alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### Eades, Cassaundra From: Lewis, Josh Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2014 1:09 PM To: Eades, Cassaundra; Mims, Kathy Cc: Bailey, KevinJ Subject: FW: letter to Admin. Attachments: 14.05.22 - GHG rule.pdf

For CMS

From: Vaught, Laura Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 6:16 PM To: Lewis, Josh; Distefano, Nichole Subject: FW: letter to Admin. New letter.
From: Decker, Sara (Commerce) [ 

### mailto:Sara Decker@commerce.senate.gov] Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 4:48 PM To: Vaught, Laura Subject: letter to Admin. Hi Laura — Attached, please find a letter spearheaded by Senator Rubio to Administrator McCarthy regarding the anticipated proposed rule on greenhouse gas emissions for existing power plants. A hard copy is in the mail. Please let me know if you have any questions. 

# S.

Sara E. Decker Professional Staff Member Office of Senator Marco Rubio Subcommittee on Oceans, Atrnosphere, Fisheries and Coast Guard (202) 224-3041



### 1

# llflitrd ^tjtu ^& Inatc

`NLiSFiIntGTON. Dc 20510 May 22, 2014
'T'he Honorable Gina McCarthy Administrator Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20460
Dear Adrninistrator McCarthy: It is our understanding that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will be moving forward with a draft proposal to regulate greenhouse gases from existing power plants as soon as June l s '. Given the controversy and ongoing debate regarding the costs and benefits of this proposed regulation, we are respectfully writing that you do not move forward with the draft proposal at this tiine. Energy that is cost-effective and drawn from diverse resources is indisputably a positive input to any economically prosperous society. ln the United States, we have benefited from a diverse and abundant energy supply, one that includes coal and natural gas as well as nuclear and renewable energy. We have also prospered as a country because the costs of this energy have remained low, allowing businesses and families to use their income not to pay high electricity bills but to invest in their company or pay for college tuition. Unfortunately, while the overall benetits of any draft proposal are questionable, the economic and social costs of further regulating our electricity industry will undoubtedly increase costs for consumers and businesses. According to some estimates, such a proposal on existing power plants, when combined with other regulations already being ptit forth by the Administration, could cost 600,000 jobs and an aggregate decrease in gross domestic product by $2.23 trillion. Even more notably, it could cost a family of four more than $1,200 per year. As public officials, we have a duty to weigh the costs of any policy, -vvhether legislative or administrative, against the expected benefits. Unfortunately, we do not see a proper balance on the EPA's decision to move forward on regulating greenhouse gases from existing power plants and, for this reason, ask that you do not move forward with the draft proposal at this time. 'Fhank you for your consideration of our request.^^`' ®

p.;, - , ^ ^^ ,^^^ .^^ .
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4605 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4605

  To authorize the appropriation of amounts for the construction of a 
battle management combined operations complex at Robins Air Force Base, 
                                Georgia.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 20, 2024

  Mr. Ossoff introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
              referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To authorize the appropriation of amounts for the construction of a 
battle management combined operations complex at Robins Air Force Base, 
                                Georgia.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Robins Facilities Enhancement Act''.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF AMOUNTS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A BATTLE 
              MANAGEMENT COMBINED OPERATIONS COMPLEX AT ROBINS AIR 
              FORCE BASE, GEORGIA.

