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

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2887 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2887

  To amend the Controlled Substances Act to provide authority for the 
  transfer of forfeited property to State and local fire departments.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             August 5, 1993

   Mr. Gene Green of Texas introduced the following bill; which was 
   referred jointly to the Committees on Energy and Commerce and the 
                               Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Controlled Substances Act to provide authority for the 
  transfer of forfeited property to State and local fire departments.

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

SECTION 1. AUTHORITY FOR TRANSFER TO STATE AND LOCAL FIRE DEPARTMENTS 
              OF PROPERTY FORFEITED UNDER THE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES 
              ACT.

    Section 511(e)(1)(A) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 
881(e)(1)(A)) is amended by inserting after ``law enforcement agency'' 
the following: ``or fire department''.

                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION**

 

 

I, Marc T.Tanenberg, Chief Financial Officer of APAC Customer Services, Inc., certifythat:

 

1.   Ihave reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of APAC Customer Services,Inc.;

 

2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, 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 report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

4   The registrant’s othercertifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

(a) Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared;

 

(b) Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

(c) Disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.  The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

 

(a) Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

 

(b) Any fraud,whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 
| Date:  November 10, 2003 | /s/ Marc T. Tanenberg   |   |
|-----------------------------------------|-------------------------|--------|
|                                    | Marc T. Tanenberg       |
|                                    | Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2913 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2913

  To eliminate the retroactive tax increases contained in the Revenue 
                      Reconciliation Act of 1993.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             August 6, 1993

  Mr. Armey introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To eliminate the retroactive tax increases contained in the Revenue 
                      Reconciliation Act of 1993.

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

SECTION 1. ELIMINATION OF RETROACTIVE TAX INCREASES.

    Notwithstanding any provision of the Revenue Reconciliation Act of 
1993--
            (1) the amendments made by sections 13201, 13202, 13203, 
        and 13221 of such Act (relating to individual and corporate 
        income tax rate increases) shall take effect on the date of the 
        enactment of such Act and the provisions of section 15 of the 
        Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall apply to the rate changes 
        provided by such amendments and such date of enactment shall be 
        treated as the effective date of such changes for purposes of 
        such section 15, and
            (2) the amendments made by section 13208 of such Act 
        (relating to estate and gift tax rates) shall only apply to the 
        estates of decedents dying, and gifts made, after such date of 
        enactment.

