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

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1124 

To grant the Director of the United States Marshals Service authority to 

appoint criminal investigators in the excepted service. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 15, 2017 

Mr. HATCH (for himself, Mr. COONS, Mr. CORNYN, and Ms. KLOBUCHAR) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To grant the Director of the United States Marshals Service 

authority to appoint criminal investigators in the excepted service. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Patrick T. Carothers 

5 U.S. Marshals Service Hiring Improvement Act of 2017’’. 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1124 IS

1 SEC. 2. UNITED STATES MARSHALS SERVICE EXCEPTED 

2 SERVICE APPOINTMENT AUTHORITY. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 37 of title 28, United 

4 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol5 lowing: 

6 ‘‘§ 570. Excepted service appointment authority 

7 ‘‘(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section, the terms ‘com8 petitive service’ and ‘excepted service’ have the meanings 

9 given those terms in sections 2102 and 2103, respectively, 

10 of title 5. 

11 ‘‘(b) AUTHORITY.—The Director may appoint a 

12 qualified candidate to the position of deputy marshal or 

13 criminal investigator— 

14 ‘‘(1) in accordance with the statutes, rules, and 

15 regulations governing appointments under Schedule 

16 B of the excepted service; and 

17 ‘‘(2) notwithstanding any statutes, rules, or 

18 regulations governing appointments in the competi19 tive service. 

20 ‘‘(c) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—The appointment of 

21 a candidate to a position under the authority under sub22 section (b) shall not be considered to cause the position 

23 to be converted from the competitive service to the ex24 cepted service. 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 1124 IS

1 ‘‘(d) LIMIT.—Service by an incumbent in a position 

2 under the authority under subsection (b) may not exceed 

3 4 years. 

4 ‘‘(e) NONCOMPETITIVE CONVERSION.—The Director 

5 may, upon satisfactory completion of 3 years of substan6 tially continuous service by a qualified incumbent who was 

7 appointed to a position under the authority under sub8 section (b), convert the appointment of the individual, 

9 without competition, to a career or career-conditional ap10 pointment.’’. 

11 (b) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENT.— 

12 The table of sections for chapter 37 of title 28, United 

13 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol14 lowing: 

‘‘570. Excepted service appointment authority.’’. 

Æ 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
October 10, 1957

No. 61260.

Suit 4888.

#### United States *v.*Hercules Antiques and The Danwill Company.

Abstract 59910 reversed June 25, 3957. C. A. D. 662.
# United States Court of Appeals

**for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

January 20, 2011

ERRATA

______________________

Appeal No. 2010-1147

PAPIERFABRIK AUGUST KOEHLER AG AND

KOEHLER AMERICA, INC.,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

AND

MITSUBISHI INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION,

MITSUBISHI HITEC PAPER FLENSBURG GMBH,

AND MITSUBISHI HITEC PAPER BIELEFELD

GMBH,

Plaintiffs,

v.

UNITED STATES,

Defendant,

AND

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION,

Defendant-Appellee,

ANDAPPLETON PAPERS INC.,

Defendant-Appellee.

Decided: January 11, 2011

Nonprecedential Opinion

______________________

Please make the following change:

Page 7, line 5, change “19 U.S.C. § 156a(b)(1)(B)(i)” to

--19 U.S.C. § 1516a(b)(1)(B)(i)--.
Devany, Dennis (OST) \iOT- 0^7- l9l1^ >^^^^ 

From: 1000 Islands Parrot Head Club [tiparrotheads@yahoo.com] 

Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 1:03 PM 

To: RobertH@co.jefferson.ny.us 

Cc: Devany, Dennis (OST) 

Subject: Re: Public Support for Cape Air Proposal for EAS Service 

— J 

ro 

> 

o 

U J 

_o 

f-;-^ ^--. O 

fTi-^ m 

^ ^ ^ ^S-^ 

o g ^ 

CO 

Correction on mistyped address 

The correct address is as follows: 

1000 Islands Parrot Head Club 

P.O. Box 8263 

Watertown, NY 13601 

AB 

— On Thu, 11/11/10,1000 Islands Parrot Head Club <tiparrotheads(a)vahoo. com> wrote: 

