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

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 371 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 371

 Designating July 22, 2006, as ``National Day of the American Cowboy''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 14, 2006

   Mr. Thomas (for himself, Mr. Bingaman, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Burns, Mr. 
 Allard, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Reid, Mr. Martinez, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Salazar, 
 Mr. Baucus, Mr. Craig, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Allen, Mr. Ensign, 
    Mr. Thune, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Frist, and Mr. Crapo) submitted the 
   following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the 
                               Judiciary

                             April 5, 2006

             Committee discharged; considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Designating July 22, 2006, as ``National Day of the American Cowboy''.

Whereas pioneering men and women, recognized as cowboys, helped establish the 
        American West;
Whereas that cowboy spirit continues to infuse this country with its solid 
        character, sound family values, and good common sense;
Whereas the cowboy embodies honesty, integrity, courage, compassion, respect, a 
        strong work ethic, and patriotism;
Whereas the cowboy loves, lives off of, and depends on the land and its 
        creatures, and is an excellent steward, protecting and enhancing the 
        environment;
Whereas the cowboy continues to play a significant role in the culture and 
        economy of the United States;
Whereas approximately 800,000 ranchers are conducting business in all 50 States 
        and are contributing to the economic well being of nearly every county 
        in the Nation;
Whereas rodeo is the sixth most-watched sport in the United States;
Whereas membership in rodeo and other organizations encompassing the livelihood 
        of a cowboy transcends race and sex and spans every generation;
Whereas the cowboy is an American icon;
Whereas to recognize the American cowboy is to acknowledge the ongoing 
        commitment of the United States to an esteemed and enduring code of 
        conduct; and
Whereas the ongoing contributions made by cowboys to their communities should be 
        recognized and encouraged: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate--
            (1) designates July 22, 2006, as ``National Day of the 
        American Cowboy''; and
            (2) encourages the people of the United States to observe 
        the day with appropriate ceremonies and activities.
                                 <all>
```
Before the First Division,

December 6, 1944

No, 49836.

#### Protest 79473-K of Calif. Asia Co., Ltd. (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Walker, J.

At the hearing the president of the plaintiff company testified, and there was received in evidence exhibit 1. From the record it was found that the testimony did not establish that cane was the component materia] of chief value. Therefore, following *United States*v. *Rice-Stix Dry Goods Co.*(19 C. C. P. A. 232, T. D. 45337), the protest was overruled.
Exhibit 32.1


Certification of Chief Executive Officer


Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 , as adopted Pursuant to


Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017 (the “Report”) of Hancock Park Corporate Income, Inc. (the “Registrant”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Bilal Rashid, the Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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/ Bilal RashidName:Bilal RashidDate:March 30, 2018
IN THE MISSOURI COURT OF APPEALS

MARCH 4 , 2014

WESTERN DISTRICT

THE FOLLOWING CASES WERE AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 84.16(b)

AND ISSUED PER CURIAM

WD75667 John Brinson vs. State of Missouri

WD75981 Brian Schultz vs. S tate of Missouri

WD76166 In the Matter of KCP&L Greater Missouri Operations

Company’s Request for Authority to Implement a General

Rate Increase for Electric Service; Missouri Public

Service Commission vs. Missouri Energy Consumers Group;

Office o f Public Counsel; Missouri Public Service

Commission; Dogwood Energy, Inc.; and Union Electric

D/B/A Ameren Missouri

WD76167 Consolidated with WD76166

WD76203 In the Interest of A.V.B.; Missouri Department of Social

Ser vices, Children’s Division vs. M. C. (Father)

THE FOLLOWING CASES WERE AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 30.25(b)

AND ISSUED PER CURIAM

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

None
(Reap. Dec. 9356)

#### Plywood & Door Northern Corporation *v.*United States

Entry Nos. 959873-1/2; 928490.

(Decided March 19, 1959)

*James Wilson Young*for the plaintiff.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Mollison, Judge:

The above-entitled appeals for reappraisement have been submitted for decision upon stipulation of counsel for the parties on the agreed facts in which I find that, except for the items of merchandise set forth in schedule “B,” attached hereto, foreign value, as defined in section 402(c), Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, is the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise involved, and that such value is the appraised value, less 10 per centum net, packed.

As to the merchandise specified in said schedule “B,” the appeals for reappraisement having been abandoned, are to that extent dismissed.

Judgment will issue accordingly.

