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

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 10 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.Con.Res.10
                                          Agreed to May 14, 2013        

                     One Hundred Thirteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday,
           the third day of January, two thousand and thirteen

                          Concurrent Resolution

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring),

SECTION 1. USE OF EMANCIPATION HALL FOR EVENT TO CELEBRATE BIRTHDAY OF 
              KING KAMEHAMEHA.

    (a) Authorization.--Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor Center 
is authorized to be used for an event on June 9, 2013, to celebrate the 
birthday of King Kamehameha.
    (b) Preparations.--Physical preparations for the conduct of the 
ceremony described in subsection (a) shall be carried out in accordance 
with such conditions as may be prescribed by the Architect of the 
Capitol.
Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.
Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-K
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          29,686
<SECURITIES>                                    40,682
<RECEIVABLES>                                   23,513
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,134
<INVENTORY>                                      5,427
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                98,957
<PP&E>                                          16,653
<DEPRECIATION>                                   5,993
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 112,328
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           17,337
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           361
<OTHER-SE>                                      94,630
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   112,328
<SALES>                                         81,100
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                85,739
<CGS>                                           15,815
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   64,154
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,770
<INCOME-TAX>                                       130
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              5,640
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,640
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .16
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .15


</TABLE>
10-Q





Exhibit 32.1


May 14, 2019


Via EDGAR


Securities and Exchange Commission


100 F. Street, N.E.


Washington, D.C. 20549





Re:Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


Ladies and Gentlemen:


In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2019 (the "Report") of Chesapeake Granite Wash Trust (the “Trust”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, the undersigned, not in her individual capacity but solely as the trustee of the Trust, certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to her knowledge:





|    |                                                                                                                                  
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|(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 operation of the Trust.

The above certification is furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350) and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.





The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A.Trustee for Chesapeake Granite Wash TrustBy:/s/ Sarah C. NewellSarah C. NewellVice President
Exhibit 23.1











CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS








We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement (Form S-8) pertaining to
the 1996 Stock Incentive Plan, the 1989 Incentive Stock Option, Nonqualified Stock Option and Stock Purchase Plan, the 1989 Special Nonqualified Stock Option and Stock Purchase Plan and the Executive Stock Plan of our report dated July 19, 2002,
except for paragraph 5 of footnote 1 and paragraph 3 of footnote 6, for which the date is October 3, 2002, with respect to the financial statements of Cortex Pharmaceuticals, Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended June 30,
2002.











/S/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP


ERNST & YOUNG LLP








San Diego, California


October 14, 2002
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION

File Name: 12a1123n.06

Case No. 11-2422

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

GARY WARD,

Petitioner-Appellant,

v.

BLAINE LAFLER, WARDEN,

Respondent-Appellee.

_______________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

ON APPEAL FROM THE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT

COURT FOR THE EASTERN

DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

BEFORE: BATCHELDER, Chief Circuit Judge; KEITH and MARTIN, Circuit Judges.

ALICE M. BATCHELDER, Chief Judge. This case arises from a drug purchase that went

bad and the resulting shooting. The appellant, GaryWard, was charged with and convicted of assault

with intent to commit murder, armed robbery, possession with intent to deliver marijuana, and

possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony.

Ward retained Robert Slameka as his defense attorney prior to the preliminary hearing. The

relationship between Ward and Slameka quicklydeteriorated. Ward repeatedly refused to meet with

Slameka in the intervening period before trial. Slameka, for his part, requested to withdraw at the

beginning of trial because he had been unable to meet with his client, stating, “I have no defense, I

have no idea what I’m doing whatsoever.” The trial was heard anyway and Ward was convicted on

all counts. On this habeas appeal, Ward alleges ineffective assistance of trial counsel, arguing both

presumptive ineffectiveness under United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648 (1984) and ineffectiveness

under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984).
No. 11-2422, Ward v. Lafler, Warden

The Michigan Court of Appeals found as a matter of fact that it was Ward’s fault that his

counsel was unable to meet with him about his case before trial and that counsel performed

“admirably” under the circumstances. Relying on these and other findings, the court dismissed

Ward’s ineffective assistance claims. Ward then brought this habeas appeal. The federal district

court held that the state decision was not objectively unreasonable in its analysis under either Cronic

or Strickland. Ward timely appealed to this court.

After carefully reviewing the district court’s opinion, the briefs, and the record in this case,

we conclude that the district court did not err in dismissing Ward’s claims. As the district court

correctly set out the applicable law and correctly applied that law to the undisputed material facts

contained in the record, issuance of a full written opinion by the court would serve no jurisprudential

purpose.

Accordingly,forthe reasonsstated in the district court’s well-reasoned opinion, we AFFIRM

the judgment of the district court.

