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

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 152 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 152

Encouraging States bordering the Great Lakes, and the Canadian Province 
 of Ontario to prohibit off-shore drilling in the Great Lakes for oil 
                    and gas, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              June 5, 2001

 Mr. Rogers of Michigan submitted the following concurrent resolution; 
 which was referred to the Committee on Resources, and in addition to 
     the Committee on International Relations, for a period to be 
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration 
  of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee 
                               concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Encouraging States bordering the Great Lakes, and the Canadian Province 
 of Ontario to prohibit off-shore drilling in the Great Lakes for oil 
                    and gas, and for other purposes.

Whereas the water resources of the Great Lakes Basin are precious public natural 
        resources, shared and held in trust by the States of Illinois, Indiana, 
        Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, and 
        the Canadian Province of Ontario;
Whereas the environmental dangers associated with off-shore drilling in the 
        Great Lakes for oil and gas outweigh the potential benefits of such 
        drilling;
Whereas in accordance with the Submerged Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1301 et seq.), 
        each State that borders any of the Great Lakes has authority over the 
        area between that State's coastline and the boundary of Canada or 
        another State;
Whereas the States of Illinois, Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin 
        each have a statutory prohibition of off-shore drilling in the Great 
        Lakes for oil and gas;
Whereas the States of Indiana, Minnesota, and Ohio do not have such a 
        prohibition; and
Whereas the Canadian Province of Ontario does not have such a prohibition, and 
        drilling for and production of gas occurs in the Canadian portion of 
        Lake Erie: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That the Congress encourages--
            (1) the States of Illinois, Michigan, New York, 
        Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin to continue to prohibit off-shore 
        drilling in the Great Lakes for oil and gas;
            (2) the States of Indiana, Minnesota, and Ohio and the 
        Canadian Province of Ontario to enact a prohibition of such 
        drilling; and
            (3) the Canadian Province of Ontario to require the 
        cessation of any such drilling and any production resulting 
        from such drilling.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 31.2

 

Rule 13a – 14(a)/15(d) – 14(a)

 

I, Gordon Samson, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Cascade Energy Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this annual 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 annual report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have: 

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 annual report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this annual report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

c) presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and 

6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this annual report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

 

/s/ Gordon Samson

Gordon Samson

Chief Financial Officer 

Date:  July 24, 2006
EXHIBIT 32.2



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  accompanying  Annual  Report  on Form  10-KSB  (the "Report") of Diamond  Entertainment  Corporation (the "Company") for the year ended March 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),  I, Fred U. Odaka,  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, to my knowledge, that:



(1)  the Report fully  complies with the  requirements  of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



(2)  the  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all material respects,  the financial  condition and results

of operations of the Company.







/s/ Fred U. Odaka



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



Fred U. Odaka



Title:  Chief Financial Officer Chief Accounting Officer)

Date:  March 15, 2004
### IN THE UNI TED STATES COURT OFAPPEALS FOR THE FIF TH CIRCUIT

No. 10-41350 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. MONTE LEE ARMSTRONG, also known as Monte Armstrong, Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 2:10-CR-648-1

Before REAVLEY, SMITH and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Monte Lee Armstrong appeals his j u ry trial conviction on one count of possession with intent to distribute more than 1,000 kilograms of marijuana. He claims that he was denied due process of law because the Government bolstered its case during its opening statement. Armstrong contends that his conviction must be reve r s e d b ecause the cumulative effect of the Government’s errors so tainted the jury that he could not receive a fair trial. U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s F i ft h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D Sep tem ber 2 2, 2 011 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Purs uant to 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court hasd ete rm inedthat this op inion sho uld not * be publ ish ed and is not pr ece dent excep t unde r the lim ite d cir cum st ance s se t forth in 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 10-41350 Document: 00511609852 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/22/2011No. 10-41350

As Armstrong concedes, he failed to obj e c t during the Government’s opening statement. Thus, review is for plain error. See United States v. R ice , 607 F.3d 133, 138 (5th Cir. 2010). A plain error is a forfeited error that is clear

or obvious and affects the defendant’s substantial rights. United States v. Ellis , 564 F.3d 370, 377 ( 5th Cir. 2009). When those elements are shown, this court has the discretion to correct the error only if it “seri o u s ly af f e c ts the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings.” Id. (internal quotation and citation omitted). “The go v e r n m ent’s attempt to bolster a witness by vouching for his credibility constitutes error when the prosecutor’s statements ‘might reasonably have led the jury to believe that the prosecutor possessed extrinsic evidence, not presented to the jury, that convinced the prosecutor of the defendant’s guilt.’” United States v. Binker , 795 F.2d 1218, 1223 (5th Cir. 1986) (citation omitted). “[ F]or bolstering to constitute plain error, the prosecutor must intertwine ‘his personal and official c r e dib il ity with the credibility of the witnesses.’” United States v. Davis , 831 F.2d 63, 67 (5th Cir. 1987) (citation omitted). The purpose of an opening statement is to pre sent what the evidence would show. United States v. Garza-Vasquez , 1994 WL 35615, *5 (5th Cir. Jan. 27, 1994) (unpublished). Here, the Government’s openin g s t a t ement merely provided an overview of the ca s e and the evidence it expected to present. Armstrong has not demonstrated plain error. AFFIRMED.

