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

House Calendar No. 103 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 602 

[Report No. 110–293] 

Providing for consideration of the conference report to accompany the bill 

(H.R. 2272) to invest in innovation through research and development, 

and to improve the competitiveness of the United States. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

AUGUST 1, 2007 

Ms. SUTTON, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; 

which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for consideration of the conference report to accompany the bill (H.R. 2272) to invest in innovation 

through research and development, and to improve the 

competitiveness of the United States. 

1 Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it 

2 shall be in order to consider the conference report to ac3 company the bill (H.R. 2272) to invest in innovation 

4 through research and development, and to improve the 

5 competitiveness of the United States. All points of order 

6 against the conference report and against its consideration 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

HRES 602 RH 

1 are waived. The conference report shall be considered as 

2 read. 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with BILLS

bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
House Calendar No. 103 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 602 

[Report No. 110

–293] 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for consideration of the conference report 

States. and to improve the competitiveness of the United innovation through research and development, to accompany the bill (H.R. 2272) to invest in 

AUGUST 1, 2007 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

ALAN FRAIRE

,

Appellant

,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

,

State

. §

§

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 1 9

- 00 2 75

- C R

Appeal from the

171 st D istrict Court

of El Paso C ounty, Texas

(TC# 20170D05623 )

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS Rebecca Macias ’ r equest for an extension of time within which to file

the remaining portion of the Reporter ’ s Record until April 2 4 , 2020

. NO FURTHER REQUESTS

FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE THE REMAI NING PORTION OF THE REPORTER ’ S

RECORD WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ORDERED that Rebecca Macias

, Roving Court Reporter for the 171 st D istrict

Court f or El Paso County, Texas, prepare the remaining portion of the Reporter ’ s Record and

forward the sam e to this Cou rt on or before April 24 , 2020

.

I T IS SO ORDERED this 2 nd d ay of April , 20 20

.

PER CURIAM

Before Alley , C.J., R odriguez and Palafox , JJ.
---

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 accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K/A
of Resource Group, Inc. for the Year Ended February 28, 2009, I, James P.
Geiskopf, President and Chief Executive Officer of Resource Group, Inc. hereby
certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:



|1. | Such Annual Report on Form 10-K for the Year ended
      February 28, 2009, 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 such Annual Report on Form
      10-K for the Year ended February 28, 2009, fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
      Resource Group, Inc.

By:       /s/ James P.
Geiskopf       
      James
Geiskopf             
President and Chief Executive Officer

Dated: June 16, 2008

---
From: wakko1954@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 8:39:24 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,

Timothy Ferrero

Lynnwood, WA 98087
From: ActorMD@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 9:11:02 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,

Michael Dean

Costa Mesa, CA 92627
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 TAXATION OF COSTS -- 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

MART LIIKANE,

Plaintiff,

v.

CITY OF SEATTLE, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. C05-1829RSL

TAXATION OF COSTS

Costs in the above-entitled cause are hereby taxed against PLAINTIFF MART LIIKANE and on

behalf of DEFENDANTS in the amount of $1,007.50.

Entered this 15th day of MAY , 2007 .

A

Bruce Rifkin

Clerk, U.S. District Court

Case 2:05-cv-01829-RSL Document 108 Filed 05/15/07 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         456,352
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,563,684
<ALLOWANCES>                                    30,000
<INVENTORY>                                    772,788
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,762,824
<PP&E>                                       2,214,263
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,995,361
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,191,463
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,233,197
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        55,654
<OTHER-SE>                                     553,190
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,191,463
<SALES>                                      1,815,182
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,815,182
<CGS>                                        1,488,438
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,488,438
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               279,612
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                50,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              35,141
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  8,990
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              8,990
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     8,990
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
01 

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

DETENTION ORDER 15.13

18 U.S.C. § 3142(i) Rev. 1/91

PAGE 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v. 

OSCAR NUNEZ-MURATALLA,

Defendant.

____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 05-527M

DETENTION ORDER 

Offense charged: 

Illegal Reentry After Deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).

Date of Detention Hearing: November 2, 2005.

