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

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 445 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 445

     Expressing the sense of the Senate in commemorating Holocaust 
                            Remembrance Day.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 25, 2006

 Mr. Santorum (for himself, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Nelson of Florida, Mr. 
Voinovich, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Ensign, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Allen, 
   Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. DeWine, Mr. Levin, Mr. Chafee, Mr. Frist, Mr. 
Lautenberg, Mr. Burns, Mr. Specter, Mr. Hagel, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Warner, 
    Mrs. Dole, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Talent, and Mr. Sununu) submitted the 
        following resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
     Expressing the sense of the Senate in commemorating Holocaust 
                            Remembrance Day.

Whereas the Holocaust involved the systematic persecution and genocide of 
        millions of innocent Jewish men, women, and children, along with 
        millions of others, by the Nazis under the leadership of Adolf Hitler;
Whereas an estimated 6,000,000 Jews and many others were killed in the 
        Holocaust;
Whereas millions of survivors of the Holocaust endured enormous suffering 
        through violence, torture, slave labor, and involuntary medical 
        experimentation;
Whereas in the 61 years since the end of the Holocaust, this tragic event has 
        helped to teach the people of the world awareness of the danger of 
        hatred, anti-Semitism, bigotry, and racism, and the importance of 
        compassion and understanding diversity; and
Whereas Holocaust Remembrance Day is held every year in remembrance of the 
        Holocaust and its millions of victims: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate--
            (1) commemorates Holocaust Remembrance Day, which falls on 
        April 25, 2006;
            (2) remembers the 6,000,000 Jews and many others who were 
        killed by the Nazis, and honors the millions of survivors of 
        the Holocaust; and
            (3) encourages all Americans to commemorate the occasion 
        through reflection, acts of compassion, and education about the 
        horrific consequences of anti-Semitism, bigotry, racism, and 
        hatred.
                                 <all>
```
## Generalized Process Flow for **Manufacture of Substrate Infus**  **ed Carbon Nanostructures**  Substrate Payout Sanitized (optional step) Sanitized (optional step) Sanitized Sanitized CNS Growth Oven Sanitized Sanitized Sanitized (optional step) Processing into Thermoplastic or Matrix Impregnation of Substrate
# Official Journal C 96/2014

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 96 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 571 April 2014 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 96

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 571 April 2014

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Parliament |
| 2014/C 096/01 | Decision of the Bureau of the European Parliament of 15 April 2013 concerning the rules governing the treatment of confidential information by the European Parliament | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Parliament

2014/C 096/01

Decision of the Bureau of the European Parliament of 15 April 2013 concerning the rules governing the treatment of confidential information by the European Parliament

1

---

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

EN
# C_2015138EN.01004201.xml

| 27.4.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 138/42 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.4.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 138/42

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Simvoulio tis Epikratias (Greece) lodged on 20 February 2015 — Kapnoviomichania Karelia AE v Minister for Finance

(Case C-81/15)

(2015/C 138/56)

Language of the case: Greek

Referring court

Referring court

Simvoulio tis Epikratias

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Kapnoviomichania Karelia AE

Applicant:

Defendant: Minister for Finance

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

May Directive 92/12/EEC (1), in the light of the general principles of EU law and, in particular, the principles of effectiveness, legal certainty and proportionality thereof, be interpreted, in a case such as this, as prohibiting the implementation of legal provisions of a Member State, such as Article 108 of the Greek Customs Code, according to which the authorised warehousekeeper of goods moved from the tax warehouse thereof under a duty suspension arrangement, which departed the arrangements in question irregularly through smuggling, may be declared as jointly liable for the payment of administrative fines, on the ground of smuggling, regardless of whether the warehousekeeper had, at the time when the infringement was committed, possession of the goods, on the basis of the rules of private law, and, furthermore, regardless of whether the perpetrators of the infringement involved in that movement had concluded a particular contractual relationship with the authorised warehousekeeper from which they can be seen to have acted as agents of the authorised warehousekeeper?

1

---

(1)  Council Directive 92/12/EEC of 25 February 1992 on the general arrangements for products subject to excise duty and on the holding, movement and monitoring of such products, (OJ 1992 L 76, p. 1).

1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 7
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                         1,017,195
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                        1,017,195
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                          1,017,195
<EQUITIES>                                       1,159
<MORTGAGE>                                           0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                               1,018,354
<CASH>                                          28,529
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                              78,713
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                          11,116
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,484,987
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                497,770
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                            237,199
<POLICY-OTHER>                                       0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                                0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    224,950
<COMMON>                                        70,382
<OTHER-SE>                                     189,599
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,484,987
<PREMIUMS>                                     194,969
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                             17,835
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                               1,072
<OTHER-INCOME>                                       0
<BENEFITS>                                     152,901
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                     10,312
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                             7,285
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 40,085
<INCOME-TAX>                                    13,213
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             26,872
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    26,872
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .37
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .34
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                       0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                  0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                      0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0
        

</TABLE>
Form 20-F | Integrated Media Technology Limited  Exhibit 13.1   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 Annual Report of Integrated Media Technology Limited (the "Company") on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2021 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Xiaodong ZHANG, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:  1.
