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

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2105 

To provide that certain regulations shall have the force and effect of enacted 

law. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 19, 2021 

Mr. ROSENDALE (for himself, Mr. BAIRD, Mr. JOYCE of Pennsylvania, Mr. 

ISSA, and Mr. WEBER of Texas) introduced the following bill; which was 

referred to the Committee on Education and Labor 

A BILL 

To provide that certain regulations shall have the force and 

effect of enacted law. 

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 ‘‘Teach Relevant Ap5 prenticeships to Drive Economic Success Act’’ or the 

6 ‘‘TRADES Act’’. 

7 SEC. 2. LEGAL EFFECT. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—The provisions of part 29 of title 

9 29, Code of Federal Regulations, relating to industry-rec10 ognized apprenticeship programs, as amended by the final 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2105 IH

1 regulations entitled ‘‘Apprenticeship Programs, Labor 

2 Standards for Registration, Amendment of Regulations’’ 

3 published by the Department of Labor in the Federal Reg4 ister on March 11, 2020 (85 Fed. Reg. 14294 et seq.) 

5 shall have the force and effect of enacted law. 

6 (b) FUNDING.—Amounts appropriated to carry out 

7 the Act of August 16, 1937 (commonly known as the ‘‘Na8 tional Apprenticeship Act’’; 50 Stat. 664, chapter 663; 29 

9 U.S.C. 50 et seq.) shall also be made available to carry 

10 out the provisions described in subsection (a). 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
#### State of Missouri Respondent, vs. Wilhelmine Schuermann, Appellant.

1. *Practice, criminal*— Court *of Criminal Correction of St. Louis County*— Jus*tices of the Peace*— Disturbing *the peace.*— A. was prosecuted before a Justice of tile Peace in St. Louis County, for disturbing the peace of a neighborhood, was convicted, and appealed to the Court of Criminal Correction ; *Held,*though, the Justice had jurisdiction to commit for trial before said Court, hut not te *166try, yet said court should try the case on the information filed before *the Justice,*or on a new one, disregarding tile former trial. [State vs. Barada, 49 Mo., 504, affirmed.]

*Appeal from St. Louis Court of Criminal Correction.*

*E. Peacock,*for Appellant.

*M. W. Hogan, and Francis Garvey,*for Respondent,

cite : State vs. Barada, 49 Mo., 504.

Adams, Judge,

delivered tbe opinion of tbe court.

This was a prosecution commenced before a Justice of the Peace against the defendant, for disturbing the prosecutor’s family and neighborhood. The defendant was tried • and convicted before the Justice, and took an appeal to the St. Louis Court of Criminal Correction, where the defendant was again tried on the original information and convicted.

He then moved for a new trial and in arrest upon the ground that the Justice of the Peace had no jurisdiction. These motions were overruled and the defendant has appealed to this court.

It may be conceded that the Justice of the Peace had no jurisdiction to try the defendant for the alleged offense. But lie certainly had jurisdiction to commit him for trial by the Court of Criminal Correction, and it was his duty to have pursued this course and not to dismiss the prosecution. As he did not commit him but proceeded *to try the case,*and as the defendant appealed the case to the Court of Criminal Correction, it became the duty of that court to disregard the trial before the Justice, and to try the defendant on the informa tion taken before the Justice, or on a new information to be filed by the prosecutor, or the prosecuting attorney. This point was ruled by this court in the State vs. Barada, 49 Mo., 504, and we are satisfied with that decision.

Let the judgment be affirmed.

The other Judges concur.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 227 (Tuesday, November 25, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 62801]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-30963]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Research and Special Programs Administration
[Notice No. 97-14]


Notice of Information Collection Approval

AGENCY: Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Information Collection Approval.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces OMB approval of information collection 
request for OMB No. 2137-0595, entitled Cargo Tank Motor Vehicles in 
Liquefied Compressed Gas Service. This information collection has been 
extended until March 31, 1999.

DATEs: The expiration date of this information collection is March 31, 
1999.

