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

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 457 

Calling on the Russian Federation to withdraw its military forces, armaments, 

and ammunition stockpiles from the sovereign territory of the Republic 

of Moldova. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 5, 2007 

Mr. MCCOTTER (for himself, Ms. BERKLEY, Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of 

Florida, Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida, Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota, Mr. SHIMKUS, Mr. SHUSTER, and Mr. TANCREDO) submitted the 

following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

RESOLUTION 

Calling on the Russian Federation to withdraw its military 

forces, armaments, and ammunition stockpiles from the 

sovereign territory of the Republic of Moldova. 

Whereas at the 1999 Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Summit in Istanbul, Turkey, the 

Russian Federation committed to completely withdraw its 

military forces from the territory of the Republic of 

Moldova by the end of 2002; 

Whereas at the 2002 OSCE Ministerial Council in Porto, 

Portugal, the Russian Federation agreed to complete the 

withdrawal of its military forces from the territory of 

Moldova by December 31, 2003; 


bajohnson on PRODPC60 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 457 IH 

Whereas the Russian Federation ceased its withdrawal of 

military forces from the Transnistrian region of Moldova 

on March 24, 2004, and has yet to show any intention 

of continuing its withdrawal process; 

Whereas 1,250 Russian soldiers remain stationed in the 

Transnistrian region of Moldova against the will of the 

Moldovan people; 

Whereas the presence of Russian military forces in the 

Transnistrian region of Moldova is a clear violation of 

Moldova’s territorial sovereignty; 

Whereas the Russian Federation as a participating state in 

the OSCE is obligated to ‘‘. . . respect the territorial integrity of each of the participating States . . . [and] refrain from making each other’s territory the object of 

military occupation . . .’’; and 

Whereas Russia’s failure to withdraw troops from the 

Transnistrian region of Moldova is a violation of its commitments as a member of the OSCE: Now, therefore, be 

it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) calls upon the Russian Federation to fulfill 

3 its commitments and unconditionally withdraw its 

4 military forces, under OSCE observation and 

5 verification, from the Transnistrian region of the 

6 Republic of Moldova; 

7 (2) calls upon the Russian Federation to re8 move or destroy all of its armaments and ammuni9 tion stockpiles in the Transnistrian region of 

10 Moldova; and 


bajohnson on PRODPC60 with BILLS
3 

•HRES 457 IH 

1 (3) declares the present armed forces stationed 

2 in the Security Zone of Moldova should be replaced 

3 with a multinational peacekeeping contingent under 

4 an OSCE mandate. 

Æ 


bajohnson on PRODPC60 with BILLS
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF

CHIEF
FINANCIAL OFFICER

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 (Amendment No. 1) of Retrophin, Inc. (the Company), for the period ended
December 31, 2015 (the Report), the undersigned officer of the Company 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 such officers
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.
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                    |  |                              
|------------------- |  | -----------------------------
|Date: March 2, 2016 |  | /s/ Laura Clague             
|                    |  | Laura Clague                 
|                    |  | Chief Financial Officer      
|                    |  | (Principal Financial Officer)
EXHIBIT
13.1





GREEN
CHINA RESOURCES, INC.





Certification





Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, the
undersigned, Jean Chalopin, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
of Green China Resources, Inc. (the “company”), hereby certifies, to his
knowledge, that the company's annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended
December 31, 2009  (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the company.





Date:
June  29 , 2010





/S/ Jean ChalopinName:
      Jean ChalopinTitle:
      Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
  Officer





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.





The
foregoing certification is being furnished with the company’s Report pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and it is not to be incorporated by
reference into any filing of the company, whether made before or after the date
hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such
filing.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-6717

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

TOMEL K. LUCAS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District

Judge. (CR-94-78, CA-01-2-7)

Submitted: August 9, 2001 Decided: August 17, 2001

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tomel K. Lucas, Appellant Pro Se. Ray B. Fitzgerald, Jr., OFFICE

OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlottesville, Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Tomel Kareem Lucas 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 on the reasoning of

the district court. See United States v. Lucas, Nos. CR-94-78; CA01-2-7 (W.D. Va. Apr. 17, 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
From: mgmusa78@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 7:26:48 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 Walls

Cave City, AR 72521
From: puaka1@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 8:39:19 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

As a physician, 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 urge 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 Tovey

Columbia, MO 65202
#### Scott Tremayne GRIFFIN, Petitioner—Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent—Appellee.

