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

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7036 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7036

 To amend the Antitrust Criminal Penalty Enhancement and Reform Act of 
                  2004 to repeal the sunset provision.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 27, 2020

Mr. Neguse (for himself, Mr. Nadler, Mr. Cicilline, Mr. Jordan, and Mr. 
Sensenbrenner) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Antitrust Criminal Penalty Enhancement and Reform Act of 
                  2004 to repeal the sunset provision.

    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 ``Antitrust Criminal Penalty 
Enhancement and Reform Permanent Extension Act''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS; PURPOSE.

    (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
            (1) Conspiracies among competitors to fix prices, rig bids, 
        and allocate markets are categorically and irredeemably 
        anticompetitive and contravene the competition policy of the 
        United States.
            (2) Cooperation incentives are important to the efforts of 
        the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice to 
        prosecute and deter the offenses described in paragraph (1).
    (b) Purpose.--The purpose of this Act, and the amendments made by 
this Act, is to strengthen public and private antitrust enforcement by 
providing incentives for antitrust violators to cooperate fully with 
government prosecutors and private litigants through the repeal of the 
sunset provision of the Antitrust Criminal Penalty Enhancement and 
Reform Act of 2004 (15 U.S.C. 1 note).

SEC. 3. REPEAL OF SUNSET PROVISION.

    (a) In General.--Section 211 of the Antitrust Criminal Penalty 
Enhancement and Reform Act of 2004 (15 U.S.C. 1 note) is repealed.
    (b) Technical and Conforming Amendments.--Section 212 of the 
Antitrust Criminal Penalty Enhancement and Reform Act of 2004 (15 
U.S.C. 1 note) is amended--
            (1) by striking paragraph (6); and
            (2) by redesignating paragraph (7) as paragraph (6).
                                 <all>
```
##### 



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  
    
    the Report fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
and
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.
  /s/ Lawrence SaperLawrence SaperChairman of the Board
and Chief Executive Officer/s/ Henry M. ScaramelliHenry M. ScaramelliVice President and Chief Financial Officer (Acting) 39
**Exhibit 31.1**
**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**
I, Nikos K. Kardassis, certify that:
1.     Ihave reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of ML Life InsuranceCompany of New York;
2.     Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
3.     Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this annual report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of theregistrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4.     Theregistrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this annual report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to material affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
5.     Theregistrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
 (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves managementor other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.   Dated: March 26, 2004    /s/ NIKOS K. KARDASSIS
LOAN MODIFICATION
                                                                       AGREEMENT
[GRAPHIC OMITTED] SEAFIRST BANK
                    MEMBER FDIC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

         This agreement amends the Promissory Note dated APRIL 14, 1998 ("Note")
executed by THE COEUR  D'ALENES  COMPANY  AND UNION IRON WORKS,  INC OF SPOKANE,
WASHINGTON  ("Borrower") in favor of BANK OF AMERICA  NATIONAL TRUST AND SAVINGS
ASSOCIATION,  DOING BUSINESS AS SEAFIRST BANK ("Bank"),  regarding a loan in the
maximum   principal   amount  of   $1,850,000.00   (the   "Loan").   For  mutual
consideration,  Borrower  and Bank  agree to amend the above loan  documents  as
follows:

         1.  MATURITY  DATE.  The  maturity  date of the Note is  changed to MAY
1,2000.  Bank's commitment to make advances to Borrower under its line of credit
is also extended to MAY 1,2000.

         2.  MODIFICATION  FEE. Borrower shall pay to Bank a modification fee of
$1,000.00 upon execution of this Agreement.

         3.  OTHER TERMS.  Except as  specifically  amended by this agreement or
any prior amendment,  all other terms,  conditions,  and definitions of the Note
and all other security agreements,  guaranties,  deeds of trust, mortgages,  and
other  instruments  or  agreements  entered  into with  regard to the Loan shall
remain in full force and effect.

         DATED FEBRUARY 22, 1999.