2 Case: 10-41350 Document: 00511609852 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/22/2011
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13

- 50349 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v. ENRIQUE PARRA, also known as Uncle , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:11

- CR

- 1827

- 15

Before PRADO, ELROD, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges

. PER CURIAM: *
The attorney appointed to represent Enrique Parra has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011).
Parra h a s not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review.

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that th is 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. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED April 16, 2014 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 13-50349 Document: 00512598429 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/16/2014No. 13

- 50349

Accordingly, counsel’s motion fo r leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2.

2 Case: 13-50349 Document: 00512598429 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/16/2014
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2225 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2225

  To suspend temporarily the duty on 2-Cyclopropylaminonicotinic acid.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 29, 2009

Mr. Lieberman (for himself and Mr. Dodd) introduced the following bill; 
     which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To suspend temporarily the duty on 2-Cyclopropylaminonicotinic acid.

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

SECTION 1. 2-CYCLOPROPYLAMINONICOTINIC ACID.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

        ``9902.01.00     2-                  Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/ ''.
                          Cyclopropylaminon                                                  31/2011
                          icotinic acid (2-
                          CAN) (CAS No.
                          639807-18-4)
                          (provided for in
                          subheading
                          2933.39.61)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to articles entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### In the Matter of the Probate of the Will of James H. F. Farquharson, Deceased.

Surrogate’s Court, Richmond County,

March 10, 1959.

*Burke $ Burke*for petitioners.

John C. Boylan, S.

In this probate proceeding the proponent also requests a construction of the will.

The court undoubtedly has power to construe a will at any stage (Surrogate’s Ct. Act, § 145), however, when a construction is sought during the probate proceeding the court will, in its discretion, grant the application only when there is a showing of an essential need for construction. It has been uniformly held that the exercise of the court’s discretion in favor of construing a will at this time is only when it is required for the orderly administration of an estate, a determination of necessary parties or other cause of like nature.

In the case at bar construction is sought for a determination as to whether there is an intestacy of the residue or whether the will has provided for the disposition of the remaining assets. This determination is normally left for the accounting proceeding.

The courts have rightly proceeded on the proposition that to decide in advance an issue that may arise *in futuro*subject themselves to possible legislative change or circumstances that may not be the same then as now *(Matter of Mount,*185 N. Y. 162).

The court will not indulge in rendering an impotent decision tainted with fugacity. The proponent is to proceed with the probate of the will and the application for construction is denied without prejudice to a similar application being made at the time of accounting.

Proceed accordingly.
Exhibit 4.2  


[FORM
OF FACE OF CERTIFICATE] 


BANKGREENVILLE
FINANCIAL CORPORATION 


INCORPORATED
UNDER THE LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA 


THE
CORPORATION IS TO ISSUE 10,000,000 SHARES OF COMMON STOCK—NO PAR VALUE 


        This
certifies that
                                         
        is the registered holder of
                                         
        Shares of Common Stock which are fully paid and
non-assessable and transferable only on the books of the Corporation by the holder hereof in person or by Attorney upon surrender of this Certificate properly endorsed. 


        In
Witness Whereof, the said Corporation has caused this Certificate to be signed by its duly authorized officers and its Corporate Seal to be hereunto affixed this
                         day of
                         A.D. 20             



      




	
	 	

	SECRETARY	 	PRESIDENT










[FORM
OF BACK OF CERTIFICATE] 


        The
following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this certificate, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or
regulations. 



	TEN COM	 	—as tenants in common	 	UNIF GIFT MIN ACT—	    
	Custodian	 	 
	TEN ENT	 	—as tenants by the entireties	 	 	 	(Cust) (Minor)
	JT TEN	 	—as joint tenants with right of	 	 	under Uniform Gifts to Minors
	 	 	survivorship and not as tenants	 	 	Act	    
	 	 
	 	 	in common	 	 	 	(State)	 	 





Additional
abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list. 


For
value received,
                                         
        hereby sell, assign and transfer unto

PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER

    IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE 



	

	

 PLEASE PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS OF ASSIGNEE
	


	

	
 	

Shares





represented by the within Certificate, and do hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint
                         Attorney to transfer the said shares on the
books of the within-named Corporation with full power of substitution in the premises. 