From: 1000 Islands Parrot Head Club <tiparrotheads@vahoo.com> 

Subject: Public Support for Cape Air Proposal for EAS Service 

To: RobertH@co.jefferson.nv.us 

Cc: Dennis.DeVany(a),ost.dot.gov 

Date: Thursday, November 11, 2010, 12:49 PM 

Dear Mr. Hagemann, 

Over the past few weeks the process of rebidding for EAS service to Ogdensburg, Massena and Watertown has 

been ongoing. While the 1000 Islands Parrot Head Club has had an opportunity in public forum to show our 

support for the Cape Air proposal for continued service in both Ogdensburg and Massena, we have been unable 

to find any public forum in Watertown and Jefferson County to show our support. Can you please advise on 

when we can speak out publicly in support of Cape Air? 

We at the 1000 Islands Parrot Head Club have had the opportunity to work with Cape Air over the past three 

summers in connection with our 1000 Islands Parrot Head Golf Outing to benefit the Make A Wish Foundation 

of Central New York. Cape Air's generous, hands-on support has helped us forward over $10,000 on to Make 

A Wish over the past three years. 

During the last round of bidding, no public forum was offered in Watertown and the Jefferson County 

endorsement of another airline was made at the final hour of the public comment period, giving no time for a 

public response with opposing views. We hope this will not be the case again this time. 

Will you please let us know when we might be allowed to show our support for Cape Air publicly before the 

deadline for public comment has expired? 

Thank you, 
Andrea Bos, President 

1000 Islands Parrot Head Club 

P.O. Box 8363 

Watertown, NY 13601
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

RENZETTI, INC. : Civil Action No. 05-cv-1141

:

Plaintiff, :

:

v. :

:

DYNA-KING, INC. :

:

Defendant :

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO DISMISS

Plaintiff, RENZETTI, INC. by and through its undersigned counsel, hereby moves

this Court under Rule 41.1(b) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure for the dismissal of the

action without prejudice against DYNA-KING, INC. on the grounds that the parties have

resolved their dispute and have entered into a Settlement Agreement dated September 6,

2005. 

Respectfully submitted,

EUGENE E. RENZ, JR., P.C.

Dated: October 26, 2005 /Eugene E. Renz, Jr./

 EUGENE E. RENZ, JR.

Attorney for Plaintiff 

RENZETTI, INC.

205 North Monroe Street

Post Office Box 2056

Media, PA 19063-9056

Phone: (610) 565-6090

Fax: (610) 566-9790

e-mail: renzassoc@earthlink.net

F:\idx90-\24186\plaintiffsmotiontodismiss.001

Case 2:05-cv-01141-MAM Document 4 Filed 10/26/05 Page 1 of 1
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-7510
EDWARD RUTLAND, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus IN THE MATTER OF THE SEIZURE OF TWENTY-ONE THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED NINETY-SEVEN DOLLARS AND FORTY-TWO CENTS ($21,897.42) US CURRENCY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Orangeburg. Charles E. Simons, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-91-3842-5-6) Submitted: February 26, 1998 Decided: March 19, 1998 Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Edward Rutland, Appellant Pro Se. Marvin Jennings Caughman, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying his motion for return of seized property, Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(e). Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Rutland v. $21,897.42 US Currency , No. CA-91-3842- 5-6 (D.S.C. Sept. 11, 1997). We dispense with oral argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Case No. 13,705.

#### SWOPE v. SAINE.

[1 Dill. 416.] 1

Circuit Court, D. Kansas.

1871.

Taxation — Tax Deeds — Limitation of Actions.

Where the county clerk assigned without authority of law, a tax sale certificate, and the tax deed was made to the assignee, the same is void on its face, and under the decisions of the supreme court of Kansas, will not support the two years limitation statute applicable to suits to recover lands sold for taxes, no possession having been taken under the deed.

[Cited in brief in Hannibal & St. J. ft. Co. v. Clark, 6S Mo. 372.]

