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

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2160 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2160

   To authorize borrowers of loans under the William D. Ford Federal 
  Direct Loan Program to modify the interest rate of such loans to be 
 equal to the interest rate for such loans at the time of modification.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 23, 2021

  Mr. Pocan introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Education and Labor

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To authorize borrowers of loans under the William D. Ford Federal 
  Direct Loan Program to modify the interest rate of such loans to be 
 equal to the interest rate for such loans at the time of modification.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Student Loan Refinancing Act''.

SEC. 2. BORROWER MODIFICATION OF INTEREST RATES UNDER THE WILLIAM D. 
              FORD FEDERAL DIRECT LOAN PROGRAM.

    Section 455(b) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
1087e(b)) is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
            ``(11) Borrower modification of interest rate.--
                    ``(A) Modification.--Notwithstanding the preceding 
                paragraphs of this subsection, the borrower of a 
                Federal Direct Stafford Loan, a Federal Direct 
                Unsubsidized Stafford Loan, a Federal Direct PLUS Loan, 
                or a Federal Direct Consolidation Loan may elect to 
                modify the interest rate of the loan to be equal to the 
                interest rate that would be applicable to such loan if 
                such loan were first disbursed (or in the case of a 
                Federal Direct Consolidation Loan, first applied for) 
                on the date on which such borrower elects to modify the 
                interest rate of such loan.
                    ``(B) Fixed rate.--Except as provided in 
                subparagraph (C), an interest rate elected under 
                subparagraph (A) for a loan shall be fixed for the life 
                of the loan.
                    ``(C) Continuing authority to modify.--A borrower 
                may elect to modify the interest rate of a loan in 
                accordance with subparagraph (A)--
                            ``(i) at any time during the life of the 
                        loan; and
                            ``(ii) any number of times during the life 
                        of the loan, except that a borrower may not 
                        modify the interest rate of the loan more than 
                        once in a six-month period.''.
                                 <all>
```
IB 

Union Calendar No. 116 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2220 

[Report No. 117–159] 

To amend title 40, United States Code, to modify the treatment of certain 

bargain-price options to purchase at less than fair market value, and 

for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 26, 2021 

Mr. GUEST (for himself, Mr. WEBSTER of Florida, and Mr. PENCE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

NOVEMBER 1, 2021 

Reported from the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure; committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union 

and ordered to be printed 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2220 RH

A BILL 

To amend title 40, United States Code, to modify the treatment of certain bargain-price options to purchase at less 

than fair market value, and for other purposes. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 2220 RH

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

3 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON DISCOUNTED PURCHASE OP4 TIONS. 

5 Section 585 of title 40, United States Code, is 

6 amended by adding at the end the following: 

7 ‘‘(d) Any bargain-price option to purchase at less 

8 than fair market value contained in any lease agreement 

9 entered into on or after January 1, 2021, pursuant to this 

10 section may be exercised only to the extent specifically pro11 vided for in subsequent appropriation Acts or other Acts 

12 of Congress.’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
Union Calendar No. 116 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2220 

[Report No. 117–159] 

A BILL 

To amend title 40, United States Code, to modify 

other purposes. purchase at less than fair market value, and for the treatment of certain bargain-price options to 

NOVEMBER 1, 2021 

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 

State of the Union and ordered to be printed 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
#### Lee Roy JONES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. L-303.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. First District.

Dec. 9, 1969.

Louis O. Frost, Jr., Public Defender, Gerald Sohn, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., Horace A. Knowlton, III, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appel-lee.

PER CURIAM.

This cause having been orally argued before the court, the briefs and record on appeal having been read and given full consideration, and appellant having failed to demonstrate reversible error, the judgment of the lower court hereby appealed is affirmed. See Avis (Epps, and Wommock) v. State, 221 So.2d 235 (Fla.App.1969).

