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

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 163 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 163

   Urging the collective judgment of both Congress and the President 
       regarding the use of military force by the United States.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 14, 2007

 Ms. DeLauro (for herself, Mr. Olver, Mr. Larson of Connecticut, Mrs. 
     Maloney of New York, and Mr. Fattah) submitted the following 
   resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
   Urging the collective judgment of both Congress and the President 
       regarding the use of military force by the United States.

Whereas the United States has the best trained, most effective military in the 
        world;
Whereas the United States military consists of an all volunteer force of 
        dedicated, patriotic men and women;
Whereas the men and women of the Armed Forces are a reflection of the best 
        values and spirit of our Nation;
Whereas Congress has a responsibility to ensure that the members of the Armed 
        Forces are provided for to the fullest extent possible;
Whereas Congress has a responsibility to make certain that the lives of the 
        members of the Armed Forces are never put at risk without careful 
        consideration;
Whereas, under the Constitution of the United States, Congress has the power to 
        declare war;
Whereas the use of military force by the United States must not proceed without 
        careful preparation;
Whereas Congress enacted legislation permitting the President of the United 
        States to use military force against Afghanistan (Public Law 107-40) and 
        against Iraq (Public Law 107-243) only after 17 hours of debate; and
Whereas the use of military force by the United States must not be undertaken 
        without a full debate over whether it is in the best interests of the 
        United States: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved,  That--
            (1) it is the sense of the House of Representatives that 
        the Constitution of the United States provides that the 
        President, in an emergency, may act to defend the country, but 
        reserved the matter of offensive war to Congress as the 
        representatives of the people; and
            (2) the House of Representatives affirms the requirement 
        under the Constitution that the President seek and obtain the 
        approval of Congress before the United States undertakes 
        offensive military action against any other nation.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit 31.1**

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER				PURSUANT TO THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934,				RULES 13a-14 AND 15d-14				AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO				SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Material Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert M. Bernstein, Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company, certify, pursuant to Rules 13a-14 and 15-d14 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as adopted pursuant to §302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:				1.       I have reviewed this Report;				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;				3.       Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in the Report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in the Report;				4.       I and the other certifying officers of the Company:

are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures for the Company;
- have designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information is made known to us, particularly during the period in which the Report is being prepared;     have evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures within 90 days of the date of the Report; andhave presented in the Report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on the required evaluation.			
5.       I and the other certifying officers have disclosed to the Company’s auditors and to the audit committee of the board of directors (or persons fulfilling the equivalent function):
all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls (a pre-existing term relating to internal controls regarding financial reporting) which could adversely affect the Company's ability to record, process, summarize and report		
financial data and have identified for the Company's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and
- any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the Company's internal controls.		  6.       I and the other certifying officers have indicated in the Report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of their evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.  
Dated: November 19, 2007

/s/ Robert M. Bernstein                         

By:

Robert M. Bernstein

Chief Executive Officer and President
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Kennedy Benoit, Appellant.

[633 NYS2d 981]

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Greenberg, J.)* rendered June 21, 1994, convicting him of criminally negligent homicide, assault in the third degree, criminal impersonation in the second degree, and aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish that he committed assault in the first degree is unpreserved for appellate review *(see,*CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Udzinski,*146 AD2d 245, 250). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution *(see, People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence. Rosenblatt, J. P., Pizzuto, Altman and Hart, JJ., concur.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES 

TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING 

AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF 

FILED.

CANDIA VANESSA WILLIAMS,

Appellant,

v. Case No. 5D23-278

LT Case No. 16-2022-CA-002295

JIM FULLER, D/B/A CLERK OF COURT, 

RONNIE FUSSELL, D/B/A CLERK OF COURT, 

ABRAHAM C. SOOD, JR. D/B/A JUDGE,

ADRIAN G. SOUD, D/B/A JUDGE, JOHN GUY,

D/B/A JUDGE, W. GREGG MCCAULIE, D/B/A

JUDGE, WADDELL A. WALLACE, III, D/B/A JUDGE, 

CHARLES O. MITCHELL, JR, D/B/A JUDGE, 

FREDRICK B. TYGART, D/B/A JUDGE, MARK 

MAHON, D/B/A CHIEF JUDGE,·MICHAEL WILLIAMS,

D/B/A SHERIFF, JOHN RUTHERFORD, D/B/A 

SHERIFF, MARCIA MORALES HOWARD, D/B/A/ 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE, TIMOTHY 

CORRIGAN, D/B/A/ CHIEF UNITED STATES 

DISTRICT JUDGE, ELIZABETH WARREN, D/B/A 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT CLERK OF COURT, 

U.S. MARSHAL SERVICE MIDDLE DISTRICT 

FLORIDA, U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, 

FANNIE MAE, DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST 

COMPANY, WELLS FARGO HOME MORTGAGE, 

CITIFINANCIAL SERVICES, DAVID P. TROTTI, 

GLENN A. ZIEGLER, KIMBERLY A HUMPHREY, 

MERS MORTGAGE, ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION

SYSTEM, ARLENE B. NEWMAN, ARANTES M. 

RODRIGUES, SIDNEY E. LEWIS, JOHN A. VAN NESS, 
2

DUVAL COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR, AS STATE OF 

FLORIDA,

Appellees.

/

Opinion filed March 7, 2023

Appeal from the Circuit Court 

for Duval County,

Marianne Aho, Judge.

Candia Vanessa Williams, 

Jacksonville, pro se.

Lawrence J. Bernard, of Bernard &

Shemer, P.A., Jacksonville, for 

Appellee, Sidney E. Lewis.

No Appearance for Remaining 

Appellees.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.315(a).

