alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
H. Con. Res. 179 Agreed to June 28, 2007 

One Hundred Tenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE FIRST SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday, 

the fourth day of January, two thousand and seven 

Concurrent Resolution 

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That when the House adjourns on the legislative day of 

Thursday, June 28, 2007, or Friday, June 29, 2007, on a motion 

offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution by its Majority Leader 

or his designee, it stand adjourned until 2 p.m. on Tuesday, July 

10, 2007, or until the time of any reassembly pursuant to section 

2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first; and that 

when the Senate recesses or adjourns on Friday, June 29, 2007, 

Saturday, June 30, 2007, Sunday, July 1, 2007, or Monday, July 

2, 2007, on a motion offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution 

by its Majority Leader or his designee, it stand recessed or 

adjourned until noon on Monday, July 9, 2007, or such other time 

on that day as may be specified by its Majority Leader or his 

designee in the motion to recess or adjourn, or until the time 

of any reassembly pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first. 

SEC. 2. The Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader 

of the Senate, or their respective designees, acting jointly after 

consultation with the Minority Leader of the House and the 

Minority Leader of the Senate, shall notify the Members of the 

House and the Senate, respectively, to reassemble at such place 

and time as they may designate if, in their opinion, the public 

interest shall warrant it. 

Attest: 

Clerk of the House of Representatives. 

Attest: 

Secretary of the Senate.
Exhibit 15.1


                         Consent of Independent Auditors


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement (Form
S-8 No. 333-31130) pertaining to the Fundtech Ltd. 1996 Employee Stock Option
Plan for the Employees of Fundtech Ltd., the Fundtech Ltd., the Fundtech Ltd
1999 Employee Stock Option Plan, the Fundtech Ltd. 1997 Stock Option Plan for
Fundtech Corporation, the 1997 Israeli Share Option Plan and the Fundtech Ltd.
Directors Option Plan, of our report, dated February 12, 2004, with respect to
the consolidated financial statements of Fundtech Ltd. Included in its Annual
Report (Form 20-F) for the year ended December 31, 2003.


BRIGHTMAN ALMAGOR & CO
Certified Public Accountants
A member of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu


Tel Aviv, Israel
June 24, 2004
No. 6256.

#### SUCCESSION OF LEON HUGUENEL.

Syllabus.

The object of a mortgage in favor of a minor, whether it be the general mortgage or the special mortgage which the tutor is *146permitted to substitute in lieu thereof, is to insure a faithful administration of the tutorship; and the tutor’s property or the proceeds thereof subject to the mortgage can be released from its .effect only upon a final accounting and actual settlement at the expiration of the tutorship.

Appeal from the Civil District Court, Parish of Orleans, Division “A,” No. 86,674. Honorable T. C. W. Ellis, Judge.

E. J. Meral and K. Y. Richard, attorneys.

S. F. Gautier, for appellant.

His Honor, EMILE GODCHAUX,

rendered the opinion and decree of the Court, .as follows;

Redmond, a judgment creditor of Mrs. Huguenel, widow of the decedent, attempts to secure payment of his debt from the fund deposited in the registry of the Court and consisting of .a portion of the proceeds of the sale of real estate owned by Mrs. Huguenel which was subject to the legal mortgage in favor of her minor children resulting from the recordation of the abstract of inventory when she qualified as their tutrix. His demand for payment was denied below and he now appeals.

In the face of the express admission in the record ‘ ‘ that the minor’s mortgage bears against this deposit” and the fact that the amount of this mortgage is largely in excess of this deposit, we are unable to perceive upon what ground Redmond, an ordinary judgment creditor, whose claim is clearly outranked by that of the minors, can be permitted to withdraw any portion of this fund to their prejudice.

The object and purpose of the legal m ortgage in favor of the minor is to secure a faithful administration of the tutorship; and the tutor’s property or the proceeds therof *147subject to tbe mortgage, can be released from its effects only upon a final accounting and actual settlement at the expiration of the tutorship.

Opinion and decree, January 5, 1915.

Rehearing refused, February 1,1915.

Schneider vs. Burns, 45 An., 875.

Lyman vs. Strondbach, 47 An., 71.

