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

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. CON. RES. 137

Recognizing, appreciating, and remembering with dignity and respect the

Native American men and women who have served the United States

in military service.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 19, 2000

Mr. LEVIN submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred

to the Committee on Indian Affairs

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Recognizing, appreciating, and remembering with dignity and

respect the Native American men and women who have

served the United States in military service.

Whereas it is necessary to recognize, appreciate, assist, and

remember the Native American men and women who

have served the United States in military service;

Whereas Native American men and women have served the

United States armed forces in every military campaign

since the American Revolutionary War;

Whereas some tribes, notably the Ottawa Nation, sent a special company of warriors to serve in the Civil War with

the Michigan Sharpshooters and the Ottawa Warriors of

Company K were highly decorated for their brave actions

in that military action;
2

•SCON 137 IS

Whereas some tribes, notably the Ottawa Nation, sent their

finest warriors to serve in the Spanish American War

and one of their warriors distinguished himself in the calvary with Teddy Roosevelt on San Juan Hill;

Whereas some tribes, notably Ottawa, Chippewa, and Potawatomi answered the warrior call from within and served

in great numbers in World War I even though they were

not accepted as citizens of this country at that time;

Whereas the Navajo Code Talkers as well as other tribes, including the Ottawa and Chippewa, used their sacred languages to assist our country in World War II;

Whereas these sacred languages were also used to assist the

United States efforts in the Korean war and the Vietnam

conflict during which Native American veterans distinguished themselves with their bravery;

Whereas Native American veterans served in operations

Desert Storm and Desert Shield; and

Whereas Native Americans have served in the United States

military in numbers that far exceed their representation

in the United States population: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That the Congress recognizes, appreciates,

3 and remembers with dignity and respect the service to the

4 United States of Native American veterans.

Æ
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 Quarterly Report of Vicor Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, David H. Fater, 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.




Dated: August 22, 2011




/s/ David H. FaterDavid H. FaterChief Executive Officer and President
50319.

#### MALIN v. JAGGERS.

Quillian, Judge.

"Issues of negligence, including the related issues of assumption of risk, lack of ordinary care for one’s own safety, lack of ordinary care in avoiding the consequences of another’s negligence and comparative negligence, are ordinarily not susceptible of summary adjudication whether for or against the plaintiff or the defendant, but must be resolved by a trial in the ordinary manner.” *Wakefield v. A. R. Winter Co.,*121 Ga. App. 259 (174 SE2d 178).

Furthermore, "While opinion evidence adduced by *807the respondent is sufficient to preclude the grant of a summary judgment ... it does not follow that the introduction of opinion evidence by the movant will authorize the grant of a summary judgment.” *Harrison v. Tuggle,*225 Ga. 211, 213 (167 SE2d 395).

Argued March 10, 1975

Decided May 13, 1975.

*Phillips Slotin,*for appellant.

*Daniel C. B. Levy,*for appellee..

A thorough review of the proof offered on defendant’s motion for summary judgment reveals that the trial judge did not err in overruling such motion.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Pannell, P. J., and Clark, J., concur.*
#### STATE ex rel. James Earl WILLIAMS v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 87-KH-0377.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 13, 1987.

In re Williams, James Earl; applying for writ of mandamus; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. “G”, Nos. 235-114, 236-105.

Denied.
106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. CON. RES. 150

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Whereas Afghanistan has existed as a sovereign nation since

1747, maintaining its independence, neutrality, and dignity;

Whereas Afghanistan had maintained its own decisionmaking

through a traditional process called a ‘‘Loya Jirgah’’, or

Grand Assembly, by selecting, respecting, and following

the decisions of their leaders;

Whereas recently warlords, factional leaders, and foreign regimes have laid siege to Afghanistan, leaving the landscape littered with landmines, making the most fundamental activities dangerous;

Whereas in recent years, and especially since the Taliban

came to power in 1996, Afghanistan has become a haven

for terrorist activity, has produced most of the world’s

opium supply, and has become infamous for its human

rights abuses, particularly abuses against women and

children;

Whereas the former King of Afghanistan, Mohammed Zahir

Shah, ruled the country peacefully for 40 years, and after

years in exile retains his popularity and support; and

Whereas former King Mohammed Zahir Shah plans to convene an emergency ‘‘Loya Jirgah’’ to reestablish a stable

government, with no desire to regain power or reestablish
2

SCON 150 ES

a monarchy, and the Department of State supports such

ongoing efforts: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives

2 concurring), That the United States—

3 (1) supports the democratic efforts that respect

4 the human and political rights of all ethnic and reli5 gious groups in Afghanistan, including the effort to

6 establish a ‘‘Loya Jirgah’’ process that would lead to

7 the people of Afghanistan determining their own

8 destiny through a democratic process and free and

9 fair elections; and

10 (2) supports the continuing efforts of former

11 King Mohammed Zahir Shah and other responsible

12 parties searching for peace to convene a Loya

13 Jirgah—

14 (A) to reestablish a representative govern15 ment in Afghanistan that respects the rights of

16 all ethnic groups, including the right to govern

17 their own affairs through inclusive institution

18 building and a democratic process;

19 (B) to bring freedom, peace, and stability

20 to Afghanistan; and
3

SCON 150 ES

1 (C) to end terrorist activities, illicit drug

2 production, and human rights abuses in Af3 ghanistan.