Ejectment. The plaintiff showed title in himself by regular conveyances from the patentee. The defendant relied on a tax deed dated January 14, 1865; recorded January 16, 1865 (which was more than two years before suit was brought], reciting a sale for taxes made at an adjourned sale, January 8, 1862, for the taxes of 1860, and upon the two year limitation statute, which is'as follows: “Any suit * * * for the recovery of lands sold for taxes, except, &c., shall be commenced within two years from the time of recording the tax deed, and not thereafter.” Comp. Laws 1862, § 11. The tax deed recited that the property was sold at an adjourned sale on January 8, 1862, and was bid in by the county treasurer and certificate assigned in June, 1864, by the county clerk; and the tax deed was made to the assignee. The defendant offered the tax deed in evidence, and the plaintiff objected, for that it was void on its face, because (1). there was no authority to sell at any time except on the 1st day of January, 1862, or on the first Tuesday in May of that year, while here the sale was made on the 8th day of January; (2) the county clerk had no authority in June, 1864, to assign certificates of sales made in 1862.

Martin, Burns & Case, for plaintiff.

Mr. Merrill, for defendant.

Before MILLER, Circuit Justice, and DILLON, Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM.

The court is inclined against the first objection to the deed, and to hold that the effect of the act of 1861 (Laws 1861, p. 286) was to authorize sales to be made on the 1st day of January, 186z, and on ensuing days by adjournments duly made.

But without deciding this question, the court holds that under the act of March 1, 1864 (Laws 1864, p. 70, §§ 9, 12), the county clerk had no right in June. 1864, to assign the tax certificate of a sale made in 1862, that the assignment was null, and the tax deed made to the assignee was void on its face, and under the decision of the supreme court of Kansas (which this court is bound to follow), it “is insufficient to set the statute of limitations in operation, so as to bar an action for the recovery of the land, in two years.” Shoat v. Walker [6 Kan. 65] June term, 1870.

There was no evidence of any actual possession taken, or held, under the tax deed. The tax deed was excluded, and the plaintiff had judgment. Judgment for the plaintiff.
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**Certification Pursuant to Section 302of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

I,Philip C. S. Yin, certify that:

 

1.I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of AXT, 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,the financial statements, and other financial information included in thisreport, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, theperiods presented 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) and15d-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 thisreport any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal 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:

 

(a) All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controlover financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and

 

(b) Any fraud, whetheror not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 
| Dated: November 8, 2005 | By:    | /s/ Philip C. S. Yin    |
|------------------------------|--------|-------------------------|
|                         |   | Philip C. S. Yin        |
|                         |   | Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

: CIVIL ACTION NOS.

:

TAYLOR : 02-3877

JACKSON : 02-3879

LIAGA, et al. : 02-3920

KARGE, et al. : 02-3927

GREEN, et al. : 02-3942

MARKS : 02-3969

FULTZ : 02-3977

RACKLEY : 02-4118

THOMPSON, et al. : 02-4125

RUSSELL, et al. : 02-4127

ALCALA : 02-4131

ANDERSON : 02-4193

CAGAPE, et al. : 02-4227

MONZON, et al. : 02-4241

SANDOVAL, et al. : 02-4282

CHAPMAN, et al. : 02-4289

DUNHAM, et al. : 02-4304

FORTUNATO, et al. : 02-4315

:

VS. :

:

BAYER CORPORATION, et al. :

O R D E R

AND NOW, this day of July, 2002, the Court having been previously

advised that the above action cannot proceed to trial and disposition because of the following

reason:

[ ] - Order staying these proceedings pending disposition of a related

action.

[ ] - Order staying these proceedings pending determination of

arbitration proceedings.

[ ] - Interlocutory appeal filed.

[ X ] - Other: Case is placed into suspense pending receipt of the Case

Transfer Order from the Judicial Panel on Multi District Litigation

transferring case to District of Minnesota.

Case 2:02-cv-04227-JCJ Document 2 Filed 07/10/2002 Page 1 of 2
It is

ORDERED that the Clerk of Court mark this action closed for statistical purposes and

place the matter in the Civil Suspense File, and it is

FURTHER ORDERED that the Court shall retain jurisdiction; and that the case be

restored to the trial docket when the action is in a status so that it may proceed to final

disposition; this order shall not prejudice the rights of the parties to this litigation.