It does indirectly appear that the tutorship has been forfeited by a second.marriage, but it is not even pretended that the tutrix has made a final accounting or actual settlement with her wards. Under such circumstances the trial Court properly held that the fund in question could not be presently' applied to the satisfaction of appellant’s judgment.

The judgment is accordingly affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1337 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permanently extend existing 

elective tax treatment for Alaska Native Settlement Trusts. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 7, 2011 

Ms. MURKOWSKI (for herself and Mr. BEGICH) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permanently 

extend existing elective tax treatment for Alaska Native 

Settlement Trusts. 

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

3 SECTION 1. PERMANENT EXTENSION OF ELECTIVE TAX 

4 TREATMENT FOR ALASKA NATIVE SETTLE5 MENT TRUSTS. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 901 of the Economic 

7 Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (relat8 ing to sunset provisions) shall not apply to the provisions 

9 of, and amendments made by, section 671 of such Act (reVerDate Mar 15 2010 03:01 Jul 08, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S1337.IS S1337

jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1337 IS

1 lating to tax treatment and information requirements of 

2 Alaska Native Settlement Trusts). 

3 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

4 this section shall be effective upon the date of enactment 

5 of this Act. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
No. 44285.

#### Protest 735276-G (B) of Edward E. Ziskind (New York).

Opinion by

Brown, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise is bodies, hoods, forms, or shapes similar to those the subject of *Cohn*v. *United States*(4 Cust. Ct. 166, C. D. 314). The protest was therefore sustained.
No. 54271.

#### W. R. Zanes & Company *v.*United States,

protest 133555-K (Galveston).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

An examination of the record disclosing nothing sufficient to disturb the action of the collector, which was presumptively correct, the protest was overruled.
RENDERED: JANUARY 20, 2023; 10:00 A.M.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

Commonwealth of Kentucky

Court of Appeals

NO. 2021-CA-0365-MR

STEPHEN WILLIAM BARALT APPELLANT 

v. 

APPEAL FROM SPENCER CIRCUIT COURT

HONORABLE S. MARIE HELLARD, JUDGE

ACTION NO. 13-CI-00201

MELISSA MITCHELL BARALT APPELLEE 

OPINION

AFFIRMING

**   **  **

BEFORE: DIXON, LAMBERT, AND MCNEILL, JUDGES.

MCNEILL, JUDGE: The parties in the present case were divorced by decree of the 

Spencer Circuit Court, Family Division, in 2015. They had minor children at the 

time. According to Appellant’s brief, he alleged over 1,000 individual instances of 

contempt of the underlying litigation. He suggested to the trial court in various 

orders that he be awarded over $100,000 in attorneys’ fees and costs, and that 
-2-

Appellee rectify her alleged parental alienation by submitting herself to counseling 

and written apologies to the children. 

In a handwritten order entered on January 26, 2021, the family court 

stated that all issues relating to attorneys’ fees, contempt, etc., were previously 

determined pursuant to the court’s December 7, 2020 docket order. However, the 

order further states that the motions for contempt and attorneys’ fees were not 

preserved and that the court had previously determined all issues relating to the 

parties’ children were moot. It is undisputed that the children are now adults. In

another handwritten docket order entered on March 2, 2021 the court stated that 

the January 26, 2021 order is final and appealable. Appellant appeals from that 

order as a matter of right. For the following reasons, we affirm.

ANALYSIS

 When a court exercises its contempt powers, it has 

nearly unlimited discretion. Consequently, we will not 

disturb a court’s decision regarding contempt absent an 

abuse of its discretion. The test for abuse of discretion is 

whether the trial [court’s] decision was arbitrary, 

unreasonable, unfair, or unsupported by sound legal 

principles.

Meyers v. Petrie, 233 S.W.3d 212, 215 (Ky. App. 2007) (internal quotation marks 

and citations omitted). Appellant cites to numerous portions of the record where 

he filed motions for contempt. However, he has not raised any specific instance of 

alleged contempt or cited to any substantive ruling for this Court to review. It 
-3-

appears that his general argument is that the family court did not adequately 

address his various motions, and that it also failed to do so in a timely manner. In 

any event, considering the immense discretion afforded the circuit court and the 

record presented, we cannot conclude that the court abused its discretion here. 

Therefore, we affirm the Spencer Circuit Court. 