*566Schedule “B”

Reappraisement No. Collector’s No. Entry No. Date of export

R58/17645 06412 959873)4 5/16/57

Birch plywood as follows:

BJ/BB grade, %" thick, 72” x 48”

R58/17935 06507 928490 4/5/57

Birch plywood as follows:

BJ/BB grade, J4” thick, 62”'x 62”

61"'x 61”

60” x 60”

58” x 58”

52” x 52” BB grade *}í"*thick

60” x 48” BJ/BB grade, ]4" thick,

BB/WG grade, *%i”*thick 45” x 60

BB grade, J4” thick 48” x 48‘
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

EASTERN DIVISION 

LEONARD G. PAIGE, 

 

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. Civil Action 2:12-cv-764 

 Judge Frost 

 Magistrate Judge King 

CAROLYN W. COLVIN, 

ACTING COMMISSIONER 

OF SOCIAL SECURITY, 

 Defendant. 

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

 Plaintiff filed a motion for an award of attorney’s fees, 

Doc. No. 15, and the parties have stipulated to an award of attorney 

fees in the amount of $2,730.05 under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 

28 U.S.C. § 2412, and costs in the amount of $369.95, for a total of 

$3,100.00. Joint Stipulation to Award Attorney’s Fees under the Equal 

Access to Justice Act, Doc. No. 16. 

 It is RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s motion for an award of 

attorney’s fees, Doc. No. 15, be granted consistent with the parties’ 

stipulation, Doc. No. 16. It is SPECIFICALLY RECOMMENDED that 

plaintiff be awarded an attorney’s fee in the amount of $2,730.05 

under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412, and costs in 

the amount of $369.95, for a total of $3,100.00. 

 If any party seeks review by the District Judge of this 

Report and Recommendation, that party may, within fourteen (14) days, 

file and serve on all parties objections to the Report and 

Case: 2:12-cv-00764-GLF-NMK Doc #: 17 Filed: 05/30/13 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
Recommendation, specifically designating this Report and 

Recommendation, and the part thereof in question, as well as the basis 

for objection thereto. 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). 

Response to objections must be filed within fourteen (14) days after 

being served with a copy thereof. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). 

 The parties are specifically advised that failure to object 

to the Report and Recommendation will result in a waiver of the right 

to de novo review by the District Judge and of the right to appeal the 

decision of the District Court adopting the Report and Recommendation. 

See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Smith v. Detroit Fed’n of 

Teachers, Local 231 etc., 829 F.2d 1370 (6th Cir. 1987); United States 

v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981). 

 s/Norah McCann King 

 Norah McCann King 

 United States Magistrate Judge 

May 30, 2013 

Case: 2:12-cv-00764-GLF-NMK Doc #: 17 Filed: 05/30/13 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

EASTERN DIVISION 

BOBBY L. TACKETT, 

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. Civil Action 2:12-cv-1134 

 Judge Watson 

 Magistrate Judge King 

BANK OF AMERICA, NA, 

 Defendant. 

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiff asks for leave to proceed in this civil action without 

prepayment of fees or costs. Doc. No. 1. In his application for leave 

to proceed in forma pauperis, however, plaintiff claims a yearly 

disability income in excess of $45,000.00 and monthly expenses of less 

than $2300.00. Under these circumstances, the Court concludes that 

plaintiff is financially able to pay the $350.00 filing fee. 

 It is therefore RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s application for 

leave to proceed in forma pauperis, Doc. No. 1, be DENIED.

If any party seeks review by the District Judge of this Report 

and Recommendation, that party may, within fourteen (14) days, file 

and serve on all parties objections to the Report and Recommendation,

specifically designating this Report and Recommendation, and the part 

thereof in question, as well as the basis for objection thereto. 28 

U.S.C. §636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Response to objections must 

be filed within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy 

thereof. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). 

Case: 2:12-cv-01134-MHW-NMK Doc #: 3 Filed: 12/10/12 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
 The parties are specifically advised that failure to object 

to the Report and Recommendation will result in a waiver of the right 

to de novo review by the District Judge and of the right to appeal the 

decision of the District Court adopting the Report and Recommendation. 

See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Smith v. Detroit Fed’n of 

Teachers, Local 231 etc., 829 F.2d 1370 (6th Cir. 1987); United States 

v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981). 

 s/Norah McCann King 

 Norah McCann King 

 United States Magistrate Judge 

December 10, 2012 

Date 

Case: 2:12-cv-01134-MHW-NMK Doc #: 3 Filed: 12/10/12 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
EXHIBIT 32.3


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


    Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a)
and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), I, Angela
D. Toppi, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Trans-Lux
Corporation, do hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge that:

    (1) The Registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
March 31, 2007 being filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (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.

    This Certification accompanies this Form 10-Q as an exhibit, but shall not
be deemed as having been filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 or as a separate disclosure document of the Registrant or
the certifying officer.