Passed the Senate October 24 (legislative day, September 22), 2000.

Attest:

Secretary.

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. CON. RES. 150

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Relating to the reestablishment of representative

government in Afghanistan.
NUMBER 13-20-00491-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG

 

VINCENT KRUSSOW, Appellant,

v.

MARTIN G. ANGUIANO, JR., 

VALERIE NICOLE VALDEZ, AND 

NANCY ANN FLORES, Appellees.

On appeal from the 214th District Court

of Nueces County, Texas.

ORDER OF ABATEMENT

Before Justices Benavides, Longoria, and Tijerina

Order Per Curiam
The cause is before the Court on appellant’s motion to appoint counsel. The Texas 

Legislature has provided for the possibility of appointed counsel in civil matters by 

conferring upon a district court judge the discretion to “appoint counsel to attend to the 

cause of a party who makes an affidavit that he is too poor to employ counsel to attend 

to the cause.” TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. §24.016 (West, Westlaw through 2013 C.S.). Under 

exceptional circumstances, “the public and private interests at stake [may be] such that 

the administration of justice may best be served by appointing a lawyer to represent an 

indigent civil litigant.” Travelers Indem. Co. v. Mayfield, 923 S.W.2d 590, 594 (Tex. 1996).

Accordingly, we now ABATE this appeal and REMAND the cause to the trial court 

for further proceedings. Upon remand, the trial court shall immediately cause notice of a 

hearing to be given and, thereafter, conduct a hearing to determine the following: 

1. Whether appellant desires to prosecute this appeal;

2. Whether appellant is indigent;

3. Whether appellant is entitled to a free appellate record due to his or 

her indigency;

4. Whether appellant is entitled to appointed counsel; and, 

5. What orders, if any should be entered to assure the filing of 

appropriate notices and documentation to dismiss appellant's appeal 

if appellant does not desire to prosecute this appeal, or if appellant 

desires to prosecute this appeal, to assure that the appeal will be 

diligently pursued.

If the trial court determines that appellant does want to continue the appeal and 

that appellant is indigent and entitled to court-appointed counsel, the trial court shall 

appoint counsel to represent appellant in this appeal. If counsel is appointed, the name, 

address, telephone number, email address, and state bar number of said counsel shall 

be included in an order appointing counsel.
The trial court shall cause its findings and recommendations, together with any 

orders it may enter regarding the aforementioned issues, to be included in a supplemental 

clerk's record. Furthermore, the trial court shall cause a supplemental reporter's record of 

any proceedings to be prepared. The supplemental clerk's record and supplemental 

reporter's record, if any, shall be filed with the Clerk of this Court on or before the 

expiration of thirty days from the date of this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the

30th day of December, 2020.
Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
            
            
            
            U.S. Air Force
                    U.S. Air Force
        Search
                    Search AF.mil:
                        Search
                Search AF.mil:
                    Search
    Home





