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

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4751 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4751

  To amend title 5, United States Code, to establish and clarify the 
applicable statute of limitations for seeking remedy for a legal wrong 
             due to agency action, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 23, 2024

  Mr. Coons (for himself, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Blumenthal, Ms. Hirono, Mr. 
 Booker, Mr. Welch, and Mr. Whitehouse) introduced the following bill; 
which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 
                        and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend title 5, United States Code, to establish and clarify the 
applicable statute of limitations for seeking remedy for a legal wrong 
             due to agency action, and for other purposes.

    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 ``Agency Stability Restoration Act of 
2024''.

SEC. 2. RIGHT OF REVIEW.

    (a) In General.--Section 702 of title 5, United States Code, is 
amended--
            (1) in the first sentence, by striking ``A person'' and 
        inserting the following:
    ``(a) In General.--A person''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
    ``(b) Statute of Limitations.--Except as otherwise expressly 
provided by law, a person bringing an action under this section shall 
bring that action not later than 6 years after the date of the final 
agency action with respect to which the person seeks judicial 
review.''.
    (b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--Section 2401(a) of title 
28, United States Code, is amended, in the first sentence, by inserting 
``or section 702(b) of title 5'' after ``title 41''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350) In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2017 (the Report) of TICC Capital Corp. (the Registrant), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Jonathan H. Cohen, the Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that: (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 (2)

          The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant. /s/ Jonathan H. CohenName: Jonathan H. Cohen Date:   May 8, 2017
**IN THE SUPREME COUR T OF**  **THE ST AT**  **E OF MONT**  **ANA DA**  **2 1**  **- 0**  **258** ST AT E OF MONT

ANA, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. DA VID LA WRENCE PITTSLEY

, JR. , Defendant and Appellant . **ORDER** Upon consideration of Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Opening Brief and Declaration in Support , and good cause appearing; **IT IS HEREBY**

**ORDERED** that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including July 12 , 2022 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s Opening Brief.

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

June 27 2022

06/27/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0258
Before the Second Division,

March 2, 1950

No. 54090.

#### European Vibraphone Company *v.*United States,

protests 68909-K, etc. (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

The protests were dismissed.
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-23-00052-CR

SALVADOR RUBIO, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

§

§

§

§

§

On Appeal from the 355th District 

Court

of Hood County (CR15025)

December 14, 2023

Memorandum Opinion by Justice 

Birdwell

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there 

was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the trial 

court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By /s/ Wade Birdwell

 Justice Wade Birdwell
Exhibit 10.15


 


Party A: Sanhe Xiangtian Electric Engineering Co., Ltd.


 


Party B: Shandong Thaidai Photovoltaic Technology Co., Ltd.


 


After agreement from both parties, according to the PRC common
law enforced agreement signed by Sanhe Xiangtian Electric Engineering on March 10th, 2014, supplement terms are added
to the Haide Group 10MW distributed photovoltaic project.


 


Contract volume and price


 


According to the construction progress assessed by Haide Group,
the original 10MW will be amended to 8.5MW. 5.988MW has now been completed, leaving the 2.512MW volume pending to be completed.
Description as below:


 


Name: Battery board


 


Style: P250


 


Unit price: 6.651


 


Quantity: 10048


 


Total: RMB16,707,312


 





Obligation:


 


Ni Baofeng will be a guarantor to this supplement contract,
who will share the joint liability with the two parties.Ni Baofeng promises not to pay party B with the money received from party
A unless have the permission of party A, or he will bear the whole losses of party A (if any).


 


Payment method:


 


After the signing of this supplement contract, party A shall
be required to pay party B RMB3,000,000 within three working days. Party B shall perform installation within two working days after
receiving the first payment.


 


Party A shall be required to pay the guarantor Ni baofung RMB10,000,000
for temporary custody. Party B shall issue a full amount invoice to party A within three working days after Ni baofung received
the RMB10,000,000 custody fee, otherwise terminating the contract.


 


Party A agreed to pay another RMB6,000,000 to Ni baofung on
or before February 5, 2015, otherwise terminating the contract.


 


The remaining contract fee shall be cleared before April 1,
2015, after party B has completed all the construction listed in the contract (besides the deposit of RMB2,800,000).