ALL CONCUR. 

BRIEFS FOR APPELLANT:

W. Steven Middleton

Frankfort, Kentucky 

BRIEF FOR APPELLEE:

Kevin P. Fox

Frankfort, Kentucky
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 90 (Thursday, May 10, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 26619]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-8931]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP07-424-000]


Northern Natural Gas Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC 
Gas Tariff

May 3, 2007.
    Take notice that on May 1, 2007 Northern Natural Gas Company 
(Northern) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Fifth 
Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, to become effective 
November 1, 2007:

27 Revised Sheet No. 54
25 Revised Sheet No. 63
24 Revised Sheet No. 64

    Northern further states that copies of the filing have been mailed 
to each of its customers and interested state commissions.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must 
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of 
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, 
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of 
Sec.  154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone 
filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on 
the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before 
the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or 
protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an 
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#0d4b485f4e4263616463685e787d7d627f794d6b687f6e236a627b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="ecaaa9beafa38280858289bf999c9c839e98ac8a899e8fc28b839a">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-8931 Filed 5-9-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
ERNEST EUGENE WATKINS,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D15-1909

_____________________________/

Opinion filed July 8, 2015.

An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Alachua County.

Mark W. Moseley, Judge.

Ernest Eugene Watkins, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Giselle D. Lylen, Assistant Attorney 

General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

WOLF, LEWIS, and MAKAR, JJ., CONCUR.
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1281 

To amend title 49, United States Code, to prohibit the transportation of 

horses in interstate transportation in a motor vehicle containing two 

or more levels stacked on top of one another. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 27, 2011 

Mr. KIRK (for himself and Mr. LAUTENBERG) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, 

Science, and Transportation 

A BILL 

To amend title 49, United States Code, to prohibit the transportation of horses in interstate transportation in a 

motor vehicle containing two or more levels stacked on 

top of one another. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Horse Transportation 

5 Safety Act of 2011’’. 

6 SEC. 2. TRANSPORTATION OF HORSES. 

7 Section 80502 of title 49, United States Code, is 

8 amended— 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1281 IS

1 (1) in subsection (c), by striking ‘‘This section 

2 does not’’ and inserting ‘‘Subsections (a) and (b) 

3 shall not’’; 

4 (2) by redesignating subsection (d) as sub5 section (e); 

6 (3) by inserting after subsection (c) the fol7 lowing: 

8 ‘‘(d) TRANSPORTATION OF HORSES.— 

9 ‘‘(1) PROHIBITION.—No person may transport, 

10 or cause to be transported, a horse from a place in 

11 a State, the District of Columbia, or a territory or 

12 possession of the United States through or to a 

13 place in another State, the District of Columbia, or 

14 a territory or possession of the United States in a 

15 motor vehicle containing 2 or more levels stacked on 

16 top of each other. 

17 ‘‘(2) MOTOR VEHICLE DEFINED.—In this sub18 section, the term ‘motor vehicle’— 

19 ‘‘(A) means a vehicle driven or drawn by 

20 mechanical power and manufactured primarily 

21 for use on public highways; and 

22 ‘‘(B) does not include a vehicle operated 

23 exclusively on a rail or rails.’’; and 

24 (4) in subsection (e), as redesignated— 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 1281 IS

1 (A) by striking ‘‘A rail carrier’’ and insert2 ing the following: 

3 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—A rail carrier’’; 

4 (B) by striking ‘‘this section’’ and insert5 ing ‘‘subsection (a) or (b)’’; and 

6 (C) by striking ‘‘On learning’’ and insert7 ing the following: 

8 ‘‘(2) TRANSPORTATION OF HORSES IN MULTI9 LEVEL TRAILER.— 

10 ‘‘(A) CIVIL PENALTY.—A person that 

11 knowingly violates subsection (c) is liable to the 

12 United States Government for a civil penalty of 

13 at least $100 but not more than $500 for each 

14 violation. A separate violation occurs under sub15 section (c) for each horse that is transported, or 

16 caused to be transported, in violation of sub17 section (c). 

18 ‘‘(B) RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER LAWS.— 

19 The penalty provided under subparagraph (A) 

20 shall be in addition to any penalty or remedy 

21 available under any other law or common law. 

