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

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3881 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3881

To amend the Small Business Act to eliminate restrictions on providing 
   financial assistance to small business concerns engaged in media-
                          related industries.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 23, 1994

  Mr. Duncan introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Small Business

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Small Business Act to eliminate restrictions on providing 
   financial assistance to small business concerns engaged in media-
                          related industries.

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

SECTION 1. SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS ENGAGED IN MEDIA-RELATED INDUSTRIES.

    (a) Eligibility for Financial Assistance.--Section 3 of the Small 
Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632) is amended by adding at the end the 
following new subsection:
    ``(n) Media-Related Concerns.--For purposes of this Act, a small 
business concern shall not be considered ineligible for financial 
assistance, including loans under section 7(a), solely on the basis 
that the concern is engaged in a broadcast, print, or other media-
related industry.''.
    (b) Repeal of Opinion Molder Rule.--Not later than 60 days after 
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Small 
Business Administration shall--
            (1) issue regulations to repeal section 120.101-2(b) of 
        title 13, Code of Federal Regulations; and
            (2) take such other actions as may be necessary to carry 
        out the amendment made by subsection (a).

                                 <all>
```
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 3506

To amend the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and

Liability Act of 1980 with respect to interest on amounts recoverable

under that Act.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

NOVEMBER 15, 1993

Ms. BYRNE introduced the following bill; which was referred jointly to the

Committees on Energy and Commerce and Public Works and Transportation

A BILL

To amend the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 with respect to

interest on amounts recoverable under that Act.

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

3 SECTION 1. INTEREST ON AMOUNTS RECOVERABLE UNDER

4 COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RE5 SPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY

6 ACT OF 1980.

7 (a) DATE ON WHICH INTEREST STARTS TO AC8 CRUE.—Subsection (a) of section 107 of the Comprehen9 sive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liabil-
2

•HR 3506 IH

1 ity Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9607(a)) is amended by strik2 ing out ‘‘(i) the date payment of a specified amount is

3 demanded in writing,’’ and inserting in lieu thereof ‘‘(i)

4 the date notice of potential liability is provided by the

5 President in writing,’’.

6 (b) RATE OF INTEREST ON AMOUNTS RECOVER7 ABLE.—Subsection (a) of section 107 of such Act (42

8 U.S.C. 9607(a)) is further amended by inserting after

9 ‘‘Internal Revenue Code of 1954’’ the following: ‘‘, plus

10 3 percentage points’’.

Æ
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-30614 Conference Calendar

TOBY IHLI, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus WAYNE MCELVEEN ET AL., Defendants, RANDY BENEVAGE; RON JOHNSON, Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 96-CV-2367

- - - - - - - - - - June 17, 1998 Before DAVIS, PARKER, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Toby Ihli appeals summary judgment for defendants Randy Benevage and Ron Johnson. He argues that judgment in their favor on the 42 U.S.C. § 1985 claim was in error because they failed to meet their initial summary-judgment burden by pointing out an absence of a genuine issue on a material fact concerning that claim and the district court improperly met the burden requiredNo. 97-30614 -2- of the moving party. Even if Benevage and Johnson failed to meet their summary-judgment burden, the district court’s judgment was correct because Ihli’s allegation, raised for the first time on appeal, of animus motivating the defendants’s action, to discriminate against Ihli because he is a mental-health-care patient, is insufficient to state a § 1985(3) claim. See Word of Faith World Outreach Ctr. Church v. Sawyer , 90 F.3d 118, 124 (5th Cir. 1996), cert. denied , 117 S. Ct. 1248 (1997). We have independently reviewed the remaining arguments and the appellate record. We conclude that the district court did not err in granting summary judgment to Benevage and Johnson.
See Little v. Liquid Air Corp. , 37 F.3d 1069, 1075 (5th Cir. 1994) (en banc).
AFFIRMED.
# C_2014408EN.01000601.xml

| 15.11.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 408/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.11.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 408/6

---

EXECUTIVE AGENCY FOR SMALL AND MEDIUM-SIZED ENTERPRISES

Publication of the final accounts for the financial year 2013

2014/C 408/06

The complete version of the final accounts may be found at the following address:

http://ec.europa.eu/easme/

---
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**




**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**




**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**




SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In
      connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB/A of Universal Property
      Development and Acquisition Corporation (the "Company") for the year ended
      December 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
      the
      date hereof (the "Report"), I, Kamal Abdallah, Chief Executive Officer of the
      Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.
      906
      of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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.




April
                12, 2007
            
            /s/ Kamal
                AbdallahKamal