2
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLAImages

# DLA Images

Search

Search

                                  - All Images 
                                  - Other 

                                  - Upload Date
                                  - Photo Date
                                  - Title

Share

----

Download Image: Small ()Medium ()Full Size (2.29 MB)

Tags:

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT KIESHA L. HOLM E S; KOHREA M c KINNEY, Plaintiffs - Appe lla nts, v. FLOW ER

FOOD INC ORPOR

ATED, a Ge orgia C orporation, pa

re nt c om pa ny to Subsidia ry Holsum B ake ry , Inc orporate d, an Ariz ona

C o rporation; e t a l., De fe nda

nts - Appe lle e s. No. 12-16741 D.C . No. 2:12-c v-01376-GM S M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Distric t of Ariz o na G . M urray

Snow, Distric t Judge , Pre siding Subm itte d Se pte m

be r 24, 2013 * * B e fore : R

AW LINSON, N.R . SM ITH, a nd C HR ISTEN, C irc uit Judge s. Kie sha L. Holm e s a

nd Kohre a

M c Kinne y

a ppe a l pro se from

the distric t c ourt’ s judgm e nt dismi ssing the ir e m ploy m e nt a c tion. W e have jurisdic tion unde r



# FIL ED OCT 9 2013 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S . CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).28 U.S.C . § 1291. W e re vie w de novo a dism i ssa l for fa ilure to sta te a c la im unde r 28 U.S.C . § 1915(e )(2). Barre n v . Harrington , 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th C ir. 1998) (orde r). W e a ffirm in pa rt, va c ate in pa

rt, a nd re m and. The distric t c ourt prope rly dism isse d pla intiffs’ Title VII c l a im s without le ave to a m e nd be c a

use the se c la im s we re tim e -barre d. Se e42 U.S.C . § 2000e 5(f)(1); O ’Donne ll v . Ve n c or Inc . , 466 F.3d 1104, 1111 (9th C ir. 2006) (pe r c uriam ) (Title VII c la im

wa s untim e ly

be c a use c om p la int wa s file d

m ore tha n 90 da y s a fte r Equa l Em

p loy m e nt Opportunity

C om m ission’ s issua

nc e of right-to-sue le tte r, e ve n though e arlie r dism isse d a c tion ba se d on the sa m e e ve nts wa s tim e ly ). Although the c om

pla i nt did not c onta i n a

short a n d pla i n sta

te m e nt of the re m a ining c la im s a s re quire d by Fe d. R . C iv. P. 8(a ), dism issa l of pla intiffs’ re m a ining c la im s wa s im

prope r at this e arly

sta ge be c a

use pla i ntiffs we re proc e e ding pro sean d the dism issa l wa s with pre judic e an d

without a n opportunity to a m e nd. Se e Flow e rs v . First Hawaiian Bank , 295 F.3d 966, 976 (9th C ir. 2002) (noting tha

t this c ourt is “ve ry c a

utious in a

p proving a

distric t c ourt’ s de c i sion to de ny pro se litiga

nts le a ve to a m e nd” ); Luc as v . De

p’t of C o rr. , 66 F.3d 245, 248 (9th C ir. 1995) (pe r c uriam ) (“ Unle ss it is a bsolute ly c le ar that no a m e ndm e nt c an c ure the de fe c t, . . . a

pro se litiga

nt is e ntitle d to notic e of the c om pla i nt’ s de fic ie nc ie s a

nd a n opportunity

to a m e n d prior to dism

issa l of the a c tion.” ). 1 2 - 1 6 7 4 1 2Ac c ordingly , we va c ate in pa rt a n d re m an d to a llow pla intiffs a n opportunity to file an am e nde d c om

pla int. AFFIRM E D in par t; V ACAT E D in par t; and RE M ANDE D.

1 2 - 1 6 7 4 1 3
# Uradni list C 334I/2021

| | ISSN 1977-1045 |
| --- | --- |
| Uradni list
  Evropske unije | C 334I |
| | |
| Slovenska izdaja | Informacije in objave | Letnik 6420. avgust 2021 |

ISSN 1977-1045

Uradni list

Evropske unije

C 334I

Slovenska izdaja

Informacije in objave

Letnik 6420. avgust 2021

---

| Vsebina | Stran |
| --- | --- |
| | IV   Informacije |
| | INFORMACIJE DRŽAV ČLANIC |
| 2021/C 334 I/01 | Informacije o zaprtju ribolova, ki jih sporočijo države članice | 1 |

Vsebina

Stran

IV   Informacije

INFORMACIJE DRŽAV ČLANIC

2021/C 334 I/01

Informacije o zaprtju ribolova, ki jih sporočijo države članice

1

---

| SL | |
| --- | --- |

SL

---

IV Informacije

INFORMACIJE DRŽAV ČLANIC

| 20.8.2021 | SL | Uradni list Evropske unije | CI 334/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.8.2021

SL

Uradni list Evropske unije

CI 334/1

---

Informacije o zaprtju ribolova, ki jih sporočijo države članice

(2021/C 334 I/01)

V skladu s členom 35(3) Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 1224/2009 z dne 20. novembra 2009 o vzpostavitvi nadzornega sistema Unije za zagotavljanje skladnosti s pravili skupne ribiške politike (1) je bila sprejeta odločitev o zaprtju ribolova, kot je določeno v preglednici:

| Datum in čas zaprtja | 24.7.2021 ob 24.00 UTC |
| --- | --- |
| Trajanje | od 24.7.2021 ob 24.00 UTC do 31.12.2021 |
| Država članica | Evropska unija (vse države članice) |
| Stalež ali skupina staležev | RED/N3M |
| Vrsta | rdeči okuni (Sebastes spp.) |
| Cona | NAFO 3M |
| Vrste ribiških plovil | — |
| Referenčna številka | 14/TQ92 |

Datum in čas zaprtja

24.7.2021 ob 24.00 UTC

Trajanje

od 24.7.2021 ob 24.00 UTC do 31.12.2021

Država članica

Evropska unija (vse države članice)

Stalež ali skupina staležev

RED/N3M

Vrsta

rdeči okuni (Sebastes spp.)