The Court, having conducted a detention hearing pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f), and

based upon the factual findings and statement of reasons for detention hereafter set forth, finds:

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DETENTION

(1) A detainer has been placed on defendant by Immigration and Customs

Enforcement.

(2) Defendant has stipulated to detention, due to the immigration detainer lodged

against him, but reserves the right to contest his continued detention if there is a change in

circumstances.

Case 2:05-cr-00399-JLR Document 9 Filed 11/03/05 Page 1 of 2
01 

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

DETENTION ORDER 15.13

18 U.S.C. § 3142(i) Rev. 1/91

PAGE 2

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:

(1) Defendant shall be detained pending trial and committed to the custody of the

Attorney General for confinement in a correction facility separate, to the extent

practicable, from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody

pending appeal;

(2) Defendant shall be afforded reasonable opportunity for private consultation with

counsel;

(3) On order of a court of the United States or on request of an attorney for the

government, the person in charge of the corrections facility in which defendant

is confined shall deliver the defendant to a United States Marshal for the purpose

of an appearance in connection with a court proceeding; and

(4) The Clerk shall direct copies of this Order to counsel for the United States, to

counsel for the defendant, to the United States Marshal, and to the United States

Pretrial Services Officer.

DATED this 3rd day of November, 2005.

AJAMES P. DONOHUE

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 2:05-cr-00399-JLR Document 9 Filed 11/03/05 Page 2 of 2
**Exhibit 31.2**

**I, Anthony J. Galici, certifythat:**

**1.**     I have reviewed thisquarterly report on Form 10-Q of Griffin Land & Nurseries, Inc.;

**2.**     Based on my knowledge,this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;

**3.**     Based on my knowledge, thefinancial statements, and other financial information included in this report,fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;

**4.**     The registrant’s othercertifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

**a)**     Designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

**b)**    Evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

**c)**     Disclosed in this reportany change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and 

**5.**     The registrant’s othercertifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation ofinternal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent functions):

**a)**     All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

**b)**    Any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significantrole in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
| Date:  October 17, 2006 |   | /s/ ANTHONY J. GALICI                                  |   |
|------------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                         |   | Anthony J. Galici                                      |
|                         |   | Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and  Secretary |

 

----
IN THE SUPREME COURT FO R THE STATE OF MONTANA
No. DA 21-0384 IN THE MATTER OF: J.S., Youth In Need Of Care. ORDER Upon consideration of Father an d Appellant’s Motion For Extens ion Of Time (First), and with good cause shown, Father and Appellant C .G. is hereby granted an extension of time until November 5, 2021 in which to prepare, file and serve Father and Appella nt’s opening brief. No further extensions will be granted.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

October 1 2021

10/01/2021

Case Number: DA 21-0384
Case No. 13,535.

#### STRING et al. v. HILL.

[1 Crabbe, 454.] 1

District Court, E. D. Pennsylvania.

Dec. 17, 1841.

Shipping — Master—Extra Services.

A master is entitled to an extra allowance for ■services rendered out of the line of his duty, as in painting the ship.

This was a libel for work, materials, &e. fby David A. String and Maria A. Wood .against John P. Hill, late owner of the sloop itegulus],

O. Hopkinson, for libellants.

H. Hubbell, for respondent.

HOPKINSON, District Judge.