                Abdallah




The
      foregoing certification is made solely for the purpose of 18 U. S.C. Section
      1350, subject to the knowledge standard contained therein, and not for any
      other
      purpose.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-20310

KELVIN WASHINGTON,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

HCA HEALTH SERVICES OF TEXAS, INC.,

doing business as HCA Spring Branch Medical Center,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

December 22, 1999

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Before POLITZ, GARWOOD and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

This Americans with D isabilities Act (ADA) case, in which

plaintiff-appellee Kelvin Washington claims that defendantappellant, HCA Health Services of Texas, Inc. (the Hospital),

terminated his employment because of his disability, is now before

us again on remand from the United States Supreme Court.

The Hospital filed a motio n for summary judgment contending

that Washington did not have a disability as defined in the ADA, 42

U.S.C. § 12102(2), because his condition, Adult Stills Disease, was

effectively controlled by medication. The district court denied

the motion, r uling that for purposes of determining whether2

Washington met the definition of disability in section 12102(2)(A)-

section 12102(2)(B) and (C) being deemed not to be in issue–his

condition should be evaluated in its unmedicated, rather than

medicated, state, and that in his unmedicated state he was disabled

within the meaning of section 12102(2)(A) or at the least presented

an issue of fact in that respect. The district court certified its

order for appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) on the ground that it

involved a controlling question of law as to which there was a

substantial ground for di fference of opinion, namely whether for

purposes of section 12102(2)(A) Washington’s condition should be

evaluated in its unmedicated or medicated state. We granted the

Hospital’s petition for leave to appeal the district court’s order,

and we subsequently affirmed the district court’s denial of the

Hospital’s motion for summary judgment, agreeing with the district

court that Washington’s condition should be evaluated in its

unmedicated state for purposes of section 12102(2)(A). W ashington

v. HCA Health Services of Texas, Inc. , 152 F.3d 464 (5th Cir.

1998).

The Supreme Court granted the Hospital’s petition for writ of

certiorari, v acated the judgment of this Court and remanded the

case to this Court “for further consideration in light of Sutton v.

United Air Lines, Inc.

, 527 U.S.

____, 119 S.Ct. 1752,

___ L.Ed.2d

____ (1999), and Murphy v. United Parcel Service, Inc.

, 527 U.S.

___, 119 S.Ct. 2133, ____L.Ed.2d

____ (1999).” H CA Health Services

of Texas, Inc. v. Washington , 119 S.Ct. 2388, 2389 (1999).

We therefore now vacate our prior ruling and judgment, and we3

vacate the referenced o rder of the district court denying the

Hospital’s motion for summary judgment, and we remand the case to

the district c ourt for further consideration and proceedings in

light of and consistent with Sutton and Murphy

.

VACATED AND REMANDED
#### Mildred F. O’SHEA v. Michael J. O’SHEA.

No. 38619.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June 1969.

221 Certiorari denied without opinion. So.2d 223.
Please note that new Connecticut county and township level geographies are not available within the map.

            An official website of the United States government          

**Official websites use .gov**              A **.gov** website belongs to an official government              organization in the United States.            

**Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**              A **lock** (              LockA locked padlock              ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to              the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official,              secure websites.            

----

QuickFacts is currently undergoing a maintenance cycle. Please check back later.

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

Thank you for your feedback.Comments or suggestions? 

Comments or suggestions?255 characters maximum⚠ 255 characters maximum reached
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3106 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3106

 To amend the Thomas Jefferson Commemoration Commission Act to extend 
                       the deadlines for reports.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 21, 1993

Mr. Payne of Virginia introduced the following bill; which was referred 
           to the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Thomas Jefferson Commemoration Commission Act to extend 
                       the deadlines for reports.

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

SECTION 1. REPORTS FROM THE COMMISSION.

    Section 9 of the Thomas Jefferson Commemoration Commission Act 
(Public Law 102-343; 106 Stat. 915) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (a) by striking ``December 31, 1992'' and 
        inserting ``March 15, 1994''; and
            (2) in subsection (b) by striking ``December 31, 1993'' and 
        inserting ``December 31, 1994''.

SEC. 2. AUDIT OF FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS.

    Section 10(b) of the Thomas Jefferson Commemoration Commission Act 
(Public Law 102-343; 106 Stat. 915) is amended--
            (1) by striking ``December 31, 1992'' each place it appears 
        and inserting ``March 15, 1994'';
            (2) by striking ``March 4, 1994'' and inserting ``March 3, 
        1995''; and
            (3) by striking ``1993'' and inserting ``1994''.

SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    Section 12 of the Thomas Jefferson Commemoration Commission Act 
(Public Law 102-343; 106 Stat. 915) is amended by striking ``and 
$62,500 for fiscal year 1994'' and inserting ``, $150,000 for fiscal 
year 1994, and $62,500 for fiscal year 1995''.

                                 <all>
```
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20
- 1997