    There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of Defense 
for fiscal year 2025 $64,000,000 for the construction of a battle 
management combined operations complex at Robins Air Force Base, 
Georgia.
                                 <all>
```
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 FLATBUSH FEDERAL BANCORP, INC. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2007 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), we, Jesus
R. Adia, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company and John S.
Lotardo, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 result of
                  operations of the Company.

The purpose of this statement is solely to comply with Title 18, Chapter 63,
Section 1350 of the United States Code, as amended by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.




                                       /s/ Jesus R. Adia
                                       -------------------------------
                                       Jesus R. Adia
                                       President and
                                       Chief Executive Officer



                                       /s/ John S. Lotardo
                                       -------------------------------
                                       John S. Lotardo
                                       Executive Vice President and
                                       Chief Financial Officer

Date: August 14, 2007




                                       23
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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSEPH ABDULLAH,

Plaintiff, No. Civ. S-04-1736 FCD/KJM

v. O R D E R

EMERALD PLACE APARTMENTS, et al.,

Defendants.

_____________________________________/

The parties in the above-captioned case have filed a Joint Status Report consenting to the

referral of this action to the assigned Magistrate Judge. See 28 U.S.C. §636(c). According to

E.D. Cal. R. 73-305, both the district court judge assigned to the case and the magistrate judge

must approve the reference to the magistrate judge.

The undersigned has reviewed the file herein and recommends that the above-captioned

case be reassigned and referred to the magistrate judge for all further proceedings and entry of

final judgment.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court reassign this case to the

Honorable Kimberly J. Mueller. The parties shall please take note that all documents hereafter

filed with the Clerk of the Court shall bear case No. Civ. S-04-1736 KJM. All currently

scheduled dates presently set before Judge Damrell are hereby VACATED.

DATED: May 20, 2005

/s/ Frank C. Damrell Jr. 

FRANK C. DAMRELL, Jr.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-01736-KJM Document 14 Filed 05/24/05 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

2

Having also reviewed the file, I accept reference of this case for all further proceedings

and entry of final judgment.

DATED: May 23, 2005.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-01736-KJM Document 14 Filed 05/24/05 Page 2 of 2
K-tel International, Inc.
                                                                  1998 Form 10-K
                                                                      Exhibit 21


SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

Subsidiaries of the Company and the jurisdiction in which each company was
incorporated are listed below. Unless otherwise indicated, all of the voting
securities of each subsidiary are owned by K-tel International, Inc. or one of
its subsidiaries. A number of subsidiaries not important to an understanding of
K-tel's business have been omitted. Such subsidiaries in the aggregate would not
constitute a significant subsidiary.

K-tel International (USA), Inc.
Minneapolis, Minnesota (a Minnesota corporation)

Dominion Entertainment, Inc.
Minneapolis, MN (a Minnesota corporation)

K-tel Ireland Limited
Dublin, Ireland (an Ireland Corporation)

K-tel International Finland OY
Helsinki, Finland (a Finland Corporation)

K-tel Entertainment (CAN) Inc.
(formerly ERA International, Ltd.)
Winnipeg, Manitoba (a Canada corporation)

Dominion Vertriebs GmbH
Karben, Germany (a Germany corporation)

K-tel Marketing (U.K.) Ltd.
London, England (an England corporation)

K-tel Entertainment (U.K.) Ltd.
London, England (an England corporation)

K-tel (Australia) Pty. Limited
Southport, Queensland, Australia (an Australian corporation)

U.S. Distribution Services, Inc.
Minneapolis, Minnesota (a Minnesota corporation)

E-Direct, Inc.
Minneapolis, Minnesota (a Minnesota corporation)

K-tel Consumer Products, Inc.
Minneapolis, Minnesota (a Minnesota corporation)

K-tel Direct, Inc.
Minneapolis, Minnesota (a Minnesota corporation)

K-tel TV, Inc.
Minneapolis, Minnesota (a Minnesota corporation)

K-tel Video, Inc.
Minneapolis, Minnesota (a Minnesota corporation)

K-tel Productions, Inc.
Minneapolis, Minnesota (a Minnesota corporation)

K-tel Online, Inc.
Minneapolis, Minnesota (a Minnesota corporation)
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 44 (Wednesday, March 7, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10295-10296]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-4082]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

February 28, 2007.
    The Department of the Treasury has submitted the following public 
information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Pub. L. 104-13. Copies of 
