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

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 337 

Supporting the goals and ideals of a Lyme Disease Awareness Month. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 25, 2007 

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey (for himself, Mr. STUPAK, Mr. HOLDEN, and Mr. 

SHAYS) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

RESOLUTION 

Supporting the goals and ideals of a Lyme Disease 

Awareness Month. 

Whereas Lyme disease is the most prevalent vector-borne disease in the United States today and is usually caused by 

the bite of an infected tick; 

Whereas based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reporting statistics, Lyme disease has been reported in 49 States and the District of Columbia, and 

cases increased nationally almost three-fold from 1993, in 

which 8257 cases were reported, to 2005, in which 

23,305 cases were reported, and increased 18 percent in 

one year from 2004 to 2005; 

Whereas studies indicate that the actual number of Lyme disease cases are approximately 10 times the number reported; 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 337 IH 

Whereas Lyme disease is a common but frequently misunderstood disease that, if not caught early and treated properly, can cause prolonged chronic illness; 

Whereas Lyme disease can attack every system in the body 

including cardiac, musculo-skeletal, and the central nervous system; 

Whereas Lyme disease can be treated successfully with antibiotics if caught early and treated appropriately; 

Whereas Lyme disease often goes undetected because it mimics other illnesses; 

Whereas the best protection against Lyme disease is to wear 

light-colored clothing with pants tucked into socks when 

entering tick-infested areas, to perform tick checks, and 

to consider the use of repellents; 

Whereas the ticks that spread Lyme disease also spread other 

diseases, such as anaplasmosis and babesiosis, clouding 

the diagnostic and treatment picture; 

Whereas a Lyme disease awareness month would provide an 

opportunity to focus on this significant and complex disease, to provide information on and raise public awareness of its causes, effects, treatments, and co-infections, 

and to underscore important education and research efforts surrounding Lyme disease and other tick-borne diseases; and 

Whereas it would be appropriate to designate May as Lyme 

Disease Awareness Month: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) supports the goals and ideals of a Lyme 

3 Disease Awareness Month to raise public awareness 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
3 

•HRES 337 IH 

1 of the causes, effects, treatments, and co-infections 

2 of Lyme disease; 

3 (2) encourages and supports education and re4 search efforts with respect to Lyme disease and 

5 other tick-borne diseases; and 

6 (3) requests that the President issue a procla7 mation calling upon the people of the United States 

8 to observe such a month with appropriate programs, 

9 ceremonies, and activities. 

Æ 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
Case Mo. 8,819.

#### In re MACHADO.

[3 Ben. 131: 2 N. B. R. 352 (Quarto, 113); 1 Chi. Leg. News. 163: 2 Am. Law T. Rep. Bankr. 53.] 1

District Court. S. D. New York.

Jan. 20, 1869.

Bankrupt’s Oath — Withdrawal of Opposition.

Where, after a bankrupt had taken the oath required by the 29tli section of the bankruptcy act [of 1867 (14 Stat. 531)], a creditor filed specifications of opposition to his discharge, alleging, among other things, wilful false swearing in the affidavits annexed to the petition and schedules, and afterwards withdrew his appearance in op*147position and the specifications: *Bdd,*that the oath of the bankrupt, under that section, ought ■to be taken anew, after such withdrawal.

[In the matter of John A. Machado, a bankrupt.]

A. W. Speir, for petitioner.

BLATCHFORD, District Judge.

In this case, the oath of the bankrupt required by the '29th section of the act was subscribed and taken on the 3d of December, 1868. Specifications in opposition to his discharge were filed on the 4th of January, 1869, by a credit- or, alleging, among other things, wilful false swearing in the affidavits annexed to his petition and schedules, in certain particulars. The case then came before me and was ordered to stand for hearing on the specifications, with leave to take testimony. On the 19th of January, 1869, the creditor withdrew in writing his appearance in opposition and the specifications. No new oath of the bankrupt under section 29 is presented. I think, in view of the fact that the 29th section specifies as a ground for withholding a discharge, that the bankrupt, or some person in his behalf, has procured the assent of a creditor to the discharge, or influenced the action of a creditor, at some stage of the proceedings, by a pecuniary consideration or obligation, and that the same ground is made, by section 34, a ground for setting aside and annulling the discharge after it is granted, that, in this case, and in all cases where specifications such as those in this case are put in and are afterwards withdrawn, the oath of the bankrupt required by section 29 ought to be subscribed and taken after the withdrawal. A decision in this case is, therefore, suspended, to allow the defect to be supplied.
Before the First Division,

April 21, 1966

No. P66/41.

protests 64/23856 and 64/14688 (New York).