                                 <all>
```
cerc_Exh_10_01_01



		

			Exhibit 10.1.1

		


		

			 

		


		

			[Cerecor, Inc. Letterhead]

		





		
			October 10, 2016
		

		
			 
		

		
			Via FedEx and Email
		

		
			 
		

		
			Eli Lilly and Company
		

		
			Lilly Corporate Center
		

		
			Indianapolis, Indiana 46285
		

		
			Attention: General Counsel
		

		
			Fax: 317-433-3000
		

		
			 
		

		
			Re:Addendum to Effective Date of License Agreement to develop and commercialize LY3130481
		

		
			 
		

		
			Sir or Madam:
		

		
			 
		

		
			The License Agreement entered into by and between Eli Lilly and Company (“Lilly”) and Cerecor, Inc. (“Cerecor”) for Cerecor to develop and commercialize the Transmembrane AMPA Receptor Regulatory Protein (TARP) gamma-8-dependent AMPA receptor antagonist designated as LY3130481 was dated and effective September 8, 2016.  The actual date of signing was September 22, 2016.  
		

		
			 
		

		
			This letter addendum hereby serves as notification by Cerecor of its intention, and by counter-signature below, of agreement and acceptance by Lilly, to amend the effective date of the License Agreement from September 8, 2016 to September 22, 2016.  Due to the time-sensitive nature of the SEC filings and reporting procedures,  Cerecor respectfully requests that Lilly provide the acknowledgement below, to amend the effective date of the License Agreement.   
		

		
			 
		

		
			Sincerely,
		

		
			 
		

		
			/s/ Uli Hacksell
		

		
			 
		

		
			Uli Hacksell, PhD
		

		
			CEO & President
		

		
			Cerecor Inc
		

		
			400 East Pratt Street, Suite 606
		

		
			Baltimore, MD 21202
		

		
			 
		

		
			Acknowledgement and Agreement:
		

		
			 
		

		
			Lilly hereby acknowledges the correction to the effective date of the License Agreement and agrees that the License Agreement has become effective September 22, 2016, and that no further action is required to make this change to the effective date.
		

		
			 
		

		
			Name:  /s/ Jan M. Lundberg 
		

		
			Title: Executive Vice President, Science and Technology, and President, Lilly Research Laboratories
		

		
			Date:  October 13, 2016
rAK WHITE omeyGeneml

I N. Talol. SAW F

“tml. TX. 70241 mo24E47 

# The Attorney Generals of Texas July 31, 1979

RonorableJoaResweber &UT&County Attorney 1001 Preston, Suite 634 Houston,Texas 77002 .OpinionNo.. RW-36 Re: Authority of the Harris County Department of R&cation to expendtax funds to buy andmail Christmas cards

DearMr..Jtesweber: You have. requested our opinion regarding the’ authority of Rarrii County Department of Rducation to expend tax funds to buy and mail Christmas cards. Article 3, section 52(a)of the Texas Constitution provides:

Rxcept as otherwise provided by ~this.section, the Legislature shall have no power to authorixe any county, city, town or other political corpor@on.or subdihsion of the State to lend its credit or to grant public maney or thing of value in aid of, or to eny individu& association or corporation whatsoever, or to ..become a stockholder in such Corporatiat, associatico cc‘oompany. This office has frequently said .that, in the absence ofan adequate quid proquo, a public body has no authcrity to contribute publii, funds to or on behalf of an individual or organization. See Attorney General C@nions Ii-II89 (1978)(unconditional donation by &y of federal revenue sharing fundsto a private day care center constitutes an improper grant of public fund& R-620 (l976) (county may not contribute public funds to the construation of a privately owned and operated livestock show banr); R-397 U974) (county may not become a dues paying member .of a chambers of commerce); R-70 (l973) (school district ma not purchase personal liability insurance for school trustees); M-661(1970) county has noauthority to make r a grant of public funds to a religious charitable institution); +7197 (19461, G-6563 (19431,G-l001 (1939)(county may not contribute funds to a private charitable institution). Inthe present instance, it is not asserted thet the county receives any benefit from the activity you have described. It is therefore our opinion

p. 106HonorableJoe Resweber - Page TWO (MN-36)

that article 3, seetiar 52(a) of the Texas Constitution prohibits a county from expending public funds

for the purchase and mailing of Christmas cards. See alsoTex. Canst. art. 8, s 3. SUMMARY

Article 3, section 52(a) and article 8, section 3 of the Texas Constitution prohibitwe couhty from expenw pubuc fun+ for the puMaas andmailing ofChristmas cards.

" MARK WHITE Attorney General of ‘bx~ JOHNW.I'AINTRR,

JR. Pit Assistant Attomey Generel TRDL. HARTLRY Rxecutive Assistant Attorney General PreparedbyRickGil@ Assistit Attorney General APPROVBD: OPINION

COMM?lTRR C. RobertHeath, Chairman DavidB.Brooka WalterDavis SUSMGarrieon RickGiii WilliamG Reid BruceYolmgblood

p. 107
Exhibit 32   Certifications   In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 of American General Finance, Inc. (the Company) as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of Frederick W. Geissinger, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Donald R. Breivogel, Jr., Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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, as amended; 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/                                               | Frederick W. Geissinger  | 
|      |                                                   | Frederick W. Geissinger  | 
|      | President and Chief Executive Officer             |                         
|      | /s/                                               | Donald R. Breivogel, Jr. | 
|      |                                                   | Donald R. Breivogel, Jr. | 
|      | Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |                         
|Date: | March 4, 2010                                     |                          |  | 

169
CareView Communications, Inc. 10-Q


 



EXHIBIT 10.2


 


EXTENSION OF MATURITY DATE FOR 


PROMISSORY NOTE


 


This Extension of Maturity
Date for Promissory Note (the “Extension”) dated July 1, 2016, is entered into by and between CareView-Saline, LLC,
a Wisconsin limited liability company (“Maker”) and Rockwell Holdings I, LLC (“Holder”) (collectively known
as the “Parties”).


 


WHEREAS, the pursuant
to a certain Master Investment Agreement entered into by the Parties on November 16, 2009, Maker issued to Holder a Promissory
Note in the principal amount of $109,230with respect to the Project (as defined in the Master Investment Agreement) for the Saline
Memorial Hospital,


 


WHEREAS, the Promissory
Note has a maturity date of three years from the date payments commenced thereunder, which would make the maturity date of the
Promissory Note August 30, 2013,


 


WHEREAS, the maturity
date of the Promissory Note was subsequently extended to December 31, 2013, then to June 30, 2014, then to June 30, 2015, and then
to June 30, 2016,


 


WHEREAS, the Parties
have mutually agreed to extend the maturity date to June 30, 2017,


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in
consideration of the mutual covenants hereinafter set forth, the Parties hereby enter into this Extension as follows:


 


1.          Extension
of Maturity Date for Promissory Note: The Parties agree to extend the maturity date of the Promissory Note to June 30, 2017 (the
“Extended Maturity Date”).


 


2.          Other
Provisions of the Promissory Note: The Parties agree that all other provisions of the Promissory Note will remain in full force
and effect other than the Extended Maturity Date.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
the Parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written.


 





	CAREVIEW-SALINE, LLC	 	ROCKWELL HOLDINGS I, LLC
	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	By:	/s/ Steve Johnson	 	By:	/s/ Matt Bluhm
	 	Steve Johnson	 	 	Matt Bluhm