SILBERMAN, MORRIS, KELLY, PATRICIA J., and SMITH, ANDREA T., 

Associate Judges, Concur.
EXHIBIT 23





CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND SHAREHOLDERS OF FIRST KEYSTONE CORPORATION:





We consent to the use of our reports dated March 15, 2011, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of First Keystone Corporation and Subsidiary as of December 31, 2010, and 2009, and the related consolidated statements of income, changes in stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2010, management’s report on internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010, which reports are included herein and the incorporation by reference of such reports on the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-3, related to the Dividend Reinvestment and Stock Purchase Plan, filed with the SEC on August 3, 2007 (Registration No.
333-145093).





/s/ J. H. Williams & Co., LLPJ. H. Williams & Co., LLP





March 15, 2011


Kingston, Pennsylvania
No. 66456.

#### Manuel Shapiro *v.*United States,

protests 60/27085, 60/27393, and 60/27406 (New York).

*336Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the issue is the same in all material respects as that the subject of *United States*v. *Steinberg Bros.*(47 C.C.P.A. 47, C.A.D. 727), and the record showing that the merchandise consists of nylon gloves similar in use to silk gloves, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. 69200.

#### Shriro Trading Corp. *v.*United States,

protests 64/4783 and 64/4784 (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of various types of meters similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *G. L. Electronics, Inc., Arrow Sales, Inc.*(49 CCPA 111, C.A.D. 804), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

**JASON C. SHEPPARD,**

**Petitioner**

**v.**

**BRENDAN T. CONWAY, GARY EVAN GERSON, MARK G. WEITZMAN,** 

**Respondents :** 

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**: No. 80 WM 2015** 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW **, this 2nd day of December, 2015, the Application for Leave to File** 

**Original Process is** GRANTED **, and the Petition for Writ of Mandamus is** DENIED

**.**
From: sonshine@kanab.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: I object to your mandate!

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:18:18 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Sonia Waters

, 84741-6286
##### 



CERTIFICATE OF
PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
OF
DOBSON COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
  a.
    
    fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; andb.
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the
Company at September 30, 2007, and the results of the Companys operations for the period ended September 30, 2007.
 November 9, 2007

/s/ Bruce R. KnooihuizenBruce R. KnooihuizenExecutive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer
(principal financial officer) 46
From: mariposita21_4@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:01:53 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Venesa Martin-Hurtado

Escondido, CA 92025
```

[Federal Register: August 25, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 164)]
[Notices]               
[Page 52319]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr25au10-52]                         

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

ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION

 
Sunshine Act Meeting; Cancellation

AGENCY: United States Election Assistance Commission (EAC).

ACTION: Notice to cancel EAC public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Election Assistance Commission has cancelled the EAC 
closed session meeting scheduled for Wednesday, August 25, 2010, 9-11 
a.m. EDT. The meeting was announced in a sunshine notice that was 
published in the Federal Register on Wednesday, August 18, 2010 in 
Volume 75, Number 159.

Person to Contact for Information: Bryan Whitener, Telephone: (202) 
566-3100.

Donetta Davidson,
Chair, U.S. Election Assistance Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010-21266 Filed 8-23-10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6820-KF-P
```
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 06-3204

___________

Darrell L. Smeltzer; George R. * 

Gutierrez, *

 * 

 Plaintiffs-Appellants, *

*

Jon D. Watts, *

*

Plaintiff, * 

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the District of 

* Minnesota. 

Medtox Laboratories, Inc., a *

Delaware corporation; Burlington * [UNPUBLISHED]

Northern Santa Fe Railroad *

Company, a Delaware corporation, *

*

Defendants-Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: May 18, 2007

Filed: June 13, 2007

___________

Before BYE, BEAM, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.
1

The Honorable Richard H. Kyle, United States District Judge for the District

of Minnesota.

-2-

Darrell Smeltzer and George Gutierrez appeal the district court's1

 adverse grant

of summary judgment in their negligence action brought against Medtox Laboratories,

Inc. and Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad Company. Having carefully reviewed

the record and the parties' submissions on appeal, we agree summary judgment was

proper for the reasons stated by the district court. See Sallis v. Univ. of Minn., 408

F.3d 470, 474 (8th Cir. 2005) (de novo review). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir.

R. 47B.

______________________________
From: skuchel@comcast.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:42:57 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Stan Kuchel

Littleton, CO 80128
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsAffordable In-Space TransportationCurrent and proposed launch systems will provide access to low-Earth orbit (LEO), and destinations beyond LEO, but the cost of delivering payloads will preclude the use of these services by many users. To develop and encourage revolutionary commercial utilization of geosynchronous orbit (GEO) and to provide an affordable means to continue NASA space science and exploration missions, the transportation costs to in-space destinations must be reduced. The principal objective of this study was to conceptually define three to four promising approaches to in-space transportation for delivery of satellites and other payloads, 3,000- to 10,000-lb class, to GEO destinations. This study established a methodology for evaluating in-space transportation systems based on life-cycle cost. The reusable concepts seemed to fare better in the evaluation than expendable, since a major driver in the life-cycle cost was the stage production cost.Document ID19960054362Acquisition SourceMarshall Space Flight CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsCurtis, L. A.*(NASA Marshall Space Flight Center Huntsville, AL United States)*VanDyke, M. K.*(NASA Marshall Space Flight Center Huntsville, AL United States)*Lajoie, R. M.*(Boeing Aerospace Co. Huntsville, AL United States)*Woodcock, G. R.*(Boeing Aerospace Co. Huntsville, AL United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateOctober 1, 1996Subject CategorySpace TransportationReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.15:108521NASA-TM-108521Accession Number96N36531Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19960054362.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024