Bank:

SEAFIRST BANK


By
     ------------------------------------------

Title
     ------------------------------------------


Borrower:

THE COEUR D'ALENES COMPANY AND UNION IRON
WORKS, INC OF SPOKANE,WASHINGTON


By:
     ------------------------------------------
     THE COEUR D'ALENES COMPANY

By:
     ------------------------------------------
     MARILYN SCHROEDER, TREASURER/CFO


By:
     ------------------------------------------
     UNION IRON WORKS,INC OF SPOKANE,WASHINGTON

By:
     ------------------------------------------
     MARILYN SCHROEDER, TREASURER/CFO

                           LOAN MODIFICATION AGREEMENT
         (THE COEUR D'ALENES COMPANY UNION IRON WORKS, INC OF SPOKANE;
                            R/C No. 88245/COE053JS)
                               AFS No. 1701484046
CAUSE NUMBER 03

— 15

— 00284

— CR

EX PARTE X IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
X
X THIRD COURT OF APPEALS
X LEONARD RAY BARKER X STATE OF TEXAS

APPELLANT ’S SECOND MOTION TO EXTEND TIME FOR

FILING OF APPELLANT’S BRIEF

TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS:

COMES NOW THE APPELLANT, by and through his appointed

attorney of record, Paul M. Evans, in the above entitled and numbered

cause, and moves this Court, to grant the Appellant’s Motion to Extend

Time for Filing Appellant’s Brief, and, in support thereof, would show the

Court as follows:

I.

Appellant ’s Brief was due before this Court on August 5, 2015

. A

previous Motion to Extend Time was filed on July 13, 2015, and granted the

following day.

II.

The undersigned counsel needs additional time to examine the record

and complete the research necessary to complete the Appellant’s Brief

.

Counsel has labored to complete the Appellant ’s Brief as quickly and ACCEPTED 03-15-00284-CR 6630758 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS 8/24/2015 5:36:48 PM JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERKdiligently as possible, but other obligations to other clients have impeded

his efforts. Counsel is scheduled to begin a jury trial in the 331 st District

Court of Travis County on August 31, 2015, in a matter involving one first

deg ree count of Aggravated Sexual Assault and two counts of Indecency

with a Child by Contact ( State v. San Juan) . Counsel has no reasonable

belief that the case will be resolved in any manner other than contested trial,

lasting approximately one week, and no other cases are set on the trial

docket in the 331 st District Court at that time.

In light of this and other ongoing obligations and responsibilities,

counsel would hereby respectfully request the deadline be extended to

September 21 , 2015.

III

.
This Motion is not made for purposes of delay, but so that justice

might be served.

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the Defendant respectfully

prays that this Court, upon good cause shown, grant the Appellant’s Second

Motion to Extend Time for Filin g Appellant’s Brief.Respectfully submitted, Law Office of Paul M. Evans 811 Nueces Street Austin, Texas 78701 (512) 569

- 1418 (512) 6 92

- 8002 FAX

_/s/ Paul M. Evans

________ PAUL M. EVANS SBN 24038885 Attorney for Defendant

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing was delivered by facsimile unto the office of the prosecuting attorney for the State of Texas

— the Travis County District Attorney, mailing address P.O. Box 1748, Austin, TX, 78767, physical address 509 W. 11 th Street, Austin, TX, 78701

— on this the 24 th day of August , 201 5

.

_/s/ Paul M. Evans

________ PAUL M. EVANS

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

I hereby certify that the present document contains 44 3 words, all contents included.