                                       /s/ Angela D. Toppi
                                       --------------------------------
Date:  May 18, 2007                    Angela D. Toppi
                                       Executive Vice President and
                                       Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 11

                        COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                      Quarter Ended                           Six Months Ended
                                         June 30,                                June 30, 
                                   -----------------------            --------------------------
                                    1998              1997                 1998            1997
                                    ----              ----                 ----            ----
<S>                           <C>              <C>                    <C>            <C>        
Net Income ($000)             $    18,813      $    10,611            $    45,532    $    20,229

Weighted Average Common
  Shares Outstanding           69,333,689       69,287,739             69,280,902     69,264,468

Basic Earnings Per Share      $      0.27      $      0.15            $      0.66     $     0.29

Weighted Average Common
  Shares Outstanding
  Including Common Stock
  Equivalents - Fully
  Diluted Basis                69,984,671       69,738,945             69,961,595      69,715,674


Diluted Earnings Per Share    $      0.27      $      0.15            $      0.65     $      0.29
</TABLE>




<PAGE>
|                                      |
|--------------------------------------|
|                                      |  |
| Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas | BNY Mellon Trust of Delaware |
| As Indenture Trustee                 | As Owner Trustee |
| Attn:  Michelle H.Y. Voon  | Attn:  Kristine Gullo |
| 100 Plaza One 6th Floor         | 301 Bellevue Parkway 3rd Floor |
| Jersey City, NY 07311                | Wilmington, DE  19809 |

|                                                 |
|-------------------------------------------------|
|                                                 |  |
| The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A. | Ally Auto Assets LLC |
| Attn:  Robert Castle                  | Ally Financial Inc. |
| 2 North LaSalle Street, Suite 1020              | 200 Renaissance Center |
| Chicago, IL  60602                    | 10th Floor, MC 482-B10-A68 |
|                                            | Detroit, MI |

|        |
|--------|
|        |  |
| Re:    | Ally Auto Receivables Trust 2010-5 (the “Issuer”) |
|   | Annual Statement as to Compliance |

|    |
|----|
|    |  |
| a. | A review of the activities of the Servicer during the period of January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014, and of its performance under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement and the Trust Sale and Servicing Agreement has been under his supervision, and |

|    |
|----|
|    |  |
| b. | To the best of his knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement and the Trust Sale and Servicing Agreement throughout such period. |

|        |
|--------|
|        |  |  |
|   | Very truly yours, |
|   |   |
|   | /s/ David J. DeBrunner |   |
|   | David J. DeBrunner |
|   | Vice President, Controller and Chief Accounting Officer |
|   | Ally Financial Inc. |
(Reap. Dec. 8958)

Entry No. 888788.

#### Sam Yeung Co. *v.*United States

(Decided August 1, 1957)

*Lane, Young & Fox (William Whynman*of counsel) for the plaintiff.

*George Cochran Douh,*Assistant Attorney General *(Samuel D. Spector*and *Daniel I. Auster,*trial attorneys), for the defendant.

Donlon, Judge:

Plaintiff appeals to reappraisement from an advance in value made by the appraiser in items identified in the appeal petition only as having been imported on the “Flying Independent” and entered at New York on May 19, 1954, entry No. 888788. The merchandise is not further identified in the appeal petition, and neither the entry nor any other of the official papers was offered in evidence.

Indeed, the only evidence of record is an affidavit, dated September 21, 1956, signed in Hong Kong by one Fung Keang, who therein identifies himself as manager of Howe Tack Co., Ltd., of Hong Kong, since August 1, 1956. In this affidavit, Fung Keang recites that he has examined records and made inquiries, on the basis of which he makes certain statements as to the character of the merchandise in issue and sales thereof in Hong Kong in March and April 1954.

Plaintiff’s brief, leave to file which was granted, does not address itself to the objections made by defendant, on trial, to the evidentiary value of this affidavit. Later, and without leave, plaintiff essayed to file a reply brief to present its arguments in support of its case. That plaintiff is not unaware of the defect in its proofs seems to be conceded, for alternative request is made for opportunity to submit some other affidavit than the affidavit offered on trial.

*619There is no competent evidence before us as to what this merchandise is, where it came from, or what the proper basis of value was for appraisal as of the date of exportation to the United States.

If plaintiff has failed to sustain its burden of proof, it is not due to lack of opportunity to do so. The appeal was filed October 8, 1954. It was first on the calendar of June 27, 1955, and was continued at plaintiff’s request. The case was called on October 22, 1956, December 12, 1956, and March 26, 1957. On the last-mentioned call, plaintiff introduced the affidavit of Fung Keang and rested.

