@pa.nacdnet.net 

[mailto:stephanie.harmon@pa.nacdnet.net] 

Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 10:17 AM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 26, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

Stephanie Harmon 

Po Box 380, 115 Twin Creeks Drive 

Jonestown, PA 17038
`[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Tuesday, July 25, 1995 (101), Para 101.22 Recorded Vote]
[Page 1191]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.101.22  recorded vote

  A recorded vote by electronic device was ordered in the Committee of 
the Whole on sustaining an appeal of a ruling of the Chair.

It was decided in the

Yeas

281

<3-line {>

affirmative

Nays

139`
-----Original Message----- 

From: SMAtouche@aol.com [mailto:SMAtouche@aol.com] 

Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 11:59 AM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 26, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

Paul Shay 

118 Split Rail Dr 

Cherry Hill, NJ 08034
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 Dynamic Energy Alliance Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2013, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:




(1)
The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 159d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934; and




(2)
The information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.






By:
/s/StevenFryeSteven FryeChief Executive Officer





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Dynamic Energy Alliance Corporation, Inc. and will be retained by Dynamic Energy Alliance Corporation, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
-----Original Message----- 

From: Brandi.Bayus@gmail.com [mailto:Brandi.Bayus@gmail.com] 

Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 11:50 AM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 26, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

Brandi Bayus 

22330 Grand Terrace Rd 

Grand Terrace, CA 92313
#### Edward H. Dederick, *Respondent, v.*Moreau Morris, *Appe*llant.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Opinion

*Per Curiam.*
#### Merrill *v.*Carr.

A promissory note, given to secure the restoration of stolen property, is void if a part of its consideration is an agreement not to search the house of the thief for the property before the next day, pending negotiations for a settlement of the matter.

Assumpsit. The defendant filed in set-off a note for $50, signed by the plaintiff. Facts found by a referee. The defendant, detecting the plaintiff, one evening, stealing corn and potatoes from the defendant’s field, charged him with the previous commission of other similar larcenies, of which the plaintiff claimed to be innocent, but of which he was in fact guilty. The offence was spoken of as a state-prison crime, and the defendant proposed to cause the plaintiff’s house to be searched that night for evidence of former larcenies of the defendant’s property. The note was then given, not in settlement or payment, but as security for what the plaintiff might have previously taken, and in consideration of the defendant’s not causing the plaintiff’s house to be searched that night; and they agreed to meet and make a settlement the next day. No settlement has ever been made, and the defendant has brought an action of tort for the property stolen by the plaintiff.

*Wilson,*for the plaintiff.

*Burleigh Adams,*for the defendant.

Bingham, J.

When the plaintiff was discovered carrying away the defendant’s property, a search of his house for other stolen property was contemplated. A part of the consideration of the note was the defendant’s agreement not to search the plaintiff’s. *115house that night. Issuing a warrant to search a house for stolen property is a proceeding to recover the property and bring the thief to punishment. G. L., *c.*255, *ss. 2,*3, 4; Morrison Just. & Sher. 260. A contract to suppress a criminal prosecution, even for a limited time, is illegal. The consideration of the note in question was partly the defendant’s agreement not to commence criminal proceedings against the plaintiff before the next day. A note is void if part of the consi de ration is illegal. *Hinds*v. *Chamberlin,*6 N. H. 225, 229, 231; *Forshner*v. *Whitcomb,*44 N. H. 14.

*Set-off disallowed.*

Smith, J., did not sit: the others concurred.
Exhibit No. 21.1
 
 SUBSIDIARIES OF REGISTRANT
 
 As of March 31, 2011
  1.
PHI Capital Holdings, Inc.
 Percentage of ownership: 100%
 Business activity:  Consulting and M&A advisory services
 
 2.
Providential Vietnam, Ltd.
 Percentage of ownership: 100%
 Business activity: Consulting services
 
 3.
Philand Ranch Limited –  UK
 Percentage of ownership: 58.28%
 Business activity: real estate development
 
 4.
PHI Gold Corp.  (formerly PHI Mining Group, Inc.)
 Percentage of ownership: 82.71%
 Business activity: Gold mining
 
 5.
PHI Energy Corporation (formerly Providential Energy Corporation)
 Percentage of ownership: 32%
 Business activity: energy, coal mining and coal trading
 
 6.
Provimex, Inc
 Percentage of ownership: 85%
 Business activity: Trading and Imports/Exports
 
 7.
Touchlink Communications, Inc.
 Percentage of ownership: 85%
 Business activity: Multi-media