_/s/ Paul M. Evans

________ PAUL M. EVANS
### SAT Report PMN Number: P-12-0430 SAT Date: 7/6/2012 Print Date: 7/30/2012
Related cases :

Concern levels : Type of Concern: Health Eco Comments Level of Concern: 2 1

Persistence Bioaccum Toxicity Comments 3 11

Exposure Based Review : Health: N o Ecotox: N o Routes of exposure : Health: Inhalation Ecotox: N o releases to water Fate: ; Keywords : Keywords: LUNG, ONCO-LUNG Summary of Assessment : Fate : Fate Summary: P-12-0430 FATE: S < 0.001 mg/L at 25 C (E) VP < 1.0E-6 torr at 25 C (E) BP > 400 C (E) H < 1.00E-8 (E) POTW removal (%) = 90 via sorption Time for complete ultimate aerobic biodeg > mo Sorption to soils/sediments = v.strong PBT Potential: P3B1*CEB FATE: Migration to ground water = negl
Health : Health Summary: Absorption is nil all routes based on physical/chemical p roperties. There is concern for lung effects if respirable particles are inhaled based on information for other poorly soluble respirable particulates and concern for oncogenicity if inhaled based on the expected

. Moderate concern.
Ecotox : Test Organism Test Type Test End Point Predicted Measured Comments
fish 96-h LC50 * daphnid 48-h LC50 * green algal 96-h EC50 * fish

_ chronic value * daphnid

_ chronic value * algal

_ chronic value * Sewage Sludge 3-h EC50

_ Sewage Sludge

_ Chronic Value _

Ecotox Values Comments: Predictions are based on SARs for SAR chemical class = MW > 100,000; S < 0.001 mg/L (P); p H7; effective concentrations based on 100% active ingredients and nominal concentrations; hardness <150.0 mg/L as CaCO3; and TOC <2.0 mg/L;
Factors Values Comments Assessment Factor 10 Concentration of Concern ( p pb) *

SARs SAR Class Ecotox Category
Ecotox Factors Comments: SAT Chair: Becky Jones
# Support Documents for

Significant New Use Rule (SNUR) on

Premanufacture Notice (PMN)

P-08-623

EPA Docket EPA

- HQ

- OPPT -2011-0577

# Index

A-001 Structure Activity Team (SAT) Report for

PMN P-08-623

A-002 Initial Review E ngineering Report for

PMN P-08-623

A-003 Initial Review Exposure Report for

PMN P-08-623

# A-001

Structure Activity Team (SAT) Report

for PMN P-08-623

# A-002

Initial Review Engineering Report

for PMN P-08-623

# A-003

Initial Review Exposure Report

for PMN P-08-623
### Appeal Ordered Withdrawn and Opinion issuedMarch 29,2000

In The 

## tottrt nfAppeals Mill} SHstrict of Qtexa© at Dallas No. 05-99-01858-CR DAVID ALFORD, Appellant V. STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

### On Appealfrom the 203rd District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F94-49350-HP OPINION PER CURIAM Before ChiefJustice Thomas and Justices Kinkeade and O'Neill 

### Appellanthas filed a motion to withdraw the appeal. Appellant's counsel has approved the motion. This Courthereby GRANTS the motion and ORDERSthe appeal withdrawn and that this decision be certifiedbelow for observance. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.2(a). Do Not Publish Tex. R. App. P. 47 PER CURIAM
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, .C. 20580 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE

. a
CASE NAME “FILEIDOCKET NUMBER
!
TTC v. Chicago Bridge & Tron Co., N.V. | Docket No. 9300
Gane zu 2 . ! CAR TRACE CORI,
eS esewen nocurents “ye

>» Pursuant to Section 4.4 of the Commission's Rule of Practice, enter in the abgve proceeding ;

the appearance of APR 5 (2002

( counsel or representative for the respondent (Complete items 4, 2, 4, and 5
i counsel supporting the complaint (Complete items 1, 3, 4, and 5 below)
UNSELOR REPRESENTATIVE ___. 2. RESPONDENTS

e8ecrn tat

ress and telephone of each * Incude address eid felophone aumbes ol al persons, partnerships,
corporations, of assOCkrions

Kkhett R. Krulla, Fa. |

Festeral Trade Commission

601 Pennsylvania Avenue. N.W., Koom 3102 H

Washington, D.C. 20580 (202) 126.2608
'
|
H

Steven L. Wilexsky, Esq.