JOHNSON, C. J., and RAWLS and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

EDWIN RITTER JONAS, III, Debtor,

 Appellant,

 v.

LINDA JONAS,

 Appellee.

No. 13-35526

D.C. No. 9:12-cv-00128-DLC

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Montana

Dana L. Christensen, Chief District Judge, Presiding

Submitted April 10, 2015** 

Seattle, Washington

Before: HAWKINS, RAWLINSON, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

Debtor Edwin Jonas (“Debtor”) appeals the district court’s order affirming the

bankruptcy court’s dismissal of his bankruptcy case with prejudice. We review such

FILED

APR 17 2015

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).
a dismissal for an abuse of discretion, Leavitt v. Soto (In re Leavitt), 171 F.3d 1219,

1222-23 (9th Cir. 1999), and we affirm.

The bankruptcy court acted within its discretion to dismiss the case for Debtor’s

failure to comply with the express terms of the stipulation he negotiated in order to

reconvert his case to Chapter 11. As the bankruptcy court found, “The Debtor failed

to perform his obligation under the approved Stipulation. He failed to file a plan and

disclosure statement by the deadline. On two instances he failed to pay timely

quarterly fees. For each of those failures, under the negotiated Stipulation the case

was subject to immediate dismissal with prejudice . . . .” See, e.g., 11 U.S.C. §

1112(b)(4)(J) (“failure to file a disclosure statement, or to file or confirm a plan,

within the time fixed by this title or by order of the Court” provides cause to dismiss

case); Tennant v. Rojas (In re Tennant), 318 B.R. 860, 869 (9th Cir. BAP 2004)

(bankruptcy court has authority to dismiss case sua sponte for cause).

Dismissal of the underlying bankruptcy case divested the court of jurisdiction

over the adversary proceedings against Debtor’s ex-wife Linda, and thus Debtor’s

argument that the bankruptcy court misapplied the Rooker-Feldman doctrine is not

properly before us on appeal and will not be addressed.

AFFIRMED.

2
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

	NO. 2-09-223-CR

DOMINIQUE BRADLEY	APPELLANT

	V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS	STATE

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

	FROM CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 3 OF TARRANT COUNTY

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

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

	Appellant Dominique Bradley entered an open plea of guilty to the offense of aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, and the trial court sentenced him to nine years’ confinement.  In one point, Bradley argues that his sentence is disproportionate to the offense committed, thus constituting cruel and unusual punishment prohibited by the Eighth Amendment.  We will affirm.

	To preserve a complaint for our review, a party must have presented to the trial court a timely request, objection, or motion that states the specific grounds for the desired ruling if they are not apparent from the context of the request, objection, or motion.  Tex. R. App. P. 33.1(a)(1); Mosley v. State, 983 S.W.2d 249, 265 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998) (op. on reh’g), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1070 (1999).  Further, the trial court must have ruled on the request, objection, or motion, either expressly or implicitly, or the complaining party must have objected to the trial court’s refusal to rule.  Tex. R. App. P. 33.1(a)(2); Mendez v. State, 138 S.W.3d 334, 341 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004).  An appellant claiming a disproportionate sentence is not excused from the necessity of preserving error for appellate review.  See Stewart v. LaGrand, 526 U.S. 115, 119, 119 S. Ct. 1018, 1020 (1999) (holding that appellant waived Eighth Amendment complaint); Rhoades v. State, 934 S.W.2d 113, 120 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996) (holding complaint of cruel and unusual punishment under Texas Constitution waived); Curry v. State, 910 S.W.2d 490, 496 n.2 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995) (stating that constitutional errors may be waived); Crawford v. State, No. 02- 04–00299-CR, 2005 WL 1477958, at *4 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth June 23, 2005, pet. ref’d) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (holding appellant waived claim of disproportionate sentence by not objecting after sentence was imposed, in a motion for new trial, or in any other post-verdict motion).

	Here, Bradley did not raise a disproportionate punishment complaint when the trial court imposed his sentence, in a motion for new trial, or in any other type of post-verdict motion.  Accordingly, Bradley has forfeited his complaint that his sentence is disproportionate.  See Crawford, 2005 WL 1477958, at *4.  We overrule Bradley’s point and affirm the trial court’s judgment.

							PER CURIAM

PANEL:  MEIER, WALKER, and MCCOY, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED:  December 17, 2009
```
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 231 (Tuesday, December 2, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 63630]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-31535]

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

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT

5 CFR Part 410

RIN 3206-AF99

Federal Employee Training

AGENCY: Office of Personnel Management.