In re: MAJOR MIKE WEBB , Petitioner

.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus

.

Submitted : February 23 , 2021 Decided: February 25, 2021

Before MOTZ , KEENAN , and HARRIS , Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by un published per curiam opinion

.
Michael David Webb, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Michael D avid Webb , a . k

. a . Major Mike Webb, petition ed this c ourt for a writ of mandamus seeking an orde r enjoining early voting in Virginia in the 2020 general election and compelling the Virginia State Board of Elections to apply the “pandemic exception” and place Webb on the bal lot even though Webb had not receive d the necessary signatures to qualify for placement on the ballot

. T his court does not have jurisdiction to grant mandamus relief against state officials. Gurley v. Superior Ct. of Mecklenburg Cnty. , 411 F.2d 586, 587 (4th Cir. 1969) (per curiam)

. Accordingly, we deny Webb’s original and supplemental petition s for a writ of mandamus . We deny as moot Webb’s motion for injunctive relief. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETIT ION DENIED
----

               JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE            

of 14 October 2004            

in Case T-257/02, K v Court of Justice of the European Communities (1)

(Officials - Action for damages - Exposure to asbestos - Occupational disease - Damage)

(2004/C 314/42)

Language of the case: French

In Case T-257/02, K, an official of the Court of Justice of the European Communities, residing in Luxembourg (Luxembourg), represented by J. Iturriagagoitia Bassas and K. Delvolvé, lawyers, against Court of Justice of the European Communities (Agent: M. Schauss, with an address for service in Luxembourg) — application for damages for the physical harm and the non-material, professional and financial loss allegedly suffered by the applicant — the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber), composed of: H. Legal, President, V. Tiili and M. Vilaras, Judges; J. Palacio González, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 14 October 2004, in which it:

----

(1)OJ C 274 of 9.11.2002.

----
Exhibit 13

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 Nokia Corporation (the Company) on Form 20-F for the period ending December 31, 2011, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned hereby certify that to the best of our knowledge:



|1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                    |  |                     |  |                                                     
|------------------- |  | ------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------------
|Date: March 8, 2012 |  | /s/ STEPHEN ELOP   
|                    |  | Name:               |  | Stephen Elop                                        
|                    |  | Title:              |  | President and Chief Executive Officer               
|                    | 
|Date: March 8, 2012 |  | /s/ TIMO IHAMUOTILA
|                    |  | Name:               |  | Timo Ihamuotila                                     
|                    |  | Title:              |  | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, T. Rhett Evatt, certify that:

1) I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Oconee Federal Financial Corp.;

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 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 registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4) The registrants other 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 registrant 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 registrant, 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 registrant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 registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most
recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and

5) The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit
committee of the registrant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 registrant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 registrants internal control
over financial reporting.