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of
    1934; and2.
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
    operations of the Company at the dates and for the periods indicated.  This
Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, "filed" with the Securities and Exchange Commission.    Date: April 28, 2022   /s/
Xiaodong ZHANG Xiaodong ZHANG Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
PUBLIC LAW 110–139—DEC. 18, 2007 121 STAT. 1491 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 3315: 

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 110–436 (Comm. on Transportation and Infrastructure). 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 153 (2007): 

Nov. 13, considered and passed House. 

Dec. 6, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 110–139 

110th Congress 

An Act 

To provide that the great hall of the Capitol Visitor Center shall be known as 

Emancipation Hall. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF GREAT HALL OF THE CAPITOL VISITOR 

CENTER AS EMANCIPATION HALL. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The great hall of the Capitol Visitor Center 

shall be known and designated as ‘‘Emancipation Hall’’, and any 

reference to the great hall in any law, rule, or regulation shall 

be deemed to be a reference to Emancipation Hall. 

(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—This section shall apply on and after 

the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Approved December 18, 2007. 

40 USC 5101 

note. 

Dec. 18, 2007 

[H.R. 3315]
**
Certification of the Principal Financial OfficerPursuant to 15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)(Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)  
        I, Frederic F. Brace, theExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of United Air Lines,Inc. (the "Company"), certify that:(1)     I have reviewed this quarterly reporton Form 10-Q of the Company;
(2)     Based on my knowledge, this quarterly reportdoes not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to statea 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 quarterly report;
(3)     Based on my knowledge, the financial statements,and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairlypresent in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented inthis quarterly report;
(4)     The Company's other certifying officersand I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controlsand procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) forthe Company and we have: (a)     designed such disclosure controls andprocedures to ensure that material information relating to the Company,including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterlyreport is being prepared;
(b)     evaluated the effectiveness of the Company'sdisclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior tothe filing date of this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and
(c)     presented in this quarterly report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures basedon our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date; (5)     The Company's other certifying officers andI have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the Company'sauditors and the audit committee of Company's board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent function): (a)     all significant deficiencies in the designor operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the Company'sability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and haveidentified for the Company's auditors any material weaknesses in internalcontrols; and
(b)     any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role in theCompany's internal controls; and (6)     The Company's other certifying officers andI have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were significantchanges in internal controls or in other factors that could significantlyaffect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation,including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficienciesand material weaknesses.    /s/ Frederic F. Brace
Frederic F. BraceUnited Air Lines, Inc.Executive Vice President and Chief Financial OfficerMay 2, 2003

**
# C_2017053EN.01001602.xml

| 20.2.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 53/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.2.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 53/16

---

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 21 December 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof — Austria) — Daniel Bowman v Pensionsversicherungsanstalt

(Case C-539/15) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Social policy - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Directive 2000/78/EC - Equal treatment in employment and occupation - Article 2(1) and (2) - Discrimination on grounds of age - Collective labour agreement - Extension of the period of advancement from the first to the second step in the salary scale - Indirect unequal treatment on grounds of age))

(2017/C 053/19)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Oberster Gerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Daniel Bowman

Applicant:

Defendant: Pensionsversicherungsanstalt

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 2(1) and (2) of Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation must be interpreted as not precluding a national collective labour agreement, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, by which an employee who benefits from account being taken of periods of school education for the purpose of his classification in the salary steps is subject to a longer period of advancement between the first and second salary step, as long as that extension applies to every employee benefiting from the inclusion of those periods, including retroactively to those having already reached the next steps.

---

(1)  OJ C 27, 25.1.2016.

1

---
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MANUEL EZEQUIEL SILVERIOROMERO, AKA Manuel E. Romero, AKA 

Manuel Romero Silverio, 

Petitioner, 

 v. 

WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, 

Respondent.

No. 16-72959 

Agency No. A088-659-305 

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted April 17, 2019**

Before: McKEOWN, BYBEE, and OWENS, Circuit Judges. 

Manuel Ezequiel Silverio-Romero, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions 

for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his 

appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, 

withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). 

 

* 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).

FILED

APR 22 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 16-72959 

We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law, 

Cerezo v. Mukasey, 512 F.3d 1163, 1166 (9th Cir. 2008), except to the extent that 

deference is owed to the BIA’s interpretation of the governing statutes and 

regulations, Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 532, 535 (9th Cir. 2004). We review 

for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 

F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny the petition for review.

The agency did not err in finding that, even if credible, Silverio-Romero 

failed to establish membership in a cognizable social group. See Reyes v. Lynch, 

842 F.3d 1125, 1131 (9th Cir. 2016) (in order to demonstrate membership in a 

particular group, “[t]he applicant must ‘establish that the group is (1) composed of 

members who share a common immutable characteristic, (2) defined with 

particularity, and (3) socially distinct within the society in question.’”) (citation 

omitted). Thus, Silverio-Romero’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because 

Silverio-Romero failed to show it is more likely than not that he would be tortured 
3 16-72959 

by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government of Mexico. See Aden v. 

Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009).

Silverio-Romero’s request to terminate proceedings, set forth in Docket 

Entry No. 29, is denied. See Karingithi v. Whitaker, 913 F.3d 1158, 1160-62 (9th 

Cir. 2019) (initial notice to appeal need not include time and date information to 

vest jurisdiction in the immigration court).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
EXHIBIT 34.1

 

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm



The Management Committee

BMW Financial Services NA, LLC

We have examined management’s assertion, included in the accompanying Certification Regarding Compliance with Applicable Servicing Criteria, that BMW Financial Services NA, LLC (the “Company”) complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange  Commission's Regulation AB for Asset-Backed Securities, BMW Vehicle Lease Trust 2016-1 (except for the servicing criteria described in the following paragraph), which the Company has determined as being applicable to the activities it performs with respect to the asset-backed securities transactions being serviced as of December 31, 2016 and for the period from February 17, 2016 to December 31, 2016. Management is responsible for the Company’s compliance with those servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assertion about the Company’s compliance with those servicing criteria based on our examination.

 

The Company has determined that the servicing criteria in Items 1122(d)(1)(ii), 1122(d)(1)(iii), 1122(d)(1)(iv), 1122(d)(2)(vi), 1122(d)(4)(ix), 1122(d)(4)(x)(A)-(C), 1122(d)(4)(xi), 1122(d)(4)(xii), 1122(d)(4)(xiii), and 1122(d)(4)(xv) are not applicable to the activities it performs with respect to the asset-backed securities transactions being serviced as of December 31, 2016 and for the period from February 17, 2016 to December 31, 2016.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with the attestation standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria specified in the first paragraph of this report and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria specified in the first paragraph.

In our opinion, management’s assertion that BMW Financial Services NA, LLC complied, in all material respects, with the aforementioned servicing criteria as of December 31, 2016 and for the period from February 17, 2016 to December 31, 2016 is fairly stated, in all material respects.



/s/ CohnReznick LLP



 

Roseland, New Jersey

March 22, 2017
No. 45147.

#### Protest 18777-K of Karl Neuhoff (New York).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

When the case was called for trial the protest was submitted without the introduction of evidence in support of the claims made. On the record presented the protest was overruled.
#### Lipschutz Bros. *v.*Kostoff, Appellant.

*Negotiable Instruments*— Promissory *Notes*— Bankruptcy.

In an action of assumpsit on a promissory note the defense advanced was that after incurring the obligation the defendant had *176been discharged in bankruptcy. The record showed that the debt was not scheduled, and the plaintiffs testified that they had neither notice nor knowledge of the bankruptcy proceedings, and the court found that fact in accordance with their testimony. The debt was, therefore, not discharged by the bankruptcy proceedings, and a judgment in favor of the plaintiff will be sustained.

March 16, 1925:

Argued. December 10, 1924.

Appeal, No. 303, Oct. T., 1924, by defendant, from judgment of Municipal Court of Philadelphia, Feb. T., 1924, No. 12, in favor of the plaintiff, in the case of Morris Lipschutz and Nathan Lipschutz, trading as Lipschutz Bros., v. Joseph Kostoff.

Before Porter, Henderson, Trexler, Keller, Linn and Gawthrop, JJ.

Affirmed.

Assumpsit on promissory note. Before Bonniwell, J. , without a jury.

The court entered judgment in favor of the plaintiff in the sum of $78.80. Defendant appealed.

*Error assigned*was, among others, refusal of defendant’s motion and for judgment non obstante veredicto,.

*Maurice G. Weinberg,*for appellant.

*Samuel Lipschutz,*for appellee.

Opinion by

Linn, J.,

Defendant appeals from judgment against him in a suit on a promissory note. The only defense was that after incurring the obligation, he had been discharged in bankruptcy. Jury trial was waived. Inspection of the bankruptcy schedules in the record in the light of the other evidence, shows that the debt in suit was not scheduled; while among “creditors holding securities” a firm name the same as plaintiffs,’ was scheduled as a creditor,— (1) the creditors’ address was not that of plaintiffs, (2) the amount of the scheduled note was not the amount of the note in suit, and (3) the date was *177different; in short, the scheduled debt was obviously not the debt in suit. The plaintiffs testified they had neither notice nor knowledge of the bankruptcy proceedings and the court found that fact in accordance with their testimony. The debt was therefore not discharged by the bankruptcy proceedings: section 17, (3) Acts July 1,1898, c. 541, 30 stat. 550; Feb. 5, 1903, c. 487, section 5, 32 stat. 798; March 2, 1917, c. 153, 39 stat.-999; Barnes Federal Code section 9101; Kreitlein v. Ferger, 238 U. S. 21.

Judgment affirmed.