Federal Trade Conwdssion

60) Penasylvania Avenue, N.W., Room 3616

Washingtun, 12.C. 20880 (202}326-2650

Cecelia M. Waldeck, Eeq.
Federal Trade Caremission

€O1 Pewnsytvania Avenue, N.W., Room 3632

. 20540 (202) 326-5669

Washingcon.

Michact A. Flarchak, Esq
Tederal Trade Commission
608 Pounsylvania Avenuc, N.W., Room 3626 H
Washington, D.C. 4580 (202) 426-3208

Lisa A. Resenctal, Fy.

Federsl Trade Commission

GOL Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Roum 3614

Washingien, D.C, 20S8U (0%) 376-2408

actor F. Ruiz, Jr, Esq.

Federal Trade Commission

601 Pennsyiven’a 4venoe, N.W.. Room 3613

Washington, D.C. 20590 (202) 326 3618

3. ASSOCIATE/ASSISTANT DIRECTOR
Richard Liebeskind, Assistant, Director, Mergers TI, Bureau of Competition
R CUI T's, DATE SIGNED

| April S) 2000

H-159
Federal Trade Cammission

CAN Daanachinnin Aun MIM


CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Thereby certify that on April 5, 2002, | caused copies of the foregoing Notice of
Appearance to be served on counsel identified below:

(1) Duane M. Kelley, Esq.
Winston & Strawn
35 W. Wacker Drive
Chicago, Illinois 60601-9703

Counsel for Chicago Bridge & Iron Company N.V.

(2) Jeffrey A. Leon, Esq.
Winston & Strawn
35 W. Wacker Drive
Chicago, linois 60601-9703

Counsel for The Chicago Bridge & Iron Company
(3) Nada Sulaiman, Esq.
Winston & Strawn
1400 L Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005

Counsel} for Pitt-Des Moines, Inc.

Industry Analyst

Federal Trade Commission

601 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Room 3616
Washington, D.C. 20580

(202) 326-2212
## NO S . 12

- 16

- 00080

- CR

12

- 16

- 00081

- CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

MARY NYAMETEH,

APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

APPELLEE §

§

§ APPEAL S FROM THE

COUNTY COURT AT LAW

NACOGDOCHES COUNTY, TEX AS

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

These appeals are being dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Appellant was convicted of

criminal trespass and placed on community supervision in each case . Thereafter, Appellant filed

a notice of appeal.

To be sufficie nt to invoke the appellate court’s full jurisdiction, the notice of appeal filed

by an appellant in a criminal case must bear the trial court’s certification of the appellant’s right

to appeal under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2(a)(2). T EX

. R. A P P

. P. 25.2 (d). The

certification should be part of the record when the notice is filed, but may be added by timely

amendment or supplementation. Id

. Appellant’s notice of appeal does not include the required

certification of her right to appeal in eithe r case

.

On April 22, 2016 , this court notified Appellant through her counsel, pursuant to Texas

Rules of Appellate Procedure 25.2 and 37.1, that the notice of appeal does not include the trial

court certification. The notice also informed Appellant that the appeal s would be dismissed

unless, on or before May 9, 2016 , the clerk’s record was amended to incl ude the required

certification.

The deadline for responding to this court’s notice has expired, and the clerk’s record has2

not been amended to show App ellant’s right to appeal. Therefore, the appeal s are dismissed for

want of jurisdiction

.

Opinion delivered May 11, 2016.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

( DO NOT PUBLISH )

## COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT

MAY 11 , 2016

NO. 12

- 16

- 00080

- CR

MARY NYAMETEH,

Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

Appeal from the County Court at Law

of Nacogdoches County, Texas (T r.Ct.No. CF1500829)

THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record; and the same

being considered, it is the opinion of this court that this court is without jurisdiction of the

appeal, and that the appeal should be dismissed.