    News
    
        Commentaries

    Features

    Photos

    Art

    Air Force TV

    Radio

    Week in Photos





    About Us
    
        Air Force Senior Leaders    
        SECAF

    CSAF

    CMSAF

    Biographies

    Adjunct Professors

    Fact Sheets

    Commander's Call Topics    
        CCT Archive

    CSAF Reading List    
        2018 CSAF Reading List

    2017 CSAF Reading List

    2016 CSAF Reading List

    2015 CSAF Reading List

    2014 CSAF Reading List

    2013 CSAF Reading List

    2012 CSAF Reading List

    2011 CSAF Reading List

    2010 CSAF Reading List

    2009 CSAF Reading List

    2008 CSAF Reading List

    2007 CSAF Reading List

    2006 CSAF Reading List

    50 Years of the CMSAF

    The Book

    Speeches Archive    
        Former AF Top 3 Viewpoints and Speeches

    Air Force Warrior Games 2019

    Air Force Strategic Documents

    Desert Storm 25th Anniversary

    DoD Warrior Games

    Portraits in Courage    
        Portraits In Courage Vol. I

    Portraits In Courage Vol. II

    Portraits In Courage Vol. III

    Portraits In Courage Vol. IV

    Portraits In Courage Vol. V

    Portraits In Courage Vol. VI

    Portraits In Courage Vol. VII

    Portraits In Courage Vol. VIII

    Portraits In Courage Vol. IX

    Portraits In Courage Vol. X

    Chapman MoH

    The Air Force We Need

    Events 2020





    AF Sites
    
        Social Media Sites

    Site Registration





    AF Content Management





    Careers  
 Home
  News
  Photos
 Air Force Photos Search
 Search
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Full Size (0.1 MB)
 Photo Gallery
 Quick Links
                            Join the Air ForceSite MapQuestionsContact UsRSSFOIAIGAF SitesAccessibilityEEOLink DisclaimerStrategic APRSuicide PreventionSAPRUSA.govNo FEAR Act
                    Connect
                    Official United States Air Force Website
                        Subscribe to USAF News and Information
          Submit
Exhibit 32.2 

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER**

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

          In connection with the Quarterly Report of KeyOn Communications Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q/A for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Annette Eggert, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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. |

|                    |   |                          |   |
|-------------------------|--------|-------------------------------|--------|
| Date: November 16, 2009 | By:    | /s/ Annette Eggert            |   |
|                    |   |                               |   |
|                    |   | Annette Eggert                |   |
|                    |   | Chief Financial Officer       |   |
|                    |   | (Principal Financial Officer) |   |

----
NUMBER 13-23-00459-CR

COURT OF APPEALS 

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG 

 

IN RE EUSTORGIO GUZMAN RESENDEZ

 

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. 

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Justices Benavides, Longoria, and Tijerina

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Longoria1

Proceeding pro se, relator Eustorgio Guzman Resendez filed a petition for writ of 

mandamus seeking to vacate various orders and a judgment on grounds that the trial 

court “was without authority to preside over . . . this case.” Relator’s contentions concern 

1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d) (“When denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not 

required to do so. When granting relief, the court must hand down an opinion as in any other case.”); id. R. 

47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions).
2

matters related to his 1992 conviction for capital murder.2 Relator has further filed a 

motion for leave to file the petition for writ of mandamus.

In a criminal case, to be entitled to mandamus relief, the relator must establish 

both that the act sought to be compelled is a ministerial act not involving a discretionary 

or judicial decision and that there is no adequate remedy at law to redress the alleged 

harm. See In re Meza, 611 S.W.3d 383, 388 (Tex. Crim. App. 2020) (orig. proceeding); 

In re Harris, 491 S.W.3d 332, 334 (Tex. Crim. App. 2016) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam); 

In re McCann, 422 S.W.3d 701, 704 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013) (orig. proceeding). If the 

relator fails to meet both requirements, then the petition for writ of mandamus should be 

denied. State ex rel. Young v. Sixth Jud. Dist. Ct. of Apps. at Texarkana, 236 S.W.3d 207, 

210 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (orig. proceeding).

The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus 

and the applicable law, is of the opinion that relator has not met his burden to obtain relief. 

Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. Further, as previously noted, 

relator filed a motion for leave to file this original proceeding. Although a motion for leave 

is required to file original proceedings in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, see TEX.

R. APP. P. 72.1, a motion for leave is not required to file original proceedings in the 

intermediate appellate courts. See id. R. 52 & cmt.; In re Fields, 619 S.W.3d 394, 394 

(Tex. App.—Waco 2021, orig. proceeding) (per curiam); see also In re Simmons, No. 13-

2 See Resendez v. State, 860 S.W.2d 605, 606 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi–Edinburg 1993, pet. 

ref'd) (affirming relator’s conviction on direct appeal); see also In re Resendez, No. 13-20-00433-CR, 2020 

WL 6278290, at *1 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi–Edinburg Oct. 27, 2020, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not 

designated for publication) (collecting related cases).
3

23-00217-CR, 2023 WL 3688028, at *2 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi–Edinburg May 26, 

2023, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not designated for publication). We thus dismiss the 

motion for leave as moot.

NORA L. LONGORIA

Justice

Do not publish.

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2 (b).