BY THE COURT:

________________________________________

J. Curtis Joyner, Judge

Case 2:02-cv-04227-JCJ Document 2 Filed 07/10/2002 Page 2 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MARA FLAMM : CIVIL ACTION

:

v. :

:

SARNER & ASSOCIATES, P.C.; JOSHUA SARNER; : NO. 02-4302

LEONARD SARNER, ESQUIRE; :

JODI H. BROWN, M.D.; JOHN MATUSAVAGE; :

JOHN DOE PROCESS SERVER, INDIVIDUALLY AND :

AS AGENT FOR SARNER & ASSOCIATES, P.C.; :

JOSHUA SARNER, ESQUIRE; LEONARD SARNER, :

ESQUIRE; AND JODI H. BROWN, M.D. :

ORDER

AND NOW, this 19th day of August, 2004, after conducting a Discovery Hearing with

counsel on August 16, 2004, in the above-captioned matter, it is hereby ORDERED that upon the

execution of a Confidentiality Agreement, for attorneys’ eyes only, with the exception of Robert P.

Brand, Esquire, the following shall be submitted to Plaintiff’s counsel by counsel for the Sarner

Defendants as soon as practicable:

1. Tax returns for the time periods encompassed in the Affidavit of Joshua Sarner, Esquire

dated August 12, 2004.

2. The case files, as well as any other documentation, in support of the statements made by

Joshua Sarner, Esquire in the above-mentioned affidavit concerning the collection of debts by Sarner

& Associates, P.C.

BY THE COURT:

 

M. FAITH ANGELL

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:02-cv-04302-MFA Document 58 Filed 08/19/2004 Page 1 of 1
---

CERTIFICATION OFCHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF
FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Paul G. Daly, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer of Infitech Ventures Inc. (the Company), hereby certify
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

| | (i)  | the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the Company, for the
      year ended July 31, 2007, and to which this certification is attached as
      Exhibit 32.1 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of
      Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;
      and
| | ---- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |      |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             
| | (ii) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
      in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.                                                                                                                                            



| | By:    | /s/
      Paul G. Daly     
| | ------ | ---------------------------
| |        |                            
| | Name:  | PAUL G. DALY               
| |        |                            
| | Title: | Chief Executive Officer and
| |        | Chief Financial Officer    
| |        |                            
| | Date:  | November 2, 2007           





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.

This certification accompanies the Form 10-KSB to which it
relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is
not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the
Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made
before or after the date of the Form 10-KSB), irrespective of any general
incorporation language contained in such filing.

---
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

TOLEDO MACK SALES &

SERVICE, INC. : CIVIL ACTION

:

: NO. 02-4373

 VS. : 

:

MACK TRUCKS, INC.

 ORDER

AND NOW, this 12th of JULY, 2002, in accordance with the

court’s procedure for random reassignment of cases, it is hereby, 

 ORDERED that the above captioned case is reassigned from the

calendar of the Honorable Jan E. DuBois to the Honorable Ronald L. Buckwalter.

FOR THE COURT:

 

JAMES T. GILES

Chief Judge

ATTEST:

 

MICHAEL E. KUNZ

Clerk of Court

Case 2:02-cv-04373-RB Document 2 Filed 07/12/2002 Page 1 of 1
pmpg_ex101.htm

EXHIBIT 10.1
  
  
  
  
 	 
	1
	

	 

  
  
 	 
	2
	

	 

  
  
 	 
	3
	

	 

  
  
 	 
	4
	

	 

  
  
 	 5
CERTIFICATION PRSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                 SECTION 906 OF THE SARABANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2003

In connection with the Quarterly report of Rosedale Decorative Products, Ltd.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Norman Maxwell, Chief Financial Officer, Secretary and Treasurer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2003, that:

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

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



/s/ Norman Maxwell
    --------------
    Norman Maxwell
    Chief Financial Officer, Secretary and Treasurer

December 14, 2004
EX-10.1






Grubb & Ellis®


Property Solutions Worldwide



Grubb & Ellis Realty
Investors



	 	 	 
	June 18, 2008

Chris Troutman

	 	



	Wachovia Securities

	301 South College Street

	16th Floor

	Charlotte, North Carolina 28288

	Re:

	 	Grubb-Ellis Apartment REIT







Senior and Mezzanine Credit Facility



Chris,



Per our recent conversations, please accept this letter as confirmation that we are looking to
cancel the above mentioned secured Credit Facility. While we are very, appreciative to
have worked with Wachovia on this facility it will be in our best interest to cancel it.



Please do not hesitate to give me a call if you have any additional questions. Once again,
thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.



Sincerely,



/s/ Gus Remppies

Gus Remppies

Chief Investment Officer

Grubb-Ellis Apartment REIT