	 	Manager	 	 	Managing Member
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-8418

DYLAN LOPEZ TYREE, Petitioner - Appellant,

v. WARDEN C. HOLLAR, Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (7:08-cv-00374-JLK-MFU)

Submitted: September 9, 2009 Decided: September 18, 2009

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Dylan Lopez Tyree, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Dylan Lopez Tyree seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition and denying reconsideration. The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. See MillerEl v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Tyree has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We deny Tyree’s motion to appoint counsel and 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
REGULATORY EVALUATION

Directorate Identifier: 2013-NM-009-AD

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific 

requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of 

transportation?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)
# C_2013194EN.01000701.xml

| 5.7.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 194/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.7.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 194/7

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

4 July 2013

2013/C 194/03

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2984 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 129,64 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4603 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,85980 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 8,7080 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,2328 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,9350 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 26,050 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 295,80 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7019 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,3083 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,4340 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,5343 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4239 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3690 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,0677 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6655 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,6525 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 479,92 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 13,0791 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,9537 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,4928 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 12 906,59 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,1298 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 56,322 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 43,1050 |
| THB | Thai baht | 40,393 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,9432 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 16,8402 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 78,1960 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2984

JPY

Japanese yen

129,64

DKK

Danish krone

7,4603

GBP

Pound sterling

0,85980

SEK

Swedish krona

8,7080

CHF

Swiss franc

1,2328

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,9350

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

26,050

HUF

Hungarian forint

295,80

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7019

PLN

Polish zloty

4,3083

RON

Romanian leu

4,4340

TRY

Turkish lira

2,5343

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4239

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3690

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,0677

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6655

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,6525

KRW

South Korean won

1 479,92

ZAR

South African rand

13,0791

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,9537

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,4928

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

12 906,59

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,1298

PHP

Philippine peso

56,322

RUB

Russian rouble

43,1050

THB

Thai baht

40,393

BRL

Brazilian real

2,9432

MXN

Mexican peso

16,8402

INR

Indian rupee

78,1960

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
An official website of the United States government                

----

end of header

Census.govNewsroom

# Newsroom Archive

Skip left menu navigation                          - About the Newsroom
                          - Facts for Features
                          - **News Releases**
                          - Press Kits
                          - Tip Sheets

## Rosanna Torres

Rosanna Torres joined the Foreign Trade Division in 2008 to work in the Automated Export System Branch. She is a member of the team that manages AES*Direct* and AES*PcLink*, which are free software tools used by U.S. exporters to transmit shipment information to U.S. Customs and Border Protection. She corresponds daily with exporters and freight forwarders on issues dealing with the filing of Electronic Export Information. She provides exporters information concerning Automated Export System services, such as program changes, enhancements, and available training. She has a bachelor's degree in business administration with a minor in statistics from the University of Puerto Rico, and she is currently pursuing a master's degree in international commerce and public policy at George Mason University.

CONNECT WITH US**********

                            - Information Quality
                            - Data Linkage Infrastructure
                            - Data Protection and Privacy Policy
                            - Accessibility
                            - FOIA
                            - Inspector General
                            - No FEAR Act
                            - U.S. Department of Commerce
                            - USA.gov

----

Measuring America's People, Places, and Economy

Is this page helpful?
YesNo

NO THANKS

255 characters maximum255 characters maximum reached

Thank you for your feedback.Comments or suggestions? 

PIO@census.gov
#### Melvin McKENZIE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-1271.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

May 11, 1971.

Melvin McKenzie, in pro. per.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., for appel-lee.

Before PEARSON, C. J„ and CHARLES CARROLL and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This court, proceeding in the manner outlined and recommended by the Supreme Court of the United States in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493, having deferred ruling on a motion of the public defender to withdraw as counsel for the indigent defendant-appellant, and having furnished appellant with a copy of the public defender’s memorandum brief, and having allowed the appellant a reasonable specified time within which to raise any points that he chose in support of his appeal, and the appellant having failed to respond thereto, on consideration thereof upon full ex-animation of the proceedings, we conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous. Whereupon the public defender’s said motion to withdraw is granted, and the order appealed is hereby affirmed.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markm an 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 December 28, 2011

h1219 

# Order

December 28, 2011

143714 & (18)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 143714

COA: 301859

LARRY WHIDDILL McNEAL STOVALL

, Mason CC: 05

- 201503

- FC

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 22 , 2011 order

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). The

motion for stay of proceedings is DENIED.