The value returned by the appraiser is presumptively correct and plaintiff has not overcome that presumption by competent proofs. The value found by the appraiser must, on the evidence before us, be affirmed.

I find, therefore, that the proofs offered are not competent to overcome the presumptively correct appraised value. I conclude that the value returned by the appraiser is the correct value. 28 U. S. 0. § 2633.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
No. 72-21

#### Robert Osborne, A1C, U. S. Air Force v United States.

On consideration of the Petition for Writ of Error Coram Nobis filed in the above-entitled action, it appearing that petitioner seeks relief from a sentence of confinement at hard labor for four months and partial forfeiture of pay for a like period, imposed by a special court-martial, it is, by the Court, this 12th day of June 1972,

ORDERED:

That said Petition be, and the same is hereby, dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. United States v Snyder, 18 USCMA 480, 40 CMR 192 (1969).
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

 EASTERN DIVISION

United States of America 

-vsRoosvert Perez-Lorenzo

________________________________ 

Case No. 2:13-cr-075 (1) 

 

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 

 CONCERNING PLEA OF GUILTY 

The Defendant, by consent, has appeared before me pursuant to Rule 

11, F.R.Cr.P. and has entered a plea of guilty to Count one (1) of the 

Indictment. After examining the Defendant under oath concerning each of 

the subjects mentioned in Rule 11, I determine that the defendant is 

competent and capable of entering an informed plea, that the guilty plea 

is knowingly and voluntary made and that the offenses charged are supported 

by an independent basis in fact containing each of the essential elements 

of such offense. 

I therefore RECOMMEND the plea agreement and the plea of guilty should 

be accepted and the Defendant should be adjudged guilty and sentenced 

accordingly. Otherwise, the plea agreement should be rejected and the 

defendant should be allowed to withdraw the guilty plea. 

The Defendant remains in the custody of the U.S. Marshal pending 

sentencing. 

Date: May 29, 2013 /s/ Terence P. Kemp 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

NOTICE

Failure to file written objections to this Report and Recommendation 

within fourteen (14) days from the date of its service shall bar an aggrieved 

party from attacking such Report and Recommendation before the assigned 

United States District Judge. 28 U.S.C. Section 636(b)(1)(B). 

Case: 2:13-cr-00075-JLG Doc #: 23 Filed: 05/29/13 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: <pageID>
# Notes

# RAW
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

NORMA JENE MOSLEY,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

 v.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF

THE ARMY,

Defendant-Appellee.

No. 14-16275

D.C. No. 2:13-cv-02645-SRB

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

Susan R. Bolton, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted August 16, 2016** 

Before: O’SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.

Norma Jene Mosley appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment

dismissing her action challenging her discharge from the Department of the Army. 

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal of

FILED

AUG 25 2016

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
an action as barred by the statute of limitations. Jones v. Blanas, 393 F.3d 918,

926 (9th Cir. 2004). We affirm. 

The district court properly dismissed Mosley’s action as time-barred because

Mosley filed her action eleven years after the statute of limitations had expired, and

failed to show that she is entitled to tolling on the basis of her application for relief

before the Army Board for Correction of Military Records, which was filed eight

years after the statute of limitations had expired. See Turtle Island Restoration

Network v. U.S. Dep’t of Commerce, 438 F.3d 937, 942-43 (9th Cir. 2006) (sixyear statute of limitations applies to challenges under the Administrative

Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. § 702); Nichols v. Hughes, 721 F.2d 657, 659 (9th Cir.

1983) (“[A] cause of action for wrongful discharge occurs at the time of

discharge.”); Vaughn v. Teledyne, Inc., 628 F.2d 1214, 1218 (9th Cir. 1980)

(burden of proving facts that show tolling falls on the plaintiff).

Contrary to Mosley’s contentions, the complaint does not reflect that Mosley

brought a claim seeking judicial review of the final decision of the Army Board for

Correction of Military Records.

We reject as without merit Mosley’s contention that 10 U.S.C. § 1558

applies to her action.

AFFIRMED.

2 14-16275
APPENDIX G

Reasonably Available Control Measures

Bureau of Air Quality

Department of Environmental Protection
This page blank for copying purposes.
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEFFINANCIAL OFFICER**

 

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

 

In connection with this quarterly report ofTorotel, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period endingJuly 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on thedate hereof (the “Report”), I, H. James Serrone, Chief Financial Officerof the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to myknowledge:

 

(1)       The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 
| /s/ H. James Serrone    |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
|                    |   |
|                    |   |
| H. James Serrone        |   |
| Chief Financial Officer |   |
| September 14, 2010 |   |

 

----