 


Contract signed date: January 4, 2015.
OI<LAHOMA**DEPAR!IIf~l** Oi ENVIRON!o'EN!Ac OUALJTY SCOTT A
. THOMPSON Execut i ve Dire c to r 

### OKlAHOMA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAl QUALITY September 18 , 2015 CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUEST E D Mr. Ron Curry , Regional Administrator U.S. Environmenta l Protection Agency, Region 6 1445 Ross Avenue, Su it e 1200 Dallas, Texas 75202-2733 MARY FAlLIN Governor

Subject: Evaluation and Information Supporting Oklahoma's Designation Recommendation for 2010 Su l fur Dioxide NAAQS for Noble, Choctaw, and Muskogee Counti es in Oklahoma Dear Administrato r Curry: As referenced in Governor Fallin's l etter of August 17, 2015, attached i s our evaluation and information to support th e Sta te's recommendation for the U.S. E n v ironmental Protection Agency to consider for designation of the affect ed areas. One hard copy of all documents is i ncluded, a long w i th one DVD that contai ns an electronic (.pdf) copy of all documents, as well as a copy of the modeling files. lf you desire additional infonnation , or you have an y questions concern in g this matter , please contact me, at 405-702-4100. 

### "" 

# sexvv
Ed d i e Terrill, D irector of Air Q uali ty Division Oklahoma Department of Envi ronm ental Quality
cc: Michael Teague, Secretary of Energy and Environment Scott Thompson. Executive Director , Department of Environmental Quali ty Guy Donaldson, Chief, Air Planning Section , US EPA 6 Carrie Paige, Air P lanning Section, US EPA 6 Dayana Medina, Air P l anning Section , US EPA 6

7 07 N O

RT HROBI N SO N, P .O
. B O

X1677, OK L AH O M

A

C ITY, O K LAH OM A 73 10 1 · 1 6 77 p ri nted o n recy c l ed pa pe r wi t h soy on k 

### 0
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 19 - 0527 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. MARCIAL MEJIA JR
. ,

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 June 22 , 2020 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

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

May 15 2020

05/15/2020

Case Number: DA 19-0527
(Reap. Dec. 10100)

#### Charles H. Hornburg, Jr., Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 37448, etc.

(Decided November 6, 1961)

*Lawrence & Tuttle (Edward N. Glad*of counsel) for tbe plaintiff.

*William S. Orrick, Jr.,*Assistant Attorney General *(Morris Braverman,*trial attorney), for tbe defendant.

Wilson, Judge:

The merchandise covered by these appeals consists of certain so-called “Series 1 Aston Martin DB4 Saloon” automobiles and parts thereof, exported from England between March 1959 and February 1960. Appraisement of the merchandise was made at £2,298.13.7, plus extras, as checked on the invoices herein, net.

At the hearing, the following stipulation was entered into between counsel for the respective parties:

> Mb. Glad : * * * I offer to stipulate that, during tbe period in question, there was no foreign value for sucb or similar merchandise; no export value for such or similar merchandise; and no U.S. value for such or similar merchandise, as those terms are defined under Section 402, as originally modified by the Customs Administrative Act of 1938.

> Mb. Bbaveeman: Upon information obtained from Mr. Cornthwaite, the Government so stipulates.

> Me. Glad : I further offer to stipulate that the basis of appraisement is cost of production, and that the figures for cost of production, for the period in question, are as follows:

> Eor material and labor, it was one thousand five hundred thirteen pounds, thirteen shillings, and nine pence. For usual general expenses, the amount was two hundred fifty-one pounds, three shillings, and five pence; and that the profit, figured at 10.14% of the sum of the above two, was one hundred seventy-eight pounds, nineteen shillings, and two pence, making a sum total of cost of production of one thousand nine hundred forty-three pounds, sixteen shillings, and four pence.

> Ms. Bbaveeman: Based upon information obtained from Mr. Cornthwaite, the Government so stipulates.

> Me. Glad: I further offer to stipulate that there was no packing involved in the shipment of these automobiles to the United States.

> Me. Bbaveeman : The Government so stipulates.

