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

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 768 

Honoring the life of Thomas ‘‘Tommy’’ Makem. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 23, 2007 

Ms. SHEA-PORTER submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 

the Committee on Education and Labor 

RESOLUTION 

Honoring the life of Thomas ‘‘Tommy’’ Makem. 

Whereas Thomas ‘‘Tommy’’ Makem was born on November 

4, 1932 in Keady, County Armagh, in Northern Ireland; 

Whereas Thomas Makem emigrated from Ireland to Dover, 

New Hampshire in 1955, after having won the All-Ireland Championship in acting, to pursue a career in acting 

and carrying with him only a makeshift suitcase, a pair 

of bagpipes, and proof of his health; 

Whereas in 1956 Thomas Makem joined the Clancy Brothers, 

all of whom had immigrated to the United States from 

Ireland, and began performing musically together as 

‘‘The Clancy Brothers and Tommy Makem’’ and were 

signed by Columbia Records; 


cnoel on PRODPC60 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 768 IH 

Whereas in 1961 Thomas Makem performed at the Newport 

Folk Festival and, along with Joan Baez, was named as 

the most promising newcomer; 

Whereas in 1963 the Clancy Brothers and Tommy Makem 

performed at the White House at the request of President John F. Kennedy; 

Whereas the Clancy Brothers and Tommy Makem continued 

to perform and record music together, performing in 

venues such as Carnegie Hall and on programs including 

The Ed Sullivan Show and The Tonight Show until 1969 

when Thomas Makem left the band amicably to pursue 

a solo career; 

Whereas in 1975 Thomas Makem again joined with Liam 

Clancy and the duo performed together until 1988, including a Clancy Brothers and Tommy Makem reunion 

at the Lincoln Center in New York City, New York; 

Whereas in 1997 Thomas Makem wrote a book, Tommy 

Makem’s Secret Ireland, and in 1999 premiered his own 

one-man theatre show, Invasions and Legacies, in New 

York, and established the Tommy Makem International 

Festival of Song in South Armagh, Ireland in 2000; 

Whereas throughout his performing career Thomas Makem 

was highly regarded as an exceptional musician by both 

his colleagues and the public and received many awards 

and honors including the World Folk Music Association’s 

Lifetime Achievement Award in 1999 and honorary doctorates from the University of New Hampshire in 1998, 

the University of Limerick in 2001, and the University 

of Ulster in 2007; and 

Whereas Thomas Makem died on Wednesday, August 1, 

2007 in Dover, New Hampshire and will now be rememVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:17 Oct 24, 2007 Jkt 069200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6300 E:\BILLS\HR768.IH HR768

cnoel on PRODPC60 with BILLS
3 

•HRES 768 IH 

bered as a dedicated husband, father, and grandfather 

and as one of the greatest Irish-Americans of the 20th 

Century: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives honors 

2 the life of Thomas ‘‘Tommy’’ Makem, and his accomplish3 ments as a musician, composer and performer. 

Æ 


cnoel on PRODPC60 with BILLS
Before the First Division,

May 17, 1967

No. P67/165.

#### Yuasa Trading Co. (America), Inc., and Arthur J. Fritz & Co. *v.*United States,

protest 62/15721 (San Francisco).

Watson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protest consists of charcoal briquettes similar in all material respects to those subject of *A. L. Farnsworth*v. *United States*(50 Cust. Ct. 62, C.D. 2389), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

No. 20

- 10717 Conference Calendar

**United States of America,**

Plaintiff

— Appellee **,**

versus

**Mearvin Eugene Hamilton,**

Defendant

— Appellant

**.**

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:20

- CR

- 26

- 1

Before **King, Southwick,** and **Ho,** Circuit Judges

**. Per Curiam**  **:** *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Mearvin Eugene
Hamilton has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance
with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Hamilton has filed a response and an incorporated

* Pursuant to **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  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 cuit**  **R ule**  47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED January 8, 2021

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 20-10717 Document: 00515699325 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/08/2021No. 20

- 10717

2 motion to appoint new counsel, which is **DENIED**

. See United States v. Wagner , 158 F.3d 901, 902

- 03 (5th Cir. 1998). The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us t o make a fair evaluation of Hamilton ’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claim without prejudice to collateral review. See United States v. Isgar , 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014).
We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Hamilton ’s response. We concur wit h counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review

. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is
**GRANTED** , counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and
the **APPEAL IS DISMISSED**

. See **5th Cir. R**

. 42 .2. Case: 20-10717 Document: 00515699325 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/08/2021
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 19 - 06 13 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. RYAN PATRICK MORRIS ,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including April 29 , 2020 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

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

March 23 2020

03/23/2020

Case Number: DA 19-0613
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 TO SHOW CAUSE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

JAMES ELLIOT, 

Plaintiff,

v.

