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

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 35 

To enhance intelligence oversight authority. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 5, 2007 

Mr. OBEY submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Rules 

RESOLUTION 

To enhance intelligence oversight authority. 

1 Resolved, That in clause 4(a) of rule X of the Rules 

2 of the House of Representatives, add the following new 

3 paragraph at the end: 

4 ‘‘(5)(A) There is established a Select Intelligence 

5 Oversight Panel of the Committee on Appropriations 

6 (hereinafter in this paragraph referred to as the ‘select 

7 panel’). The select panel shall be composed of not more 

8 than 13 Members, Delegates, or the Resident Commis9 sioner appointed by the Speaker, of whom not more than 

10 eight may be from the same political party. The select 

11 panel shall include the chairman and ranking minority 

12 member of the Committee on Appropriations, the chairVerDate Aug 31 2005 02:42 Jan 06, 2007 Jkt 059200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\HR35.IH HR35

ccoleman on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 35 IH 

1 man and ranking minority member of its Subcommittee 

2 on Defense, six additional members of the Committee on 

3 Appropriations, and three members of the Permanent Se4 lect Committee on Intelligence. 

5 ‘‘(B) The Speaker shall designate one member of the 

6 select panel as its chairman and one member as its rank7 ing minority member. 

8 ‘‘(C) Each member on the select panel shall be treat9 ed as though a member of the Committee on Appropria10 tions for purposes of the select panel. 

11 ‘‘(D) The select panel shall review and study on a 

12 continuing basis budget requests for and execution of in13 telligence activities; make recommendations to relevant 

14 subcommittees of the Committee on Appropriations; and, 

15 on an annual basis, prepare a report to the Defense Sub16 committee of the Committee on Appropriations containing 

17 budgetary and oversight observations and recommenda18 tions for use by such subcommittee in preparation of the 

19 classified annex to the bill making appropriations for the 

20 Department of Defense. 

21 ‘‘(E) Rule XI shall apply to the select panel in the 

22 same manner as a subcommittee (except for clause 

23 2(m)(1)(B) of that rule). 


ccoleman on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
3 

•HRES 35 IH 

1 ‘‘(F) A subpoena of the Committee on Appropriations 

2 or its Subcommittee on Defense may specify terms of re3 turn to the select panel.’’. 

Æ 


ccoleman on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>            DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>               JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                 SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                       88,341
<SECURITIES>                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                     0
<ALLOWANCES>                      0
<INVENTORY>                  22,157
<CURRENT-ASSETS>            134,866
<PP&E>                      881,784
<DEPRECIATION>              216,739
<TOTAL-ASSETS>              931,258
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>       106,346
<BONDS>                      10,439
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>             0
<PREFERRED>                       0
<COMMON>                        782
<OTHER-SE>                  781,446
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>931,258
<SALES>                   1,418,630
<TOTAL-REVENUES>          1,431,519
<CGS>                       535,389
<TOTAL-COSTS>             1,182,792
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                  0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                0
<INCOME-PRETAX>             170,231
<INCOME-TAX>                 60,784
<INCOME-CONTINUING>         109,447
<DISCONTINUED>                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                   0
<CHANGES>                         0
<NET-INCOME>                109,447
<EPS-BASIC>                  1.41
<EPS-DILUTED>                  1.38


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0001037156
<NAME>                        WNC Housing Tax Credit Fund VI, L.P., Series 6
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     US Dollars

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                           4,511,236
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                            0
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 4,511,236
<PP&E>                                                   0
<DEPRECIATION>                                           0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  19,972,300
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                    0
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                                      16,937,037
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    19,972,300
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   187,045
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      197,860
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    10,815
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      8,655
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  8,655
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                         8,655
<EPS-BASIC>                                            0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0




</TABLE>
From: jpganucheau@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:15:28 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,

Jonathan Ganucheau

Red Oak, TX 75154
Exhibit
10.10


 


CONVERSION AGREEMENT


 


THIS
AGREEMENT, made effective July 1, 2017 (the “Effective Date”), between AVRA Medical Robotics, Inc., a Florida
corporation (hereinafter referred to as the “Company”), and Barry F. Cohen, residing at 1600 SE 15th Street, #512,
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33316, USA (hereinafter referred to as the “Employee”).