On tbe agreed facts, I find cost of. production, as tbat value is defined in section 402(f) of tbe Tariff Act of 1930, to be tbe proper basis for tbe determination of tbe value of tbe merchandise here involved and that such value is 1,943'pounds, 16 shillings, and 4 pence.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-1648

ANTHONY LAMBERT, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus NORTH CAROLINA STATE BAR, Defendant - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Elizabeth City. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (CA-98-71-2-BO) Submitted: August 24, 1999 Decided: September 2, 1999 Before WIDENER, MURNAGHAN, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion. Anthony Lambert, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Douglas James Brocker, NORTH CAROLINA STATE BAR, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:Anthony Lambert, Sr., appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil action for failing to properly serve process on Defendant. We have reviewed the record and, although we find no reversible error, dismissal of the action should have been without prejudice. See 5A Charles A. Wright & Arthur R. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure § 1353, at 280 (2d ed. 1990); Umbenhauer v. Woog , 969 F.2d 25, 30 n.6 (3d Cir. 1992). Accordingly, we affirm as modified to reflect dismissal without prejudice. 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.

AFFIRMED
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. 1350)

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Wells Real Estate Investment Trust II, Inc. for the quarter ended September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
Report), the undersigned, Leo F. Wells, III, Principal Executive Officer of the Registrant, and Douglas P. Williams, Principal Financial Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to
§906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of our knowledge and belief:



| | (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 Registrant.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                           
|---------------------------
|                           
|/s/ LEO F. WELLS, III      
|Leo F. Wells, III          
|Principal Executive Officer
|November 7, 2007           
|                           
|/s/ DOUGLAS P. WILLIAMS    
|Douglas P. Williams        
|Principal Financial Officer
|November 7, 2007
Exhibit (13) b.



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,



AS ENACTED BY



SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the annual report on Form 20-F of Komatsu, Ltd. (the Company) for the period ended March 31, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on September 3, 2004 as amended by the Form 20-F/A (No.1) and this Form 20-F/A (No.2) dated the date hereof (the Report), I, Kenji Kinoshita, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. (s) 1350, 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.



Date: December 24, 2004



By:

/s/ Kenji KinoshitaKenji KinoshitaSenior Executive OfficerChief Financial Officer




4
#### State of New York, by Dennis Vacco, as Attorney-General of the State of New York, Respondent, v Astro Shuttle Arcades, Inc., et al., Appellants.

[633 NYS2d 304]

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.), entered June 24, 1994, directing entry of a money judgment against respondents in the amount of $743,230.05, plus interest, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

There is no merit to respondents’ contention that petitioner Attorney-General should not have been permitted to enter a money judgment some six years after entry of the judgment holding respondents liable for restitution to its defrauded customers. The doctrine of laches does not apply to the State when it acts in a governmental, as opposed to private or proprietary, capacity to enforce a public right or protect a public interest *(see, Matter of Carney v Newburgh Park Motors,*84 AD2d 599). Clearly, the Attorney-General acts in that capacity when he invokes his authority under Executive Law § 63 (12) to enjoin repeated fraudulent acts in the carrying on of business and seeks restitution and damages therefor. In any event, respondents do not show lack of diligence by the Attorney-*199General in assessing the amount of restitution and they are responsible for much of the delay. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Wallach, Rubin, Kupferman and Mazzarelli, JJ.
# C_2007052EN.01000101.xml

| 7.3.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 52/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.3.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 52/1

---

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2007/C 52/01)

| Date of adoption of the decision | 22.12.2006 |
| --- | --- |
| Reference number of the aid | N 830/06 |
| Member State | Germany |
| Region | Mecklenburg-Vorpommern |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | Programm zur Förderung von Technologie und Innovation |
| Legal basis | § 44 Landeshaushaltsordnung Mecklenburg-Vorpommern |
| Type of measure | Aid scheme |
| Objective | Research and development |
| Form of aid | Direct grant |
| Budget | Annual budget: —; Overall budget: EUR 25 million |
| Intensity | 70 % |
| Duration | 1.1.2007-31.12.2007 |
| Economic sectors | All sectors |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Technologie Beratungs-Institut GmbH |
| Hauptgeschäftsstelle Schwerin |
| Hagenower Str. 73 |
| D-19061 Schwerin |

