alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
H. Res. 547 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

July 17, 2007. 

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule 

XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 

Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 

the bill (H.R. 3043) making appropriations for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, 

and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 

2008, and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill 

shall be dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived except those arising under clause 

9 or 10 of rule XXI. General debate shall be confined to the 

bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the 

Committee on Appropriations. After general debate the bill 

shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute 

rule. Points of order against provisions in the bill for failure 

to comply with clause 2 of rule XXI are waived. During consideration of the bill for amendment, the Chairman of the 
2 

•HRES 547 EH 

Committee of the Whole may accord priority in recognition 

on the basis of whether the Member offering an amendment 

has caused it to be printed in the portion of the Congressional Record designated for that purpose in clause 8 of rule 

XVIII. Amendments so printed shall be considered as read. 

When the committee rises and reports the bill back to the 

House with a recommendation that the bill do pass, the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and 

amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions. 

SEC. 2. During consideration in the House of H.R. 3043 

pursuant to this resolution, notwithstanding the operation of 

the previous question, the Chair may postpone further consideration of the bill to such time as may be designated by the 

Speaker. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
From: rvburnet@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:15:48 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I strongly request 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 are not willing to

do this, then I strongly ask you to expand consciientious protections for any organizations that provide

individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. To require such things is a clear

violation of the freedom of cosncience that we Americans have always enjiyed. I also strongly oppose

the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and devices that can

cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B). Since abortion is legal in this country and is an elective

procedure, those choosing the procedure should be required to pay for it themselves.

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. As said before, this mandate clearly violates our freedom of coscience in

that we believe all life, prior to birth and after birth, is sacred. Churches and their associations often

sponsor siubsidiary ventures, such as missions, counseling agencies and much more whose moral vaules

are based upon the principles of our faith. Therefore, your 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,

J. Ronalad Burnet

Silvis, IL 61282
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk September 28, 2009

d0921 

# Order

September 28, 2009

138851

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 138851 COA: 282698 Kalamazoo CC: 07-000625-FC CHRISTOPHER S TEVEN HOLDER, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 14, 2009 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
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 on Form 10-Q of Integrated Circuit Systems, Inc. (the Company) for the period ending December 27, 2003
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Hock E. Tan, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby 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, as amended; and



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



|                                   
|-----------------------------------
|                                   
|/s/    HOCK E. TAN                 
|                                   
|Hock E. Tan Chief Executive Officer



February 10, 2004



22
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER

AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Philip L. Rose, Principal Executive
Officer and Principal 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 to the best of my knowledge:



(1)        
The Annual Report of XG Sciences, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A for the year ending December 31, 2016 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (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 the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of the Company.



|Date:   March 26, 2018 |  | /s/  Philip L. Rose                                                                                     
|---------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                       |  | Philip L. Rose                                                                                          
|                       |  | Chief Executive Officer, President,Treasurer, Principal Executive Officer andPrincipal Financial Officer
Case Nj. 10,233.

#### NICHOLLS v. WARFIELD.

[2 Cranch, C. C. 290.] i

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

April Term, 1822.

Evidence — Receipt op Goods — Notice to Produce Account.

It is not competent for the plaintiff to give evidence of the defendant’s acknowledgment of the receipt of the goods mentioned in a certain account which had been delivered to the defendant. without having first given notice to the defendant to produce the account.

[See Case No. 10,234.]

THE COURT

(THRUSTON, Circuit Judge,

absent) refused to permit the plaintiff to give evidence of the defendant’s acknowledgment of the receipt of goods charged in an account which had been delivered by the witness to the defendant, without having first given the defendant notice to produce it, although the witness held in his hand a copy of that account.
From: gaguthmiller@verizon.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 6:27:40 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,

Alene Guthmiller

Morgan Hill, CA 95037
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 459 Reported in House (RH)]

                                                  House Calendar No. 68
110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 459

                          [Report No. 110-175]

       Dismissing the election contest relating to the office of 
Representative from the Twenty-first Congressional District of Florida.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              June 6, 2007

Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania, from the Committee on House Administration, 
  reported the following resolution; which was referred to the House 
                   Calendar and ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
       Dismissing the election contest relating to the office of 
Representative from the Twenty-first Congressional District of Florida.