the submission(s) may be obtained by calling the Treasury Bureau 
Clearance Officer listed. Comments regarding this information 
collection should be addressed to the OMB reviewer listed and to the 
Treasury Department Clearance Officer, Department of the Treasury, Room 
11000, 1750 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220.
    Dates: Written comments should be received on or before April 6, 
2007 to be assured of consideration.

[[Page 10296]]

Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA)

    OMB Number: 1591-New.
    Type of Review: Regular.
    Title: Taxpayer Delinquency Investigation (TDI) Confirmation 
Letter.
    Description: The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration 
(TIGTA), Office of Audit is performing a confirmation program for 
delinquent return accounts to see if the taxpayer agrees that tax 
return(s) have not yet been filed. TIGTA will use the information 
collected to determine the accuracy of Internal Revenue Service 
records.
    Respondents: Individuals or Households.
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 25 hours.
    OMB Number: 1591-New.
    Type of Review: Regular.
    Title: Taxpayer Delinquent Account (TDA) Confirmation Letter.
    Description: The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration 
(TIGTA), Office of Audit is performing a confirmation program of 
balance due accounts owed the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to see if 
the taxpayer agrees with balance due owed. TIGTA will use the 
information collected to determine the accuracy of IRS records.
    Respondents: Individuals or Households.
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 25 hours.
    Clearance Officer: Joseph Ananka, (202) 622-5964, Treasury 
Inspector General for Tax Administration, 1125 15th Street, NW., Suite 
700A, Washington, DC 20005.
    OMB Reviewer: Alexander T. Hunt, (202) 395-7316, Office of 
Management and Budget, Room 10235, New Executive Office Building, 
Washington, DC 20503.

Michael A. Robinson,
Treasury PRA Clearance Officer.
 [FR Doc. E7-4082 Filed 3-6-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-39-P
Case No. 5,33a

#### GEORGE v. The ARCTIC.

[Bee, 232.] 1

District Court, D. South Carolina.

1806.

Salvage — Compensation.

Compensation fixed by the court, upon consultation with merchants and owners of ships, as to the value of service rendered.

In admiralty.

BEE, District Judge.

This is a petition for compensation to [James] George, who assisted with his boat and several hands in getting off the ship Arctic, which was driven on shore in the storm of August last. It. appears that the ship lay from Friday till Monday without other efforts for her safety than such as were made by her crew. On Monday Mr. George went to her assistance, received the command, as soon as he went on board, and held it till she floated: Mr. Cohen, who had also gone with a boat and hands to assist, brought her up to Charleston. Cohen had been of great service by carrying with him a spare anchor, as well as by his advice and exertions. They succeeded in floating the vessel on Wednesday evening; but George and Cohen, with their people, remained on board till Saturday evening.

I have no hesitation In admitting this claim to compensation; for services to vessels in distress must be encouraged: nor will the law make a distinction between such as are voluntary, and such as are hired. The former, at least, must have their reward; and that not upon too narrow a scale, for the reason I have already given. In fixing the amount of compensation upon this occasion, I called in the persons best qualified to assist my judgment, merchants and owners of ships, acquainted, by experience, with the nature of these services. I stated the circumstances, without naming the parties. After some consultation, they named the sum of 150 dollars, as an adequate compensation for George, and his boat’s crew; and as that sum accords with my own view of the case, .1 do order and decree, that the marshal pay that sum to Mr. George, out of the proceeds remaining in his hands from the sale of the ship. As the petitioner withdrew his first demand, and made a second, after reference of the first to the register, I direct that each party pay his own costs.
No. 65482.

#### W. J. Byrnes and Hans Ohrt et al. *v.*United States,

protests 59/29440, etc. (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Bao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues herein are similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *Schmidt Pritchard & Co. et al.*(47 C.C.P.A. 152, C.A.D. 750), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

DAVID R. BOYD JR.,

Petitioner

v.

ARMSTRONG WORLD INDUSTRIES INC. 

& BRENNTAG NORTHEAST, INC.; 

BARLEY SNYDER, AND ALAN J. HAY, 

M.D.,

Respondent

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 667 MAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 4th day of May, 2020, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
Before the Second Division,

June 1, 1959

No. 63113.

#### James G. Wiley and American Weapons Corp. *v.*United States,

protest 58/2484 (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Rao, J.

In accordance with oral stipulation of counsel that said Webley cutaways are not pistols or revolvers in their imported condition, as part of the barrel has been cut away and other working parts exposed, and that they are machines in chief value of metal, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