Cona

NAFO 3M

Vrste ribiških plovil

—

Referenčna številka

14/TQ92

---

(1)  UL L 343, 22.12.2009, str. 1.

---
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLAImages

# DLA Images

Search

Search

                                  - All Images 
                                  - Other 

                                  - Upload Date
                                  - Photo Date
                                  - Title

Share

----

Download Image: Small ()Medium ()Full Size (0.62 MB)

Tags:Asia-Pacific region , at Sea, Replenishment at Sea , USS Bonhomme Richard

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
______________________________________ _________________________________________________ __________________

*TYPED/PRINTED FULL NAME *SIGNATURE * DATE

Defense Intelligence Agency Privacy Act Request Form

Items marked with (*) are required.

Prefix:

*

Street Address:

City: State: Zip code:

First Name: Middle Name: Last Name: * *

* * *

Requester Information 

Social Security Number: Date of Birth:

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Privacy Act Request

Please describe the records you seek, and provide any additional pertinet information

By signing above you affirm that you have filled out this form to the best of your ability and provided all known information that could aid in the search of the record(s) you have requested. 

Failure to provide all pertiant information could negativly impart the ability and time required complete the request.

Defense Intelligence Agency Contact Information:

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Defense Intelligence Agency 

ATTN: IMO-2C (FOIA)

7400 Pentagon 

Washington, DC 20301-7400 

Mailing Address: Email: FOIA1@dodiis.mil 

Phone Number: (301) 394-6253

Form Updated Sept. 2022

Form Updated Sept. 2022

*

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Phone Number: Email:

Providing your birthdate and SSN is voluntary; however, without both, we may not be able to locate the records you are requesting.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct and 

that I am the person named below. I understand that any falsification of this statement is punishable, under the provisions of 

18 U.S.C. Section 1001, by a fine of not more than $10,000, or by imprisonment of not more than five years, or both and that 

requesting or obtaining any record(s) under false pretenses is punishable under the provisions of 5 U.S.C. § 552a(i)(3) by a 

fine of not more than $5000.
United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Submitted June 23, 2009

Decided June 29, 2009

Before

RICHARD D. CUDAHY, Circuit Judge

RICHARD A. POSNER, Circuit Judge

TERENCE T. EVANS, Circuit Judge

No. 08-3050

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

JUAN CRUZ-ENRIQUEZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District

Court for the Northern District of Illinois,

Eastern Division.

No. 06 CR 908-2

Matthew F. Kennelly, 

Judge.

O R D E R

Juan Cruz-Enriquez pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute

in excess of one kilogram of heroin. See 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846. The district court

sentenced Cruz-Enriquez to the mandatory-minimum 120 months of imprisonment. CruzEnriquez filed a timely notice of appeal, and his attorney has moved to withdraw because

he cannot discern a nonfrivolous argument. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). 

NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited only in accordance with

Fed. R. App. P. 32.1
No. 08-3050 Page 2

Cruz-Enriquez has not responded to counsel’s brief, see CIR. R. 51(b), so our review is

limited to the potential issues outlined in counsel’s brief.

Cruz-Enriquez told counsel that he wants to set aside his guilty plea, so counsel first

examines whether Cruz-Enriquez could challenge the voluntariness of this plea or the

adequacy of his plea colloquy. See FED. R. CRIM. P. 11. Cruz-Enriquez did not move to

withdraw his plea in the district court, so our review would be for plain error. See United

States v. Vonn, 535 U.S. 55, 59; United States v. Griffin, 521 F.3d 727, 730 (7th Cir. 2008).

Counsel identifies a single potential error in the Rule 11 colloquy: the district court

did not advise Cruz-Enriquez that he could be subject to restitution or any applicable

forfeiture. See FED. R. CRIM. P. 11(b)(1). But Cruz-Enriquez’s substantial rights were not

affected by the omission, because no restitution or forfeiture was ordered. See Fed. R. Crim.

P. 11(h); Griffin, 521 F.3d at 730; United States v. Schuh, 289 F.3d 968, 975 (7th Cir. 2002). 

Counsel also considers whether Cruz-Enriquez’s sentence could be challenged as

being unreasonable, in violation of law, or a result of an improper application of the

sentencing guidelines. But Cruz-Enriquez received the statutory-minimum sentence of 120

months, see 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), and any challenge to his sentence on these bases would

therefore be frivolous. See United States v. Duncan, 479 F.3d 924, 930 (7th Cir. 2007).

Accordingly, we GRANT counsel’s motion to withdraw and DISMISS the appeal.