Date of adoption of the decision

22.12.2006

Reference number of the aid

N 830/06

Member State

Germany

Region

Mecklenburg-Vorpommern

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Programm zur Förderung von Technologie und Innovation

Legal basis

§ 44 Landeshaushaltsordnung Mecklenburg-Vorpommern

Type of measure

Aid scheme

Objective

Research and development

Form of aid

Direct grant

Budget

Annual budget: —; Overall budget: EUR 25 million

Intensity

70 %

Duration

1.1.2007-31.12.2007

Economic sectors

All sectors

Name and address of the granting authority

Technologie Beratungs-Institut GmbH

Hauptgeschäftsstelle Schwerin

Hagenower Str. 73

D-19061 Schwerin

Other information

—

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/community_law/state_aids/

---
(LOGO) Central National Bank

March 29, 2000

Norwest Bank Minnesota, N.A.
11000 Broken Land Parkway
Columbia, MD 21044-3562

Dear Master Servicer:

The undersigned Officer certifies the following for the 1999 fiscal year:

A. I have reviewed the  activities and  performance  of the Servicer  during the
   preceding  fiscal  year  under  the term of the  Servicing  Agreement,  Trust
   Agreement,  Pooling and Servicing Agreement and/or  Seller/Servicer Guide and
   to the best of this  Officer's  knowledge,  the Servicer has fulfilled all of
   its duties, responsibilities or obligations under these Agreements throughout
   such  year,  or if there has been a default or  failure  of the  servicer  to
   perform any of such duties, responsibilities or obligations, a description of
   each default or failure and the nature and status  thereof has been  reported
   to Norwest Bank Minnesota, N.A.;

B. I have  confirmed  that the Servicer is currently  and approved FNMA or FHLMC
   servicer in good standing

C. I have confirmed  that the Fidelity Bond, the Errors and Omissions  Insurance
   Policy  and any  other  bonds  required  under  the  terms  of the  Servicing
   Agreement,   Trust   Agreement,   Pooling  and  Servicing   Agreement  and/or
   Seller/Servicer Guide
   are in full force and effect;

D. All premiums for each Hazard  Insurance  Policy,  Flood Insurance  Policy (if
   applicable)  and Primary  Mortgage  Insurance  Policy (if  applicable),  with
   respect  to each  Mortgaged  Property,  have  been  paid  and  that  all such
   insurance policies are in full force and effect;

E. All real  estate  taxes,  governmental  assessments  and any  other  expenses
   accrued and due,  that if not paid could result in a lien or  encumbrance  on
   any Mortgage Property,  have been paid, or if any such costs or expenses have
   not been paid with  respect  to any  Mortgage  Property,  the  reason for the
   nonpayment has been reported to Norwest Bank Minnesota, N.A.;

F. All Custodial Accounts have been reconciled and are properly funded; and

G. All annual  reports of  Foreclosure  and  Abandonment  of Mortgaged  Property
   required per section  6050H,  6050J and 6050P of the Internal  Revenue  Code,
   respectively, have been prepared and filed.


Certified By:

Edward J. Meekins
Vice President and Director of Mortgage Banking
3/29/00

Member F.D.I.C.
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL
OFFICER
PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)



In connection with the Quarterly Report
on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2019 (the “Report”) of Oxford Square Capital Corp. (the “Registrant”),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Bruce L. Rubin, the Chief Financial Officer of the
Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that:



| | (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
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|/s/ Bruce L. Rubin   | 
|-------------------- | 
|Name: Bruce L. Rubin | 
|Date: May 1, 2019    |
**
**Exhibit 31.2**

**Certification Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) andRule 15d-14(a)**

**of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934**

I, Beverly A. Cummings, certify that: 

 
1.
I have reviewed this Amendment to the Annual Report on Form 10-K ofPrimeEnergy Resources Corporation; and 

 
2.
Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state amaterial fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report. 

 
Date: May 12, 2020   
/s/ Beverly A. Cummings
   Beverly A. Cummings   Executive Vice President, CFO**
Before the Second Division,

November 21, 1960

No. 64914.

#### M. E. Dey & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 59/6795 (Milwaukee).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of automatic feeders the same in all material respects as *380those the subject of *John V. Carr & Son, Inc., et al.*v. *United States*(40 Cust. Ct. 292, C.D. 1996), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.