UN PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17
- 7421

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. RATHDAPHONE VONGDEUANE , Defendant

– Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Greenville

. Henry M. Herlong, Jr. , Senior District Judge. ( 6:14

- cr - 00400

- HMH

- 9; 6:17

- cv - 02162

- HMH )

Submitted : January 30, 2018 Decided: February 2, 2018

Before MOTZ and KEENAN , Circuit Judges , and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. Rathdaphone Vongdeuane, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Jeanne Howard, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpubl ished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Rathdaphone Vongdeuane seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on h er 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge i ssues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or
wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- E l v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that
the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S.
at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Vongdeuane 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 this 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

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DEMIANTRA M. CLAY,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-04-2367 DFL CMK P

vs.

 MIKE KNOWLES, Warden, 

Respondent. ORDER

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of

habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, together with a request to proceed in forma

pauperis.

Examination of the in forma pauperis affidavit reveals that petitioner is unable to

afford the costs of suit. Accordingly, the request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis will be

granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).

Since petitioner may be entitled to the requested relief if the claimed violation of

constitutional rights is proved, respondents will be directed to file a response to petitioner’s

application. 

/////

/////

Case 2:04-cv-02367-DFL-CMK Document 3 Filed 05/09/05 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

2

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner’s request to proceed in forma pauperis is granted;

2. Respondents are directed to file a response to petitioner’s application within

thirty days from the date of this order. See Rule 4, Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases. An answer

shall be accompanied by any and all transcripts or other documents relevant to the determination

of the issues presented in the application. See Rule 5, Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases;

3. Petitioner’s traverse, if any, shall be filed and served within thirty days of

service of an answer;

4. If the response to petitioner’s application is a motion, petitioner’s opposition or

statement of non-opposition shall be filed and served within thirty days of service of the motion,

and respondents’ reply, if any, shall be filed within fifteen days thereafter; and

5. The Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this order together with a copy of

petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on Jo Graves,

Senior Assistant Attorney General.

DATED: May 9, 2005

/s/ CRAIG M. KELLISON 

Craig M. Kellison

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 2:04-cv-02367-DFL-CMK Document 3 Filed 05/09/05 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4555 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4555

   To amend title II of the Social Security Act to increase the age 
 threshold for eligibility for child's insurance benefits on the basis 
                             of disability.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 17, 2024

Mr. Cassidy (for himself and Ms. Hassan) introduced the following bill; 
     which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend title II of the Social Security Act to increase the age 
 threshold for eligibility for child's insurance benefits on the basis 
                             of disability.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Fairness for Disabled Young Adults 
Act''.

SEC. 2. INCREASE TO AGE THRESHOLD FOR CHILD'S INSURANCE BENEFITS ON THE 
              BASIS OF DISABILITY.

    (a) In General.--Section 202(d) of the Social Security Act (42 
U.S.C. 402(d)) is amended by striking ``age of 22'' each place it 
appears and inserting ``age of 26''.
    (b) Conforming Amendments.--
            (1) Section 205(j)(2)(C)(vi)(II)(cc) of the Social Security 
        Act (42 U.S.C. 405(j)(2)(C)(vi)(II)(cc)) is amended by striking 
        ``age of 22'' and inserting ``age of 26''.
            (2) Section 225(a) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
        425(a)) is amended by striking ``age of 22'' and inserting 
        ``age of 26''.
            (3) Section 1631(a)(2)(B)(xvii)(II)(cc) of the Social 
        Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1383(a)(2)(B)(xvii)(II)(cc)) is amended 
        by striking ``age of 22'' and inserting ``age of 26''.
            (4) Section 1634(c) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
        1383c(c)) is amended by striking ``age of 22'' and inserting 
        ``age of 26''.
                                 <all>
```