ACTION: Correcting amendments.

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

SUMMARY: This document contains a correction to the final regulations, 
which were published in the Federal Register of Tuesday, December 17, 
1996 (61 FR 66189). The regulations implemented policies related to the 
training of Federal employees.

DATES: Effective on December 17, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Judith Lombard, 202-606-2431, email 
[email protected], or fax 202-606-2394.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The final regulations subject to this correction affect the 
training of Federal employees. The subsection on reports contains an 
inaccurate reference about records of agency training plans, 
expenditures, and activities. The correction removes a reference to a 
non-existent subsection of the final regulations and adds, in its 
place, a reference to the correct subsection of the final regulations.

Need for Correction

    As published, the final regulations contain an error which may 
prove to be misleading and needs to be corrected.

List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 410

    Education, Government employees.

    Accordingly, 5 CFR part 410 is corrected by making the following 
correcting amendment:

PART 410--TRAINING

    1. The authority citation for part 410 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 4101, et. seq.; E.O. 11348, 3 CFR, 1967 
Comp., p. 275.

Sec. 410.701  (Corrected)

    2. In Sec. 410.701, remove the reference to Sec. 410.312, and add, 
in its place, Sec. 410.311.

Office of Personnel Management.
Janice R. Lachance,
Director.
[FR Doc. 97-31535 Filed 12-1-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325-01-P
```
■ 9:35 AM-11:50 AM

■ 12:00 PM -12:45 PM Meeting with Mamadou Moustapha Ba,

Minister of Finance and Budget, Senegal 

■ 12:45 PM -12:50 PM

■ At 12:55 PM

■ 1:00 PM -1:45 PM Meeting with Macky Sall, President of Senegal

■ 1:45 PM -2:00 PM

■ 2:00 PM -4:00 PM Dinner with Macky Sall, President of Senegal

■ 4:00 PM -4:15 PM

■ At4:20 PM

■ 5:00 PM -5:30 PM Meeting with Staff

..._ Sat, Jan 21 

All Day International Travel - Switzerland-Senegal-ZambiaSouth Africa 

D All Day Senegal 

■ 3:55AM-4:00AM

■ At4:30AM

■ 4:30 AM -5:50 AM Visit Goree Island

10
Exhibit 99.1





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 TNP Enterprises, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, William J. Catacosinos, 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 to the
best of my 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 operations of the Company








/s/ William J. Catacosinos





William J.
Catacosinos


Chief Executive Officer


November 6, 2002
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 Quarterly Report of Congoleum Corporation (the “Company”) on
Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Howard N. Feist
III, Chief Financial 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 to
the best of my 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 operations of the
      Company.








November
7, 2008








/s/ Howard N. Feist
      IIIHoward
      N. Feist IIIChief
      Financial Officer








A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Congoleum Corporation and will be retained by Congoleum Corporation
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, DC 20549

**FORM N-PX**

**ANNUAL REPORT OF PROXY VOTING RECORD OF**

**Scudder Limited-Duration Plus Portfolio, U.S. Bond Index Portfolio and**

**EAFE Equity Index Portfolio**

**Each a Series of DWS Investment Portfolios**

Investment Company Act file number  811-07774

DWS Investment Portfolios

(Exact name of registrant as specified in charter)

 

345 Park Avenue

New York, NY  10154

(Address of principal executive offices)             (Zip code)

John Millette

Secretary

One Beacon Street

Boston, MA  0210-3106

(Name and address of agent for service)

Registrant's telephone number, including area code:  617-295-1000

Date of fiscal year end:  09/30

Scudder Limited-Duration Plus Portfolio

Date of fiscal year end:  12/31

U.S. Bond Index Portfolio

EAFE Equity Index Portfolio

Date of reporting period:  7/1/08-6/30/09

Form N-PX is to be used by a registered management investment company, other than a small business investment company registered on Form N-5 (§§ 239.24 and 274.5 of this chapter), to file reports with the Commission, not later than August 31 of each year, containing the registrant's proxy voting record for the most recent twelve-month period ended June 30, pursuant to section 30 of the Investment Company Act of 1940 and rule 30b1-4 thereunder (17 CFR 270.30b1-4). The Commission may use the information provided on Form N-PX in its regulatory, disclosure review, inspection, and policymaking roles.