ADDRESSES: Requests for a copy of an information collection should be 
directed to Deborah Boothe, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards 
(DHM-10), Research and Special Programs Administration, Room 8102, 400 
Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590-0001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deborah Boothe, Office of Hazardous 
Materials Standards (DHM-10), Research and Special Programs 
Administration, Room 8102, 400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 
20590-0001, Telephone (202) 366-8553.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
regulations (5 CFR 1320) implementing provisions of the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995 (P.L. 104-13) require that interested members of 
the public and affected agencies have an opportunity to comment on 
information collection and recordkeeping activities (see 5 CFR 
1320.8(s)) and specify that no person is required to respond to an 
information collection unless it displays a valid OMB control number. 
RSPA published a final rule in the Federal Register (62 FR 44038) on 
August 18, 1997, entitled ``Hazardous Materials: Cargo Tank Motor 
Vehicles in Liquefied Compressed Gas Service''. RSPA received approval 
from OMB for the information collection in that final rule under OMB 
No. 2137-0595. The approval expires on February 28, 1998.
    RSPA published Notice No. 97-4 (62 FR 44169) on August 19, 1997, 
requesting comments on this information collection. The comment period 
on Notice No. 97-4 closed on September 18, 1997. Based on comments 
received on Notice 97-4, RSPA submitted a request to OMB for extension 
of the information collection approval until March 31, 1999, which is 
the expiration date for requirements in the final rule. RSPA received 
no comments to Notice No. 97-4. RSPA has received approval from OMB for 
information collection OMB No. 2137-0595, entitled ``Hazardous 
Materials: Cargo Tank Motor Vehicles in Liquefied Compressed Gas 
Service.''
    This information collection approval expires on March 31, 1999.

    Issued in Washington, DC on November 20, 1997.
Edward T. Mazzullo,
Director, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards.
[FR Doc. 97-30963 Filed 11-24-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P
#### Bobby Lee JONES, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-1031.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Feb. 12, 1973.

*9Phillip A. Hubbart, Public Defender, and Lewis S. Kimler, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Joel D. Rosenblatt, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appel-lee.

Before PEARSON, CHARLES CARROLL and HENDRY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant was informed against, tried and found guilty of manslaughter. On this appeal he urges error in the trial court because the State was allowed to impeach one of its own witnesses. The witness was a girl friend of the defendant who was sitting with him in the car when he shot the deceased as the deceased was standing at the car window. Our review of the record convinces us that the differences between the witness’ statements prior to trial and the testimony given on the witness stand constituted a sufficient basis for the court’s finding that the State was prejudiced or surprised by the differences in the testimony.

In Gibbs v. State, Fla.App.1967, 193 So.2d 460, Mr. Justice Adkins sitting as an associate judge on the District Court of Appeal, Second District, authored a definitive opinion on the subject of the State’s right to impeach its own witness. In that case it was held that there was no basis for the impeachment inasmuch as the strongest statement that could be made relative to the testimony was that it was not as beneficial to the State as expected. The court, speaking through Judge Adkins, held the impeachment to be error and reversed. In reversing, the court set forth the law applicable to the subject as follows:

> * * * * * *

> “A party producing a witness cannot impeach him unless he not only fails to give beneficial testimony but also he must become adverse by giving evidence that is prejudicial to the party producing him. A party cannot impeach his own witness who merely fails to testify as to beneficial facts.”

> «í» H*

In the present case, the witness injected at trial a situation which her previous statements had completely ruled out. This element was an assertion that the deceased reached for the gun. The trial court properly ruled that the witness had gone beyond the mere failing to give beneficial testimony and had given adverse testimony. No error has been demonstrated. See Gibbs v. State, supra, and Hernandez v. State, 156 Fla. 356, 22 So.2d 781 (1945).

Appellant’s remaining point urging the insufficiency of the evidence to support the judgment has been examined and found to be without merit.

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>               UT
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN ITEM 1 OF CONSOLIDATED NATURAL 
GAS COMPANY'S QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30,
1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL 
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-START>                  JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                    3,086,565
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                  1,261,371
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                         978,678
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                       444,911
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                 413,425
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,184,950
<COMMON>                                       263,764
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                      530,839
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                          1,542,197
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>               2,372,971
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                         1,189,587
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                   0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                 685,600
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                  269,625
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>               1,703,338
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                6,184,950
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                    1,953,041
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                            84,425
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                   1,608,965
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                   1,693,390
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                        259,651
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                              17,837
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                 277,488
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        87,014
<NET-INCOME>                                   143,750
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                  143,750
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                       139,473
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                       91,580
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                         661,071
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.52
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.51
        

</TABLE>
## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

E R R A T A

February 3, 2006

Appeal No. 03-1341,-1366,

Precedential Majority Opinion, nCube Corporation v Seachange International

Decided January 9, 2006

Page 13, last line: delete “nC ube’s” and replace with “SeaChange’s”
U.S. TREASURY DEPARTMENT 

OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 2, 2011 

CONTACT: Treasury Public Affairs, 202-622-2960

UNITED STATES AND JAPAN TO NEGOTIATE AMENDMENTS TO 

INCOME TAX TREATY

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Department of the Treasury announced today that it plans to begin 

formal negotiation of amendments to the existing bilateral income tax treaty with Japan, which 

entered into force in 2004. The first formal round of negotiations will take place June 8-10, 2011 in 

Washington. The negotiations will aim to bring the existing tax treaty into closer conformity with 

the current tax treaty policies of the United States and Japan.