 


WHEREAS,
the Company wishes to convert payments due to the Employee per the Employment Agreement dated July 1, 2016 into Company shares
on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, and the Employee wishes to accept such conversion;


 


NOW
THEREFORE in consideration of the covenants of each of the parties given to the other and for other good and valuable consideration,
the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows:


 


		a)	From July 1, 2017 through December 31, 2017 the Employee
agrees to receive a total cash compensation of $2,500 per month with any balance due per the Employment Agreement dated July 1,
2016, paid in Company restricted common shares using a share price of $2.00. The Company shall issue these shares to the Employee
as soon as they are due and as soon as is feasible.



 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF the
parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the 1st day of July 2017.


 





	AVRA Medical Robotics Inc.	 
	 	 	 
	By:	/s/ A. Christian Schauer	 
	 	A.  Christian Schauer, CFO	 
	 	 	 
	/s/ Barry F. Cohen	 
	Barry F. Cohen
No. P69/75.

protest 60/25084 (San Francisco).

#### Sumitomo Shoji New York, Inc. *v.*United States,

NewmaN, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protest consists of rubber bulb horns similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Sherwin*International, *Inc.*v. *United States*(54 Cust. Ct. 466, Abstract 693821. the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

DONALD COLE BURCHETT,

Plaintiff,

v.

WASHINGTON STATE DEPT. OF

CORRECTIONS, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. C05-5660FDB

ORDER GRANTING

APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN

FORMA PAUPERIS AND

DIRECTING INSTITUTION TO

CALCULATE, COLLECT, AND

FORWARD PAYMENTS

The Court, having reviewed plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 1), does

hereby find and ORDER. 

(1) Plaintiff’s declaration indicates he is unable to afford the court’s filing fee or give security

therefor. Accordingly, plaintiff’s application to proceed as a pauper is GRANTED. As set forth below,

an initial partial filing fee will be collected, and plaintiff is required to make monthly payments of

20 percent of the preceding months income credited to his/her account until the full amount of the

filing fee is satisfied.

(2) Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 and plaintiff’s approved application to proceed in forma

pauperis, the agency having custody of the above named plaintiff is directed to calculate an initial partial

filing fee equal to 20 percent of greater of -- the average monthly deposits to the prisoner’s account or the

average monthly balance in the prisoner’s account for the 6-month period immediately preceding the date

of this Order. The initial partial filing fee should be forwarded to the court clerk as soon as practicable.

Case 3:05-cv-05660-FDB Document 3 Filed 11/07/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER

Page - 2

Subsequently, if the prisoner’s account exceeds $10.00, each month the agency is directed to

collect and forward payments equal to 20 percent of the prisoner’s preceding month’s income credited to

the prisoner’s account. In the event that the monthly payment would reduce the prisoner’s account below

$10.00, the agency should collect and forward only that amount which would reduce the prisoner’s

account to the $10.00 level. Please note that this $10.00 limit does not apply to the initial partial filing fee

described above. Finally, the monthly payments should be collected and forwarded to the court until the

entire filing fee ($250.00) for this matter has been paid.

(3) The Clerk is directed to send plaintiff a copy of this Order and the General Order, and a copy

of this Order along with a copy of plaintiff’s Acknowledgment and Authorization portion of the IFP

application to the attention of the inmate account manager (IFP account manager) at the Washington State

Department of Corrections.

DATED this 7thday of November, 2005.

 /s/ J. Kelley Arnold____________ J. Kelley Arnold

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:05-cv-05660-FDB Document 3 Filed 11/07/05 Page 2 of 2
1Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 00-60662

Summary Calendar

 

SAMUEL B. JOHNSON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

JAMES ANDERSON, Commissioner; C. DAVID TURNER, Superintendent;

SAMUEL JOHNSON, Deputy Warden; HUBERT JORDAN; JERRY WALLEY; KEITH

DUNNAM; LOUIS GONG; STATE OF MISSISSIPPI,

Defendants-Appellees.