A registrant is required to disclose the information specified by Form N-PX, and the Commission will make this information public. A registrant is not required to respond to the collection of information contained in Form N-PX unless the Form displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget ("OMB") control number. Please direct comments concerning the accuracy of the information collection burden estimate and any suggestions for reducing the burden to the Secretary, Securities and Exchange 

 

----
#### Gladys VEIGA et al., Appellants, v. SOUTH CAROLINA INSURANCE COMPANY et al., Appellees.

No. 72-891.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

March 6, 1973.

Spear & Johnston, Miami Beach, for appellants.

Corlett, Merritt, Killian & Okell, Miami, for appellees.

Before PEARSON, CHARLES CARROLL and HAVERFIELD, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff appealed a summary judgment entered in favor of the defendant in a personal injury action. We find merit in the appeal. The evidence before the court on hearing the motion for summary judgment disclosed the existence of a tria-ble issue as to assumption of risk by the plaintiff which could not properly be determined by summary judgment.

Judgment reversed and cause remanded for further proceedings.
Order entered November 19, 2015

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

No. 05-15-01237-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF E.A.E., E. E.E., AND E.J.E., CHILDREN

On Appeal from the 416th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 416-55549-2014



### ORDER Before Chief Justice Wright and Justices Lang-Miers and Stoddart

Based on the Court’s opin ion of this date, we DIRECT the Clerk of the Court to issue the

mandate in this appeal INSTANTER

.

/s/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE
Exhibit 32(a)
 
 
 This Certification is being furnished and shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section.  This Certification shall not be incorporated by reference into any registration statement or other document pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933, except as otherwise stated in such filing.
 
 
 Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63
 of Title 18 of the United States Code
 
 
 In connection with the Annual Report of Columbus Southern Power Company (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q (the “Report”) for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Michael G. Morris, the chief executive officer of the Company certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that, based on my knowledge (i) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 
 /s/ Michael G. Morris
 Michael G. Morris
 Chief Executive Officer
 
 
 April 30, 2010
 
 
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to American Electric Power Company, Inc. and will be retained by American Electric Power Company, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
----

| 1.   | CarMax Business Services, LLC is, as of the date hereof, the Servicer under the Sale and Servicing Agreement and the Administrator under the Administration Agreement dated as of February 1, 2010 among the Issuer, CarMax Business Services, LLC, as Administrator (the "Administrator"), and the Indenture Trustee. |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2.   | The undersigned is duly authorized to execute and deliver this Officer's Certificate. |
|----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 3.   | This Officer's Certificate is delivered pursuant to Section 3.10 of the Sale and Servicing Agreement and Section 3.9 of the Indenture. |
|----------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 4.   | A review of the activities of the Servicer during the period beginning on February 19, 2010 and ending on February 28, 2010 and of the Servicer's performance under the Sale and Servicing Agreement was made under my supervision.  To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Sale and Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout such period. |
|----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 5.   | A review of the activities of the Issuer during the period beginning on February 19, 2010 and ending on February 28, 2010 and of the Issuer's performance under the Indenture was made under my supervision.  To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Issuer has complied in all material respects with all conditions and covenants under the Indenture throughout such period. |
|----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----