MONROE CORRECTIONAL COMPLEX,

Defendant.

Case No. C06-474RSL

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

This matter comes before the Court sua sponte. On August 25, 2006, defendant Monroe

Correctional Complex (“Monroe”) filed a motion with related documents that, taken as a whole, exceeds

50 pages in length (Dkt. # 16). As of this date, a courtesy copy of these documents has not been

provided for chambers.

Monroe is hereby ORDERED to show cause within five days of this order why it should not be

sanctioned for failure to comply with this Court’s “Order Regarding Initial Disclosures, Joint Status

Report, and Early Settlement” (Dkt. # 4) and “Minute Order Setting Trial & Related Dates” (Dkt. # 15). 

Monroe shall immediately deliver a paper copy of the documents filed on August 25, 2006, with tabs or

other organizing aids as necessary and clearly marked with the words “Courtesy Copy of Electronic

Filing for Chambers,” to the Clerk’s Office.

Clerk of Court is directed to place this Order to Show Cause on the Court’s calendar for

September 11, 2006.

DATED this 30th day of August, 2006.

A

Robert S. Lasnik

United States District Judge

Case 2:06-cv-00474-RSL Document 17 Filed 08/30/06 Page 1 of 1
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 of Startech Environmental Corporation
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended January 31, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Joseph S. Klimek, Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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




/s/ Joseph S. Klimek
--------------------
Joseph S. Klimek
Chief Executive Officer, President
March 15, 2004
# Official Journal C 157/2013

| | ISSN 1977-091X
  doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2013.157.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 157 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 564 June 2013 |

ISSN 1977-091X

doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2013.157.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 157

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 564 June 2013

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2013/C 157/01 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6898 — RAG Stiftung/Evonik Industries) (1) | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2013/C 157/01

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6898 — RAG Stiftung/Evonik Industries) (1)

1

---

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2013/C 157/02 | Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations: 0,50 % on 1 June 2013 — Euro exchange rates | 2 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2013/C 157/02

Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations: 0,50 % on 1 June 2013 — Euro exchange rates

2

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY |
| | European Commission |
| 2013/C 157/03 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6942 — PAI Partners/R&R) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (1) | 3 |
| | OTHER ACTS |
| | European Commission |
| 2013/C 157/04 | Publication of an amendment application pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs | 4 |
| 2013/C 157/05 | Publication of an application pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs | 12 |

V   Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

2013/C 157/03

Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6942 — PAI Partners/R&R) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (1)

3

OTHER ACTS

European Commission

2013/C 157/04

Publication of an amendment application pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs

4

2013/C 157/05

Publication of an application pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs

12

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
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

HONORABLE RONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

RICHARD ROY SCOTT,

 Plaintiff,

v.

WILL BAILEY,

Defendant.

Case No. C06-5173RBL

ORDER

THIS MATTER comes on before the above-entitled Court upon plaintiff’s reconsideration/appeal [Dkt.

#17] of the U.S. District Judges’ Management Order [Dkt. #14]; plaintiff’s reconsideration/appeal [Dkt. #18]

of Magistrate Judge J. Kelley Arnold’s Order Denying Plaintiff’s Motion to Consolidate Cases [Dkt. #8] and

Order Denying Motion for Reconsideration [Dkt. #9]; and plaintiff’s reconsideration/appeal [Dkt. #40] of

Magistrate Judge J. Kelley Arnold’s Order Denying Motion to Appoint Counsel, Order on Motion for Leave,

Order on Motion for Discovery, Order on Motion to Stay, and Order on Motion for Sanctions [Dkt. #38]. 

Having considered the entirety of the records and file herein, the Court rules as follows:

This case has been referred to the Magistrate Judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636. Under Fed. R. Civ. P.

72(a), the non-dispositive order of a magistrate judge to whom a matter has been referred for pretrial matters

may be reviewed by the district court upon the objection of a party. The court construes Mr. Scott’s “appeals”

in these instances to be such objections.

ORDERED that plaintiff’s reconsiderations/appeals [Dkts. #17, 18 and 40] are DENIED.

Case 3:06-cv-05173-RBL Document 61 Filed 11/22/06 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

27

28

 ORDER

Page - 2

The Clerk shall send uncertified copies of this order to all counsel of record, and to any party appearing

pro se.

Dated this 22nd day of November, 2006.

ARONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-05173-RBL Document 61 Filed 11/22/06 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                       1,835,466
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               28,739,038
<ALLOWANCES>                                   820,064
<INVENTORY>                                 24,392,248
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            54,913,952
<PP&E>                                      21,043,170
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             103,259,012
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       41,947,914
<BONDS>                                      6,464,982
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          1
<COMMON>                                        25,578
<OTHER-SE>                                  53,802,168
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               103,259,012
<SALES>                                     40,458,106
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            40,458,106
<CGS>                                       32,923,941
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               32,923,941
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             708,360
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                784,540
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            784,540
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   784,540
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .03
        

</TABLE>
No. 55012.