The claim of Maria A. Wood is for certain repairs done ■to the yawl boat of the Regulus, and for wharfage. The account was fully proved, and there has been no defence set up against it; there must therefore be a decree in favor of the libellant for the amount of her account, with interest from the 28th October, 1839, the date of the last item. The claim of the other libellant is made up of various items, set forth in an account annexed to the libel. The first is a charge made by the libel-lant, who was master of the sloop, for eighteen days’ work of himself and one George Link, in painting and scraping the sloop, at one dollar per day for each of them. It is proved by Link, who was hired for this work by the master, that the work was done, that it occupied the time stated in the account, and that the wages he received were one dollar per day, which was paid to him by the master. As to so much of this charge as is for the sum paid to Link, there seems to be no reason why it should hot be paid. As to the charge made by the master for his own work a question is raised, and it is denied that he is entitled to any extra pay or allowance for this service, beyond his wages as captain. That the seamen on board a vessel perform this duty, without any additional charge for it, is, I think, the constant usage, it being considered a part of their duty; and we find that nothing beyond his wages was paid to Samuel String, the master’s brother, who also assisted in doing this work. It is clear, however, that such work does not fall within the duty of the captain. An attempt ‘was made to prove a custom or usage obliging the captain to do this work when the vessel was lying in port, but it did not succeed. The evidence of George Link, a very substantial witness, with no interest whatever in the question, has a strong bearing in support of this charge. He says that the respondent told the captain to have the vessel overhauled; that he came there while the work was going on and was well pleased and satisfied; that they were, each, to have a dollar a day; and that the work took eighteen days. This seems to put the question at rest, and to support the charge by the agreement of the respondent, independent of the general ground that it was extra work, not presumed to be provided for in the captain’s wages.

The other charges and credits are not contested. The account, therefore, will stand thus:

> Wages for painting, &c. $ 36 00

> Other charges. 120 42

> 156 42

> Less, credits allowed. 100 00

> Balance . 56 42

> Interest from 29th September, 1839... 8 44

> $ 64 86

Decree for libellant Wood for $11 75, and for libellant String for $64 86, with costs.
No. 63352.

protests 306383-K, etc. (New York).

#### Wear Ever Baby Carriage Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise consist of ribbon similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Beer Stern Import Corp.*v. *United States*(39 Cust. Ct. 294, C.D. 1944), except that the merchandise herein is velvet pile ribbon, wholly or in chief value of cotton, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 343 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 343

Commemorating the marinas of the United States, expressing support for 
the designation of the sixth annual National Marina Day, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 26, 2007

 Mr. Rogers of Kentucky submitted the following resolution; which was 
     referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Commemorating the marinas of the United States, expressing support for 
the designation of the sixth annual National Marina Day, and for other 
                               purposes.

Whereas the citizens of the United States highly value recreation time and their 
        ability to access 1 of the greatest natural resources of the United 
        States, its waterways;
Whereas, in 1928, the word ``marina'' was used for the first time by the 
        National Association of Engine and Boat Manufacturers to define a 
        recreational boating facility;
Whereas the United States is home to over 12,000 recreational boating facilities 
        that contribute substantially to their local communities by providing 
        safe, reliable gateways to boating for members of their communities and 
        welcomed guests;
Whereas marinas of the United States also serve as stewards of the environment, 
        actively seeking to protect their surrounding waterways not only for the 
        enjoyment of the current generation, but for generations to come; and
Whereas marinas of the United States also provide their communities and visitors 
        a place where friends and families, united by a passion for the water, 
        can come together for recreation, rest, and relaxation: Now, therefore, 
        be it
    Resolved,  That the House of Representatives--
            (1) commemorates the marinas of the United States for 
        providing environmentally friendly gateways to boating for the 
        citizens of, and the visitors to the United States; and
            (2) supports designation of the sixth annual ``National 
        Marina Day'' in order--
                    (A) to honor the marinas of the United States for 
                their many contributions to their local communities; 
                and
                    (B) to make citizens, policy makers, elected 
                officials, and employees more aware of the overall 
                contributions marinas make to their well-being.
                                 <all>
```
ELECTRONIC RECORD

COA# 05-13-01213-CR OFFENSE: 2.02

Anthony Chamberlain v. The State

STYLE: ofTexas COUNTY: Dallas

7*0-/5'

COA DISPOSITION: AFFIRM TRIAL COURT: 194th Judicial District Court

DATE:05/27/2015 Publish: NO TC CASE #: F-1263564-M

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

Anthony Chamberlain v. The State

STYLE: of Texas

/)PteLL/?A/7^ Petition

FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IN CCA IS:

leFu*?t>

DATE:

JUDGE:

wr

u^u^t^<~

CCA#: 7fea-;s

CCA Disposition:

DATE:

JUDGE:

SIGNED: ____

PUBLISH:

REHEARING IN CCA IS:

JUDGE:

PC:_

DNP:

MOTION FOR

ELECTRONIC RECORD