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

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 2:99-CV-268-PG

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

February 22, 2001

Before JOLLY, SMITH, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:1

Samuel B. Johnson, Mississippi inmate #42325, appeals the

magistrate judge’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint as

frivolous and for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be

granted. Johnson reiterates that Rule Violation Reports were

ambiguous because they bore different dates and charged different

offenses.

Johnson received notice of the charges sufficient to satisfy

due process concerns. See Wolff v. McDonnell 418 U.S. 539, 564-67

(1974). The confinement in isolation for twenty days and the
2

change in inmate classification did not constitute an “atypical and

significant hardship” sufficient to implicate constitutional

concerns. See Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472, 485 (1995); Moody v.

Baker, 857 F.2d 256, 257-58 (5th Cir. 1988).

We do not consider for the first time on appeal Johnson’s

allegation that medically classified prisoners are denied

incarceration in privately operated prisons. See Leverette v.

Louisville Ladder Co., 183 F.3d 339, 342 (5th Cir. 1999), cert.

denied, 120 S. Ct. 982 (2000). We do not consider Johnson’s

slavery issue raised for the first time in a post-judgment motion

to amend. See Martin v. Scott, 156 F.3d 578, 580 (5th Cir. 1998),

cert. denied, 527 U.S. 1041 (1999).

Johnson’s appeal is without arguable merit and is frivolous.

See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Because

the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

The dismissal of Johnson’s appeal and the district court’s

dismissal of his complaint as frivolous and for failure to state a

claim count as strikes for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See

Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 387-88 (5th Cir. 1996). We

caution Johnson that once he accumulates three strikes, he may not

proceed in forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed while

he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under

imminent danger of serious physical injury. See § 1915(g).

APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.
No. 63814.

protests 58/17933, 58/17934, and 58/17935 (El Paso).

#### Joseph H. Brown & Son *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of beef similar in all material respects to that the subject of *United States*v. *J. H. Brown et al.*(46 C.C.P.A. 1, C.A.D. 686), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
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 Annual Report of Cyber Supply Inc.(the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended February 28, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "report"), I, Maria Shostak, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, 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 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated this 20thday of May, 2009.



| | MARIA SHOSTAK                                      
| | ---------------------------------------------------
| | Maria Shostak,                                     
| | Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer















A signed original of these written statements required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Aden Solutions Inc. and will be retained by Aden Solutions Inc.  and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
| 0-26589                  |  01-0404322                  |
|--------------------------|-----------------------------------|
| (Commission file number) | (IRS employer identification no.) |
| Main Street, Damariscotta, Maine         |  04853 |
|------------------------------------------|-------------|
| (Address of principal executive offices) | (Zip Code)  |

----

| Item 2.02 Results of Operations and Financial Condition | Page 1 |
|---------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Item 9.01 Financial Statements and Exhibits             | Page 1 |
| Signatures                                              | Page 2 |
| Exhibit Index                                           | Page 3 |

----

----
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13**  **- 6545** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. GERALD FE LTON , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh
. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. ( 5:93

- cr - 00123

- F

- 1 )

Submitted : August 26, 2013 Decided: September 4, 2013

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and DAVIS , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
.
Gerald Fe lton, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant U nited S tates Attorney , Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee
. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Gerald Fe lton appeals the district court ’ s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we a ffirm the district court ’s order
. United States v. Felton , No. 5:93

- cr 00123

- F

- 1 (E.D.N.C. Mar. 27, 2013). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
From: bobby@heirsofsalvation.org

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 8:01:51 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,

Robert Ewbank

Azusa, CA 91702
Exhibit
      32.2





AEROCENTURY
      CORP.





CERTIFICATION








In
      connection with this quarterly report of AeroCentury
      Corp. (the
      “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2007 as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Neal D. Crispin,
      Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date
      hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United
      States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:





(1)
      the
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
      applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and





(2)
      the
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company at the dates
      and for the periods indicated.





This
      Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, “filed” with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission.




Date: November 14,
              2007
            By:
            /s/ **Toni
              M. Perazzo**Title:  Chief
              Financial Officer