Date: May 16, 2011



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/ T. Rhett Evatt                   
|T. Rhett Evatt                       
|President and Chief Executive Officer



26
° 

# OAR Box 1168 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 69 ) lll-B- 4 Docket Number: 

# A-89-1 0

Printed 4/29/200811:23:19 AM Sheet 69 of 131 P. 1P. 2



### MEMORANDU M To : Bo

b Pahel-Short , EPA/OAQPS/SD B From : JHEStelling , Radian/RT P cc: . Glen

n Rive s an d E d Moretti , Radian/RT P Date : 1 2 Octobe

r 198 9 Subject : Dat aFile s Fro mTexac o Screenin

g Progra m 

# A-89-1 0

II-B- 4 

# I D e E 

# a II L I 4I99 I EP A AI R I • i t

E d Morett i ha d aske d m e t o expan d the compresse

d Parado x dat afile containing screenin g dat aprovided unde

r confidentialit

y b y Texaco . The file wa

s ove r 3 M B i n lengt h an d therefore , coul

d not b e transporte d o

n asingl e flopp y disk . Attache d ar

e thre e 3.5 " diskette s (hig

h density ) containin

g dat afiles extracted fromthe mai n file. Thes e files contain al l th e dat afromth e origina l file. Th e files are separate d as : Ligh t liquid valves ; Gas/vapo r valves ; an d Flange s (bot

h Ugh t liquid an d gas/vapor) . Als o included o

n th e diskette s ar

e files containing onl

y th e non-zer

o screenin g values . Thi s facilitat e evaluatio n o

f th e emission s data . Thes e files ar e labelle d a s ???_NZ.DB , an d have associate d ???_NZ.R 1 files fo r asummai y repor t Copie s o f th e summar

y report s fo

r th e thre e files ar e attached . Base d o n acursor y evaluation o

f th e data , th e followin

g distribution s wer

e found : Typ e Service Tota l Flang e Flang e Valv e Valv e Liqui

d Gas/Vapo r Liqui d Gas/Vapo r 567 2

124 5 842 5 172 0 Non-Zer

o Value s 6 1 31 3 4 3 Pleas e advis e i

f yo u nee d an y additiona

l suppor t wit h thes e files.
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 165 (Friday, August 24, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 42892]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-18331]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-9040-9]


Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General 
Information (202) 564-7156 or https://www2.epa.gov/nepa/.

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements
Filed 08/13/2018 through 08/17/2018
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

Notice

    Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make public 
its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's comment 
letters on EISs are available at: https://cdxnodengn.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-public/action/eis/search.

EIS No. 20180187, Draft, GSA, CA, Otay Mesa Modernization and 
Expansion, Comment Period Ends: 10/09/2018, Contact: Osmahn Kadri 415-
522-3617
EIS No. 20180188, Draft, USFS, ID, Crow Creek Pipeline Project Draft 
Environmental Impact Statement, Comment Period Ends: 11/23/2018, 
Contact: Mike Duncan 208-847-0375
EIS No. 20180189, Draft Supplement, NRC, LA, Nureg 137 Supplement 59, 
Comment Period Ends: 10/09/2018, Contact: Elaine Keegan 301-415-8517
EIS No. 20180190, Draft, USFS, CA, Stanislaus National Forest Over-Snow 
Vehicle (OSV) Use Designation, Comment Period Ends: 10/09/2018, 
Contact: Beth Martinez 209-288-6307
EIS No. 20180191, Final, USFS, PR, El Yunque National Forest Plan 
Revision EIS, Review Period Ends: 10/23/2018, Contact: Pedro Rios 305-
306-3805

    Dated: August 21, 2018.
Robert Tomiak,
Director, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 2018-18331 Filed 8-23-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P