#### Gitkin Co. and The Otto Gerdau Co. *v.*United States,

Nichols, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of valances similar *902in all material respects to those the subject of *D. N. & E. Walter & Co. et al.*v. *United States*(43 Cust. Ct. 26, C.D. 2098), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
* Pursuant 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 2, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-50583

Summary Calendar

 

TEXAS ASSOCIATION OF BUSINESS;

WILLIAM O. HAMMOND,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

versus

MIKE BADNARIK; TONY BUZBEE; DAVID CAIN;

PAUL CLAYTON; DAVID COUNTS; BOB GLAZE;

MIKE HEAD; DONNIE JARVIS; NATHANIEL LAFLEUR;

DAVID LENGEFELD; JOSEPHINE MILLER; ROBIN MOORE;

ROBERT PARKER; RAUL PRADO; GEORGE ROBINSON;

TOM UHER; KEN YARBROUGH,

Defendants-Appellees.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. A-02-CV-826-SS

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

Before BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Texas Association of Business (TAB) and William O.

Hammond appeal the district court’s dismissal of their complaint

for lack of jurisdiction. They argue that the district court

erred in determining that the complaint did not allege facts

establishing an actual case or controversy as they have been
No. 03-50583

-2-

threatened with lawsuits and a criminal investigation concerning

their creation and publishing of issue-oriented advertisements

discussing the records of various candidates for the 2002 Texas

elections. Because TAB and Hammond have not alleged that the

threat of litigation is fairly traceable to the challenged action

of the defendants, they have not met their burden to establish

that an actual case or controversy exists. See Lujan v.

Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560-61 (1992).

AFFIRMED.
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 Real Value Estates, Inc.  (the "Company") on Form 10-K A-1 for the period ended May 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:



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 the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.



3.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.









Date:   April 19, 2010



By: /s/ DENNIS T. KUSHNER

__________________________

Dennis T. Kushner

Chief Executive Officer





1
David,

Below please see the response from Alumax of South Carolina regarding your July 01, 2011 e

- ma il with questions around coke
sulfur content.

Contact me if questions.

Henk

Henk van der Meyden, PG Environmental Manager
Alcoa

- Mt. Holly (dba Alumax of South Carolina) Office: (843) 572

- 5361 Cell: (843) 296

- 3359 Fax: (843) 572

- 5378

1. The range of sulfur content in the coke utilized to make
anodes used in the reduction cells over the last year of operation.

Response: The range of sulfur content in coke utilized to
make anodes, as based on the monthly average of coke shipments received, was 2.09% t o 2.17% for the period July 2010

- June
2011.

2. The highest sulfur content in the coke utilized to make
anodes used in the reduction cells at any time during the last 10

years.

Response: The highest sulfur content in the coke utilized
to make
anodes ov er the last 10 years, as based on the monthly average of coke shipments received, was 2.77%.

3. The lowest sulfur content anode coke that you believe you
could consistently obtain in sufficient quantities to operate your facility at capacity, long term (e .g. over the next 10 years).

Response: Given concerns about the future availability of low sulfur coke, Alcoa believes that the lowest sulfur content anode coke that will be available in sufficient quantities to operate Alumax of South Carolina at capacit y long term is 3% sulfur. This 3% sulfur coke will be a blend of low and high sulfur
material.
Before the Second Division,

September 14, 1967

No. P67/306.

#### John A. Steer Company *v.*United States, protests 62/5933 and 63/7006 (Philadelphia).

Rao, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of coordinato-graphs or parts, dedicated for use therewith, in chief value of metal, similar in all material respects to those the subject of *John A. Steer Company*v. *United States*(53 CCPA 67, C.A.D. 879), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kevin CAMPFIELD, a/k/a Kevin Macon, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 01-6627.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted June 21, 2001.

Decided July 5, 2001.

Kevin Campfield, pro se. Jamie M. Bennett, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, MD, for appellee.

*152Before WIDENER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM.

Kevin Campfield seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal substantially on the reasoning of the district court.*
      *United States v. Campfield,*Nos. CR-98-315; CA-01-622-CCB (D.Md. Mar. 27, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*

Campfield’s claim that his sentence is not proper in light of the rule announced in *Apprendi v. New Jersey,*530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), is without merit. We recently held in *United States v. Sanders,*247 F.3d 139 (4th Cir.2001), that the new rule announced in *Apprendi*is not retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review.
From: egalicki@san.rr.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 6:42:53 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.

You may take all the birth control you wish, and you may murder all the unborn human beings you

wish, for now, but don't make people participate who find these things more than offensive. Some of us

find them attrocities.

Sincerely,

Ed Galicki

San Diego, CA 92117
EXHIBIT 32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C.§1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection
with the Quarterly Report of Osteotech, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for
the quarter ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Richard W. Bauer, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my
knowledge: (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 the Report fairly presents, in all material
  respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  /S/Richard
  W. BauerRichard W.
  Bauer
  Chief Executive Officer
  August 9, 2005
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title: Economicgeology of the Summerfield and Woodsfield quadrangles, Ohio, with descriptionsof coal and other mineral resources except oil and gas**
 
Report | Plate
 
SuDoc Number:I 19.3:720
Item Number:0620 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000957930
 
July 26, 2018
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



    	 



    

 






    	29



    	 



    

 






    	30



    	 



    

 






    	31



    	 



    

 






    	32



    	 



    

 






    	33



    	 



    

 






    	34



    	 



    

 






    	35



    	 