Delivered and filed on the

30th day of October, 2023.
### SAT Report PMN Number: P-11-0331 SAT Date: 4/26/2011 Print Date: 8/3/2012

Related cases : Health related cases : Ecotox related cases:

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

Persistence Bioaccum Toxicity Comments 1 11

Exposure Based Review : Health: Yes Exposure based testing (health): May Fit HPV Category Ecotox: Yes
Routes of exposure : Health: Dermal Drinking Water Inhalation Ecotox: All releases to water Fate: ;

P 2 Rec Comments : Comment: N o Commen t
Keywords : Keywords: SOLV IRR-E,S,L,GI SOLV NEURO SENS-S,L IMMUNO MUTA UNCERT ONCO AQUATOX-A,C
Summary of Assessment :

Fate :Fate Summary: P-11-0331 FATE: Estimations for typical MW 106 Liquid with MP = -47.8 C (M for typical) log Kow = 3.20 (M for typical) S = 161 mg/L at 25 C (M for typical) VP = 8.3 torr at 25 C (M for typical) BP = 160-371C (M for mixture), 139 °C (M for typical) H = 7.18E-3 (E) log Koc = 2.57 (E) log Fish BCF = 1.78 (E) log Fish BAF = 2.08 (E) POTW removal (%) = 75-90 via sorption, stripping and biodeg Time for complete ultimate aerobic biodeg = wk Sorption to soils/sediments = moderate Volatilization half-life from a standard river = 1 hrs Volatilization half-life from a standard lake = 4 da Atmospheric Oxidation Half-life = 9.5 hr via OH radical PBT Potential: P1B1 *CEB FATE: Migration to ground water = moderate

Health : Health Summary: Absorption is good all routes, based on physical/chemical p roperties. There are concerns for solvent irritation and solvent neurotoxicity. There is also concern for dermal and respiratory sensitization, based on information in the PMN MSDS. There are also concerns for immunotoxicity based on and mutagenicity based on . There is also uncertain concern for oncogenicity based on

Ecotox :
Test Organism Test Type Test End Point Predicted Measured Comments

fish 96-h LC50 9.0 daphnid 48-h LC50 6.0 green algal 96-h EC50 4.6 fish

_ chronic value 1.0 daphnid

_ chronic value 0.82

algal

_ chronic value 2.1
Sewage Sludge 3-h EC50

_ Sewage Sludge

_ Chronic Value _

Ecotox Values Comments: Predictions are based on SARs for neutral organic chemicals;SAR chemical class = hydrocarbon; MW 106; log Kow = 3.09 (EPI); liquid with unknown mp (P); S = 141 mg/L at 25 C (P); p H7; effective concentrations based on 100% active ingredients and mean measured 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) 82

SARs neutral organic chemicals SAR Class hydrocarbon new chemicals category: neutral organics Ecotox Category

Ecotox Factors Comments:

SAT Chair: J. Kwiat
Exhibit
      32.1





**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350**





In
      connection with the periodic report of ENERGENX, INC., a Nevada corporation
      (the
“Company”), on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2007, as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, GARY A. BEDINI, Chief
      Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of my knowledge:





(1)
      the
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
      applicable, 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 at the dates
      and for the periods indicated.





This
      Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, “filed” with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission.






Date: May
              11,
              2007By:
            /s/ Gary
              A.
              BediniGary
                A. Bedini
EX-10.4





 Exhibit 10.4 

English Summary of Employee Share Incentive Plan No.1 of Burning Rock Biotech Limited 

 

	1.	 Definition. Wherever the following terms are used in the Plan they shall have the meanings specified
below, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. 


  

	 	a.	 “Company” means Burning Rock Biotech Limited, a company incorporated under the laws of the
Cayman Islands. 


  

	 	b.	 “Participant” means a person who, as an employee or officer of the Company or any of its
subsidiaries, has been granted Subscribed Shares pursuant to the Plan. 


  

	 	c.	 “Plan” means this Employee Share Incentive Plan No.1 of the Company adopted on May 9,
2020. 


  

	 	d.	 “Subscribed Share” means ordinary shares of the Company to be issued to a Participant of the
Plan. 


  

	2.	 Purpose. The purpose of the Plan is to provide incentives to the management team and employees of the
Company and its subsidiaries. 


  

	3.	 Number of Shares. The maximum number of ordinary shares reserved for issuance under this Plan is
760,000. 


  

	4.	 Eligibility. Persons eligible to participate in this Plan include the managers and above employees of
the Company and its subsidiaries. 


  

	5.	 Subscription Price. US$13.2 per share. 



 

	6.	 Maximum Subscription Amount. Up to RMB2,000,000 worth of Subscribed Shares per Participant, depending on
each employee’s position and length of service with the Company. 


  

	7.	 Vesting Schedule. The Subscribed Shares will vest in three years and are subject to certain vesting
conditions. Subject to certain vesting conditions, 10%, 40% and 50% of the Subscribed Shares shall vest on the first, second and third anniversary of the date of grant, respectively. 



 

	8.	 Plan Administration. The chief executive officer and chief financial officer of the Company have been
authorized to administer the plan. The plan administrators may determine the grant date, number of Subscribed Shares to be granted, Participants of the Plan, vesting conditions and other terms and conditions of the Subscribed Shares.