It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by this court that

this appeal be, and the same is, hereby dismissed for want of jurisdiction ; and that this decision

be certified to the court below for observance.

By per curiam opinion

. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. a nd Neeley, J.
#### Honorable Uriel BLOUNT, Jr., as Judge, etc., Petitioner, v. Dora Pino EDELL, Respondent.

No. 42986.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Dec. 20, 1972.

Certiorari denied. 267 So.2d 47.

ROBERTS^ C. J., and ERVIN, CARLTON, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                          OF CORPORATE GENERAL PARTNER

            PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, James M. Seneff, Jr., the Chief Executive Officer of CNL Realty
Corporation,  the  corporate  general  partner of CNL Income Fund IX, Ltd.  (the
"Partnership"),  has executed this  certification  in connection with the filing
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission of the Partnership's  Annual Report
on Form  10-K/A for the period  ending  December  31, 2002 (the  "Report").  The
undersigned hereby certifies 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 Partnership.

Date:  August 5, 2004               /s/ James M. Seneff, Jr.
                                    --------------------------------------------
                                    Name:  James M. Seneff, Jr.
                                    Title:   Chief Executive Officer

                                    A signed original of this written  statement
                                    required by Section 906 has been provided to
                                    CNL  Income  Fund  IX,  Ltd.   and  will  be
                                    retained  by CNL Income  Fund IX,  Ltd.  and
                                    furnished  to the  Securities  and  Exchange
                                    Commission or its staff upon request.
# United State s Court of Appeals For the F irst Circuit

Nos. 09-2094, 09-2211, 09-2285, 09-2376, 09-2461, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee,

v. VÍCTOR GERARDO CORTÉS-CABÁN, PASCUAL SANTIAGO-MÉNDEZ, LUIS ENRIQUE RUPERTO-TORRES, ANTHONY DOMÍNGUEZ-COLÓN, and VÍCTOR GERARDO CORTÉS-CABÁN Defendants, Appellants.

ERRATA SHEET

The opinion of this Court issued on August 10, 2012, is amended as follows: On page 34, line 11, the word "defendants" is changed to the possessive "defendants'", as in "defendants' argument".
<PAGE>
 
                                                                     EXHIBIT 21
 
                             LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES
                       (EACH 100% OWNED BY K-SWISS INC.)
 
1. K-Swiss Pacific Inc., a Massachusetts corporation.
 
2. K-Swiss International Ltd., a corporation organized under the laws of
   Bermuda.
 
3. K-Swiss (UK) Ltd., a United Kingdom corporation.
 
4. K-Swiss Amsterdam B.V., a Dutch corporation.
 
5. K-Swiss S.A. de C.V., a Mexico corporation.
 
6. K-Swiss Retail Services Inc., a California corporation.
 
7. K-Swiss Australia Pty. Ltd., an Australia corporation.
 
8. K-Swiss International Services (BAARN) B.V., a Dutch corporation.
<PAGE>
EXHIBIT 23.1

            Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

Artesian Resources Corporation
Newark, Delaware

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-3 (No. 333-88531) and Form S-8 (No. 333-8043, No.
333-31209, No. 333-05255, No. 333-126910) of Artesian Resources Corporation of
our reports dated March 10, 2006, relating to the consolidated financial
statements and financial statement schedule, and the effectiveness of Artesian
Resources Corporation's internal control over financial reporting, which appears
in this Form 10-K.

/s/BDO Seidman, LLP

Bethesda, Maryland
March 17, 2006
#### Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida, Appellant, v. Charles PARKER, Appellee.

No. 69-109.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Oct. 30, 1970.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and James Robert Yon, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellant.

Robert E. Jagger, Public Defender, and James L. DeMoully, Asst. Public Defender, Clearwater, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with State ex rel. Wainwright v. Holley, Fla.App.1970, 234 So.2d 409.

LILES, A. C. J., and MANN and Mc-NULTY, JJ„ concur.