    Resolved,  That the election contest relating to the office of 
Representative from the Twenty-first Congressional District of Florida 
is dismissed.
                                                  House Calendar No. 68

110th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                              H. RES. 459

                          [Report No. 110-175]

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

       Dismissing the election contest relating to the office of 
Representative from the Twenty-first Congressional District of Florida.

_______________________________________________________________________

                              June 6, 2007

        Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed
```
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

ALLAN PARMELEE,

Plaintiff,

v.

SANDRA CARTER, et al,

Defendants.

Case No. C05-5646RBL

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION REGARDING

SPECIAL MAIL RESTRICTIONS

The Court, having reviewed the report and recommendation, plaintiff’s motions for preliminary and

permanent injunctive relief and the remaining record, hereby finds and ORDERS:

(1) the Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendation is approved and adopted;

(2) plaintiff’s motion to order all parties and the Court to comply with defendants’ special mail

restrictions or bar restrictions (Dkt. #26) is DENIED; and

(3) the Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to plaintiff and any other party that has

appeared in this action.

DATED this 17th day of May, 2006.

ARONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:05-cv-05646-RBL Document 91 Filed 05/17/06 Page 1 of 1
From: gourleyron3@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 7:52:51 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,

Karen Gourley

Cato, NY 13033
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

ORDER EXTENDING

TIME TO FILE INDICTMENT - 1

(Alberto Cavero-Rios CR05-318-JLR)

FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER

1601 Fifth Avenue, Suite 700

Seattle, Washington 98101

(206) 553-1100

JUDGE JAMES L. ROBART

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

ALBERTO CAVERO-RIOS,

Defendant.

 

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

NO. CR 05-318-JLR

ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO FILE

INDICTMENT

The Court, having review the stipulation of the parties, and the defendant’s

agreement to extend the time for an indictment, finds as fact those facts stipulated to by

counsel in that document, and hereby makes the following findings of fact:

1. A failure to grant the continuance would deny counsel the reasonable time

necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence,

within the meaning of Title 18, U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B).

2. An extension of time in which to indict may result in the possible

resolution of the case without an indictment and without trial. Thus, the ends of justice

will be served by ordering a continuance in this case, that a continuance is necessary to

ensure effective trial preparation, and that these factors outweigh the best interests of the

public in a more speedy trial, within the meaning of Title 18, U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A).

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the time within which an indictment in this case

must be filed against the defendant shall be extended from September 30, 2005 to

Case 2:05-cr-00318-JLR Document 11 Filed 10/03/05 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

ORDER EXTENDING

TIME TO FILE INDICTMENT - 2

(Alberto Cavero-Rios CR05-318-JLR)

FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER

1601 Fifth Avenue, Suite 700

Seattle, Washington 98101

(206) 553-1100

October 30, 2005.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the period of delay from September 30, 2005,

through October 30, 2005, is excludable time pursuant to the Speedy Trial Act, 18

U.S.C. § 3161, et seq.

Dated this 3rd day of October, 2005.

A JAMES L. ROBART

United States District Judge

Presented by,

s/Nancy D. Tenney

Attorney for the Defendant

Federal Public Defender’s Office

1601 Fifth Avenue, Suite 700

Seattle, WA 98101

206/553-1100

206/553-0120

Nancy_Tenney@fd.org 

s/Jill Otake

Assistant United States Attorney 

United States Attorney’s Office

700 Stewart Street, Suite 5220

Seattle, WA 98101

206/553-7970

206/553-0755

Jill.Otake@usdoj.gov

Case 2:05-cr-00318-JLR Document 11 Filed 10/03/05 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 10(a)


 


CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM 


We consent to the incorporation by reference
in this Post-Effective Amendment No. 264 to Registration Statement No. 33-26305 on Form N-1A of our report dated November 21, 2012,