22 ‘‘(3) CIVIL ACTION.—On learning’’. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-6967

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

CLEVELAND NELSON, a/k/a Cleve, a/k/a Fat

Daddy,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Fayetteville. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CR-94-57-H, CA-97-578-H)

Submitted: October 8, 1998 Decided: November 16, 1998

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Cleveland Nelson, Appellant Pro Se. Jane J. Jackson, Assistant

United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Cleveland Nelson seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 &

Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s

opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning

of the district court. United States v. Nelson, Nos. CR-94-57-H;

CA-97-578-H (E.D.N.C. Apr. 29, 1998). 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.

DISMISSED
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 China BAK Battery, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB/A
for the period ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report). I, Li Xiangqian, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to §. 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 results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|Date: | August 22, 2006
|----- | ---------------



By:

/s/ Li XiangqianLi XiangqianChief Executive Officer
PUBLIC LAW 110–136—DEC. 14, 2007 121 STAT. 1453 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 4252: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 153 (2007): 

Dec. 5, considered and passed House. 

Dec. 7, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 110–136 

110th Congress 

An Act 

To provide for an additional temporary extension of programs under the Small 

Business Act and the Small Business Investment Act of 1958 through May 23, 

2008, 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. ADDITIONAL TEMPORARY EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATION 

OF PROGRAMS UNDER THE SMALL BUSINESS ACT AND 

THE SMALL BUSINESS INVESTMENT ACT OF 1958. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1 of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act to 

extend temporarily certain authorities of the Small Business 

Administration’’, approved October 10, 2006 (Public Law 109–316; 

120 Stat. 1742), as most recently amended by section 1 of Public 

Law 110–57 (121 Stat. 560), is further amended by striking 

‘‘December 15, 2007’’ each place it appears and inserting ‘‘May 

23, 2008’’. 

(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by subsection (a) 

shall take effect on December 15, 2007. 

Approved December 14, 2007. 

Dec. 14, 2007 

[H.R. 4252] 


jbridges on POFP91QD1 with PUBLIC LAWS
No. 42036.

#### Petition 5775-R of Polk Musical-Supply Co., Inc. (Savannah).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

It appeared that the petition was filed more than 60 days after liquidation. It was therefore dismissed.
III 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 336 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 11, 2008 

Received and referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Honoring the sacrifices and contributions made by disabled 

American veterans. 

Whereas the people of the United States have a sincere appreciation and respect for members of the Armed Forces 

who suffered disabling wounds while serving in the 

United States military; 

Whereas there are approximately 2,800,000 veterans receiving benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs for 

disabilities incurred while defending our Nation; 


erowe on PRODPC61 with BILLS
2 

HCON 336 RFS 

Whereas the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have resulted in 30,000 disabled American veterans as a direct 

result of combat operations, and even more so from conditions simulating war, instrumentalities of war, and hazardous duty in combat-related training; 

Whereas families throughout every State in America have 

been affected by loved ones returning disabled from their 

service to their Nation; 

Whereas the American public supports the brave men and 

women who have defended the freedom of all in America; 

Whereas America owes its very integrity to her sons and 

daughters in uniform, who risk the most for the least, 

and who epitomize the extraordinary meaning of service, 

sacrifice, and, most importantly, freedom; and 

Whereas Americans should remember and honor our men and 

women in uniform who incurred disabilities while defending our Nation with a Disabled American Veterans Week: 

Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 

2 concurring), That Congress— 

3 (1) recognizes the great sacrifices made by dis4 abled veterans and their families; 

5 (2) calls on the people of the United States to 

6 honor all disabled American veterans and the free7 dom for which they sacrificed; 

8 (3) encourages local, State, and national orga9 nizations and governmental institutions to particiVerDate Aug 31 2005 00:29 Jun 12, 2008 Jkt 069200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\HC336.RFS HC336

erowe on PRODPC61 with BILLS
3 

HCON 336 RFS 

1 pate in the effort to honor the sacrifices of Amer2 ica’s disabled veterans; and 

3 (4) supports the goals and ideals of Disabled 

4 American Veterans Week. 

Passed the House of Representatives June 10, 2008. 

Attest: LORRAINE C. MILLER, 

Clerk. 


erowe on PRODPC61 with BILLS