No. 05-6490.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted July 27, 2005.

Decided Aug. 5, 2005.

Scott Tremayne Griffin, Appellant pro se. James Ashford Metcalfe, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before KING, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM.

Scott Tremayne Griffin seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion to reconsider a prior order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a habeas proceeding *134unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000); *Reid v. Angelone,*369 F.3d 363, 370 (4th Cir.2004) (applying the certificate of appealability requirement to appellate review of the denial of a Fed. R.Civ.P. 60(b) motion). A certificate of appealability will not issue for claims addressed by a district court absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. *See Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Griffin has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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*
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

Order-1 THOMAS A. CENA, JR.

Attorney at Law

2115 North 30th, Suite 201

Tacoma, WA 98403

(253) 572-5120 Fax: (253) 593-4503

E-MAIL: TomC55@nventure.com

JUDGE LEIGHTON

 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON, AT TACOMA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

) NO. CR05-5747RBL

Plaintiff, )

) ORDER APPROVING SUBSTITUTION

vs. ) OF DEFENSE COUNSEL FOR PURPOSES

) OF SENTENCING

STACY CHARLES COMER, )

)

Defendant. )

__________________________________________)

THIS MATTER having come on regularly before the above-entitled Court upon Defendant’s

Motion for substitution of defense counsel for purposes of sentencing. The Court having reviewed the

motion of Defendant, STACY CHARLES COMER, the Court having additionally reviewed the

declaration of counsel in support of said motion, having reviewed the files and records of this

proceeding, and being fully advised herein, it is hereby

/

/

Case 3:05-cr-05747-RBL Document 172 Filed 02/05/07 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

Order-2 THOMAS A. CENA, JR.

Attorney at Law

2115 North 30th, Suite 201

Tacoma, WA 98403

(253) 572-5120 Fax: (253) 593-4503

E-MAIL: TomC55@nventure.com

ORDERED that current defense counsel, THOMAS A. CENA, JR., is hereby allowed to

withdraw and that the CJA Administrator locate substitute defense counsel for Defendant, for

sentencing. 

DATED this 5th day of February, 2007.

A

RONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Presented by

/s/ THOMAS A. CENA, JR.

______________________________________

THOMAS A. CENA, JR., WSBA NO. 6539

Attorney for Defendant Stacy Charles Comer

Case 3:05-cr-05747-RBL Document 172 Filed 02/05/07 Page 2 of 2
From: dorothy.maloney@comcast.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:42:53 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.

Sincerely,

Dorothy Maloney

Washington, DC 20007
From: jchpod@sbcglobal.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:30:54 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,

Heather Podbielski

Arlington, TX 76017
```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 239 (Friday, December 12, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 73872]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-29144]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2005-TX-0002; FRL-9920-33-Region 6]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Texas; Repeal of Lead Emission Rules for Stationary Sources in El Paso 
and Dallas County

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve a revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for Texas 
which repeals lead emission rules which cover stationary sources in El 
Paso and Dallas county that are no longer in existence. This action is 
being taken under section 110(k) and part D of the Clean Air Act.

DATES: Written comments should be received on or before January 12, 
2015.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to Mr. Guy Donaldson, Chief, Air 
Planning Section (6PD-L), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross 
Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. Comments may also be 
submitted electronically or through hand delivery/courier by following 
the detailed instructions in the ADDRESSES section of the direct final 
rule located in the rules section of this Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kenneth W. Boyce, (214) 665-7259, 
boyce.kenneth@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the final rules section of this Federal 
Register, EPA is approving the State's SIP submittal repealing lead 
emission rules which cover stationary sources that are no longer 
operating in both El Paso County and Dallas County. We are taking this 
action as a direct final rule without prior proposal because the Agency 
views this as a noncontroversial action and anticipates no adverse 
comments. A detailed rationale for the proposed approval is set forth 
in the direct final rule. If no relevant adverse comments are received 
in response to this action no further activity is contemplated. If EPA 
receives relevant adverse comments, the direct final rule will be 
withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in a 
subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not 
institute a second comment period. Any parties interested in commenting 
on this action should do so at this time.
    For additional information, see the direct final rule which is 
located in the rules section of this Federal Register and the 
electronic docket found in the www.regulations.gov Web site (Docket ID 
No. EPA-R06-OAR-2005-TX-0002).

    Dated: November 19, 2014.
Ron Curry,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2014-29144 Filed 12-11-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```