relating to the financial statements and financial highlights of BlackRock Flexible Equity Fund (formerly BlackRock Mid-Cap Value
Equity Portfolio), a series of BlackRock Funds, appearing in the Annual Report on Form N-CSR of BlackRock Funds for the year ended
September 30, 2012, and to the references to us under the headings “Financial Highlights” and “Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm” in the Prospectuses and “Financial Statements” in the Statement of Additional Information,
which are part of such Registration Statement.


	 
	/s/ Deloitte
    & Touche LLP
	 
	Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

January 24, 2013
No. 62738.

#### Meadows Wye & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 330267-K (New York).

*277Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of instruments for measuring the flowage of electricity and contains no jewels, 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 ORDER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

OSSIE LEE SLAUGHTER, )

)

Plaintiff, ) CASE NO. C05-1692-JCC-JPD

)

v. )

)

KING COUNTY, ) ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

) MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY 

Defendant. ) INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

____________________________________)

The Court, having reviewed Plaintiff’s civil rights complaint, Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary

injunctive relief, the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of Judge James P. Donohue, United States

Magistrate Judge (Dkt. No. 63), Plaintiff’s Objection to the R&R (Dkt. No. 65) and the remaining

record, does hereby find and ORDER as follows.

Plaintiff’s Objection does not address Judge Donohue’s recommendation that this Court deny

Plaintiff’s motion for injunctive relief on grounds that “neither the institutions nor the individuals

identified by Plaintiff in his motion for injunctive relief is a party to this action [and as such,] this Court

has no jurisdiction to enjoin the conduct of those institutions or individuals.” (R&R 2 (Dkt. No. 63).)

Accordingly:

(1) The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation.

(2) Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunctive relief (Dkt. No. 61) is DENIED.

Case 2:05-cv-01692-JCC Document 70 Filed 06/13/08 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 ORDER

(3) The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to Plaintiff, to counsel for

defendants, and to the Honorable James P. Donohue.

DATED this 13th day of June, 2008.A 

JOHN C. COUGHENOUR

United States District Judge

Case 2:05-cv-01692-JCC Document 70 Filed 06/13/08 Page 2 of 2
**Exhibit 99.9**

 

**CONSENT OF HOWARD BIRD**

 

I, Howard Bird, hereby consent to the references to, and the use of information derived from, the technical report dated January 6, 2011 titled “Black Fox Project National Instrument, NI 43-101 Technical Report Prepared for Brigus Gold Corp.” (the “Report”) in the annual report on Form 40-F of Sandstorm Gold, Ltd. for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012 and any amendments thereto (the “Annual Report”) being filed with United States Securities and Exchange Commission, which Annual Report incorporates by reference and attaches as an exhibit the Sandstorm Gold Ltd. Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2012 which refers to information contained in the Report.

 

I also consent to the use of my name, including as an expert or “qualified person,” in connection with the Annual Report.

 

Date: February 18, 2013

 
|   | /s/ Howard Bird                           |
|--------|-------------------------------------------|
|   | Name:  Howard   Bird                 |
|   | Title: Senior Vice President, Exploration |

 

1

----
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**1380 KA 09-00741**  PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, CARNI, LINDLEY, AND SCONIERS, JJ.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

V ORDER

JACINTO CEDENO, ALSO KNOWN AS THE GENERAL, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. (APPEAL NO. 1.)

TIMOTHY P. DONAHER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (DAVID R. JUERGENS OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (DANIEL GROSS OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a new sentence of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Harold L. Galloway, J.), rendered February 9, 2009 imposed upon defendant’s conviction of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the first degree (two counts), and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree (two counts). Defendant was resentenced pursuant to the 2004 Drug Law Reform Act.
It is hereby ORDERED that the sentence so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Entered: January 2, 2015 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court