    

 






    	36



    	 



    

 






    	37



    	 



    

 






    	38



    	 



    

 






    	39



    	 



    

 






    	40



    	 



    

 






    	41



    	 



    

 






    	42



    	 



    

 






    	43



    	 



    

 






    	44



    	 



    

 






    	45



    	 



    

 






    	46



    	 



    

 






    	47



    	 



    

 






    	48



    	 



    

 






    	49



    	 



    

 






    	50



    	 



    

 






    	51



    	 



    

 






    	52



    	 



    

 






    	53



    	 



    

 






    	54



    	 



    

 






    	55



    	 



    

 






    	56



    	 



    

 






    	57
AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORPORATION
ANNUAL COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE
PURSUANT TO SECTION 3.11(a) OF THE SALE AND
SERVICING AGREEMENT AND
ITEM 1123 OF REGULATION AB
  (i)
    
    A review of the activities of the Servicer during the reporting period ended
March 31, 2009, and of its performance under the Agreement has been made under my
supervision.(ii)
    
    To the best of my knowledge and information, based upon such review, the
Servicer has fulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement throughout such period
in all material respects.
 rd
 /s/ Paul C. HondaPaul C. HondaAssistant Vice President, Assistant Secretary, and

Compliance Officer
(senior officer in charge of the servicing function)
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

PAGE – 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

MARIA DEL TORO-CHACON,

Petitioner,

v.

MICHAEL CHERTOFF, et al.,

Respondents.

CASE NO. C05-1861RSL

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The Court, having reviewed the Report and Recommendation of the

Honorable Monica J. Benton, United States Magistrate Judge, petitioner’s objections,

and the remainder of the record, finds and ORDERS as follows:

(1) The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation.

(2) Given the specific facts of this case, the Court finds petitioner is not being

indefinitely detained under Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001), or unreasonably

imprisoned un der Tijani v. Willis, 430 F.3d 1241 (9th Cir. 2005). Even if the Court

were to conclude that petitioner’s twenty-nine month detention during the pendency of

her appeals is unreasonable, the Court has already ordered the remedy to which she

would be entitled, namely a bail hearing before an Immigration Judge with the power to

grant bail unless the government establishes that petitioner is a flight risk or a danger to

the community. The bail hearing conducted on May 15, 2006, provided all the process

to which petitioner was entitled. 

(3) Petitioner’s § 2241 petition (Dkt. #1) is DENIED, petitioner’s cross-motion

to set bond (Dkt. #34) is DENIED, respondents’ motion to dismiss (Dkt. #27) is

Case 2:05-cv-01861-RSL Document 44 Filed 03/10/08 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

PAGE – 2

GRANTED, and this action is DISMISSED with prejudice.

Dated this 10th day of March, 2008.

A

Robert S. Lasnik

United States District Judge

Case 2:05-cv-01861-RSL Document 44 Filed 03/10/08 Page 2 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 -1-

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

AKRAM ASWAD ALMUSSA and JOSHUA

KEBEDE,

Defendants.

No. CR05-381Z

ORDER

Defendant, Akram Almussa, having filed a motion to continue the trial date and the

Court, having reviewed the Motion and Declaration of Counsel, finds that a failure to grant

the requested continuance would adversely affect his ability to defend himself and impact the

free exercise of religion, and taking into account the exercise of due diligence, within the

meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A). The Court also finds that the ends of justice will be

served by continuing the trial date and that a continuance is necessary to ensure effective

trial preparation and the ability of the defendant to effectively assist his lawyer at trial and to

be capable of taking the stand and testify without being unduly effected by fasting required

during the time between dawn and dusk as required by his religion, and these factors

outweigh the best interests of the public in a more speedy trial within the meaning of 18

U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A).

Case 2:05-cr-00381-TSZ Document 94 Filed 08/21/06 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 -2-

For these reasons, the Court hereby ORDERS that the trial date be continued from

September 25, 2006, to November 27, 2006. Pre-trial motions shall be due on September 15,

2006.

It is ORDERED that the time between September 25, 2006, and November 27, 2006,

shall be excluded in the computation of time under the Speedy Trial Act as to all defendants

as this is a reasonable period of delay pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3161(h).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 21st day of August, 2006.

AThomas S. Zilly

United States District Judge

Case 2:05-cr-00381-TSZ Document 94 Filed 08/21/06 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 15








ACCOUNTANT’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT








To the Board of Directors and Shareholders


of Mediware Information Systems, Inc.:





We are aware that Mediware Information Systems, Inc. has incorporated by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 333-07591, No. 333-83016, No. 333-119503, No. 333-123496 and No. 333-130576 its Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009, which includes our report dated April 29, 2009 covering the unaudited interim financial
information contained therein. Pursuant to Rule 436(c) under of the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Act”), that report is not considered a part of the registration statement prepared or certified by our firm or a report prepared or certified by our firm within the meaning of Section 7 and 11 of the Act. It should be noted that we have not performed any procedures subsequent to April 29, 2009.








Eisner LLP


New York, New York


April 29, 2009