#### S. Vuillet and C. M. Offray & Son, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 163874-K and 162527-K (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

It was stipulated that the Federal Reserve bank certified dual rates of exchange for the currencies involved in the liquidation of the entries for the dates of exportation of the merchandise covered by the entries and that the circumstances relating to the liquidation of the said entries are similar in all material respects to those in Abstract 54732. In view of this stipulation and following the cited decision it was held that the currencies of the invoices covered by certain enumerated entries should, have been converted in the manner directed by the judgment of this court in said Abstract 54732, in accordance with Bureau of Customs Circular Letter No. 2675, dated October 19, 1949.
##### 



CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORT
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
  1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
  By:
    
    /s/ Daniel Mingdong WuName:
    
    Daniel Mingdong WuTitle:
    
    Chief Financial Officer
 
 *
    
    A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 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.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
financial statements of Ocean Optique Distributors, Inc. For the nine months
ended March 31, 1998 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                         37
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  1,675
<ALLOWANCES>                                   133
<INVENTORY>                                    4,388
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               7,414
<PP&E>                                         681
<DEPRECIATION>                                 255
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 7,865
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          4,511
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    3,844
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     (948)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   7,865
<SALES>                                        2,787
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               2,787
<CGS>                                          2,159
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  2,159
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               3,462
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             205
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,039)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,039)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,042)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
        


</TABLE>
----

Berichtigung des Protokolls aufgrund von Artikel 43 Absatz 1 des Übereinkommens über die Errichtung eines Europäischen Polizeiamts (Europol-Übereinkommen) zur Änderung dieses Übereinkommens

(Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union C 2 vom 6. Januar 2004)

(2005/C 110/14)

Diese Berichtigung wurde mit Berichtigungsprotokoll vorgenommen, das am 25. November 2004 in Brüssel vom Rat als Verwahrer unterzeichnet wurde.

Seite 5, Artikel 1 Nummer 7 (betreffend das Europol-Übereinkommen, geänderter Artikel 12 Absatz 1, Einleitungsteil):

anstatt:

„(1)   Europol hat für jede nach Artikel 10 bei ihm zur Erfüllung seiner Aufgaben geführte automatisierte Datei mit personenbezogenen Daten in einer Errichtungsanordnung, die der Zustimmung des Verwaltungsrates bedarf, festzulegen:“

muss es heißen:

„(1)   Europol hat für jede nach Artikel 10 bei ihm zur Erfüllung seiner Aufgaben geführte automatisierte Datei mit personenbezogenen Daten in einer Errichtungsanordnung festzulegen:“.

----
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

September 28, 2009 

0921 

Order 

 

September 28, 2009 

139127 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 139127 

 COA: 291632 

Washtenaw CC: 07-000440-FC 

JOSEPH WEBSTER, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 21, 2009 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 126 Reference Change Senate (RCS)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 126

                          [Report No. 105-87]

  Authorizing supplemental expenditures by the Committee on Veterans' 
                                Affairs.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 25, 1997

  Mr. Specter, from the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, reported the 
    following original resolution; which was placed on the calendar

                           September 26, 1997

         Referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  Authorizing supplemental expenditures by the Committee on Veterans' 
                                Affairs.

    Resolved, That section 18(b) of Senate Resolution 54, 105th 
Congress, agreed to February 13, 1997, is amended by striking out 
``$1,123,430'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``$1,698,430''.
                                 <all>
```
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 

AT SEATTLE 

J.L., M.L., and K.L., their minor daughter, 

 Plaintiffs, 

 v. 

MERCER ISLAND SCHOOL DISTRICT, 

 Defendant. 

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE 

CASE NUMBER: C06-494MJP 

Jury Verdict. This action came before the Court for a trial by jury. The issues have been 

tried and the jury has rendered its verdict. 

Decision by Court. This action came to consideration before the Court. The issues have 

been considered and a decision has been rendered.

THE COURT HAS ORDERED THAT 

 The original decision of the Administrative Law Judge is AFFIRMED, and Plaintiffs’ 

request for a declaratory judgment that the minor K.L. was denied a free appropriate education 

under the Individuals with Disabilities Act or state law by Defendant Mercer Island School 

District is DENIED. 

Dated this October 6, 2010. 

 William M. McCool 

 Clerk 

 s/Mary Duett 

 Deputy Clerk 

Case 2:06-cv-00494-MJP Document 84 Filed 10/06/10 Page 1 of 1