The Treasury Department invites written comments from the public regarding the upcoming 

negotiations. Comments should be sent to Manal Corwin, Deputy Assistant Secretary (International 

Tax Affairs), Room 3054 U.S. Department of Treasury, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, 

Washington, DC 20220.

Comments also may be sent by fax to (202) 622-0646, or by e-mail to Manal.Corwin@treasury.gov.

###
EXHIBIT 32.2  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 Delta Entertainment Group, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:  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 operation of the Company.  3. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.   Date: March 31, 2011 By: /s/ Marshall Freeman Marshall Freeman Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 31.2




CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




I, Vasileios Mavrogiannis, Chief Financial Officer, certify that:




1. I have reviewed this annual report of Prime Estates and Developments, Inc.;





2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material 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;





3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;





4. The other small business issuer's certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:





(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;





(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and





(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and





5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):





(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and





(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting.





/s/  Vasileios MavrogiannisVasileios MavrogiannisChief Financial Officer




November 2, 2011
#### Margaret June HORNER, Appellant, v. MODERN MOVERS, INC., a Florida corporation, and Joseph L. Sandroni, Individually, Appellees.

No. 72-744.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Feb. 28, 1973.

Leonard V. Wood, of Mairs, Wood, Muller & Burroughs, Winter Park, for appellant.

Vincent P. Collura and Dominic G. Boceo, Orlando, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The trial court decision to set aside a jury award of damages returned for plaintiff and re-try the cause upon the issue of damages only is amply supported by the record and the trial court reasoning. Pittman *9v. Smith, Fla.App. 1971, 252 So.2d 279; Martin v. Stone, Fla.1951, 51 So.2d 33. While there is a suggestion that the appealed order is ambiguous as to whether the trial court intended to also re-try the liability issues, we do not so view it and are of the opinion that the order correctly limited itself to a reversal of only the award of damages.

Affirmed.

WALDEN, CROSS and OWEN, JJ., concur.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

November 20, 2012

t1113

Order 

November 20, 2012

145662

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 145662

COA: 304094 

Saginaw CC: 10-034275-FC

JARED JAROD CAMERON,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 19, 2012 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 230 (Monday, December 1, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63601-63602]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-31354]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION


Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation Advisory Board; 
Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act 
(Pub. L. 92-463; 5 U.S.C. App. I) notice is hereby given of a meeting 
of the Advisory Board of the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development 
Corporation (SLSDC), to be held at 9:30 a.m., December 3, 1997, via 
conference call in the Association Administrator's Conference Room, 
SLSDC Administration Building, 180 Andrews Street, Massena, New York. 
The agenda for this meeting will be as follows: Opening Remarks; 
Consideration of Minutes of Past Meeting; Review of Programs; New 
Business; and Closing Remarks.
    Attendance at meeting is open to the interested public but limited 
to the space available. With the approval of the Administrator, members 
of the public may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons 
wishing further information should contact not later

[[Page 63602]]

than December 1, 1997, Marc C. Owen, Advisory Board Liaison, Saint 
Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation, 400 Seventh Street, S.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20590; 202-366-6823.
    Any member of the public may present a written statement to the 
Advisory Board at any time.

    Issued at Washington, D.C. on November 24, 1997.
Marc C. Owen,
Advisory Board Liaison.
[FR Doc. 97-31354 Filed 11-28-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-61-M
**Exhibit 32.2.1**

 

**Certification Required Under Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

I, Kevin Burke, the Chief Executive Officer of Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.(the “Company”) certify that the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2006, which this statement accompanies, (the “Form 10-Q”) fully complies with the requirements of Section13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 

Dated: May 3, 2006
**Exhibit 32.2**

**COMPREHENSIVE CARE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES**

**Certification of Co-CEO 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 Comprehensive Care Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter endingJune 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 16, 2010 (the “Report”), Clark A. Marcus, as Co-Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to18 U.S.C.§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of his 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 andresults of operations of the Company. 

 

 

40