	Dated,	 	 	 	 
	 	 	
	 	 
	

 	
 	

 	
 	


	

In presence of	
 	

 
	

	
 	

 





NOTICE:
THE SIGNATURE TO THIS ASSIGNMENT MUST CORRESPOND WITH THE NAME AS WRITTEN UPON THE FACE OF THE CERTIFICATE IN EVERY PARTICULAR, WITHOUT ALTERATION OR ENLARGEMENT, OR ANY CHANGE WHATEVER.
```

[Federal Register: February 10, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 27)]
[Notices]               
[Page 6661]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr10fe10-59]                         

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF THE UNITED STATES

 
Sunshine Act Meeting

ACTION: Notice of a Partially Open Meeting of the Board of Directors of 
the Export-Import Bank of the United States.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Time and Place: Thursday, February 11, 2010 at 9:30 a.m. The meeting 
will be held at Ex-Im Bank in Room 1143, 811 Vermont Avenue, NW., 
Washington, DC 20571.

Open Agenda Items: Item No. 1: Ex-Im Bank Sub-Saharan Africa Advisory 
Committee for 2010.

Public Participation:  The meeting will be open to public observation 
for Item No. 1 only.

Further Information: For further information, contact: Office of the 
Secretary, 811 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20571 (202) 565-
3957.

Jonathan J. Cordone,
Senior Vice President, and General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2010-2848 Filed 2-9-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6690-01-M
```
EXHIBIT 22.1

                     SCHEDULE OF SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                     Jurisdiction of   Parent      Percentage
Subsidiary                           Incorporation    Corporation  Ownership
<S>                                    <C>              <C>          <C>
Fantastic Foods International Inc.     Nevada           Company      100%
NuOasis Properties Inc.                Nevada           Company       10%
NuOasis Las Vegas Inc.(1)              Nevada           Company       10%
NuOasis Laughlin Inc.(1)               Nevada           Company       10%
Casino Management of America Inc.(1)   Nevada           Company       10%
ACI Asset Management Inc.(1)           Nevada           Company       10%
NuOasis International Inc.             Commonwealth     Company      100%
                                       of the Bahamas
Oasis Resorts International, Inc.      Nevada           NOI           65%
Oasis Hotel, Resorts & Casino III      Nevada           Oasis        100%
NuOasis Resorts & Casinos N.V.(1)(2)   Netherlands      Oasis         80%
                                       Antilles
Cleopatra Palace Resorts and Casinos   United Kingdom   Oasis         75%
Limited
Cleopatra Cap Gammarth Limited(2)      Tunisia          CPRC          90%
Cleopatra's World Inc.                 British Virgin   CPRC          80%
                                       Islands

</TABLE>

(1)  Have not commenced business.
(2)  In organization: capital stock not issued at June 30, 2000
##### 



Exhibit 12.1
 ALLIED WASTE INDUSTRIES, INC.
RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES AND PREFERRED STOCK
DIVIDENDS
(in thousands)
 For the Year Ended December 31,2007
    
    
    2006
    
    
    2005
    
    
    2004
    
    
    2003Fixed Charges:Interest expenses
    
    $
    484,649
    
    
    $
    526,547
    
    
    $
    524,020
    
    
    $
    600,042
    
    
    $
    722,444Interest capitalized
    
    
    19,294
    
    
    
    17,207
    
    
    
    14,135
    
    
    
    12,674
    
    
    
    15,235Total interest
    
    
    503,943
    
    
    
    543,754
    
    
    
    538,155
    
    
    
    612,716
    
    
    
    737,679Interest component of rent expense
    
    
    12,137
    
    
    
    10,764
    
    
    
    6,296
    
    
    
    6,832
    
    
    
    8,169Non-cash conversion of Series A preferred
stock
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    893,092Dividend expense
    
    
    62,604
    
    
    
    77,420
    
    
    
    96,118
    
    
    
    48,458
    
    
    
    172,047Total fixed charges
    
    $
    578,684
    
    
    $
    631,938
    
    
    $
    640,569
    
    
    $
    668,006
    
    
    $
    1,810,987Earnings:Income from continuing operations
before income taxes
    
    $
    517,316
    
    
    $
    391,210
    
    
    $
    320,715
    
    
    $
    123,410
    
    
    $
    196,389Plus: fixed charges
    
    
    578,684
    
    
    
    631,938
    
    
    
    640,569
    
    
    
    668,006
    
    
    
    917,895Less: interest capitalized
    
    
    (19,294
    )
    
    
    (17,207
    )
    
    
    (14,135
    )
    
    
    (12,674
    )
    
    
    (15,235
    )Less: dividend expense
    
    
    (62,604
    )
    
    
    (77,420
    )
    
    
    (96,118
    )
    
    
    (48,458
    )
    
    
    (172,047
    )Total earnings
    
    $
    1,014,102
    
    
    $
    928,521
    
    
    $
    851,031
    
    
    $
    730,284
    
    
    $
    927,002Ratio of earnings to fixed charges and
preferred stock dividends (A)
    
    
    1.8
    
    
    
    1.5
    
    
    
    1.3
    
    
    
    1.1
    
    
    
    *Ratio of earnings to fixed charges
    
    
    2.0
    
    
    
    1.7
    
    
    
    1.6
    
    
    
    1.2
    
    
    
    1.2
 
 *
    
    Earnings were insufficient to cover fixed charges, preferred stock dividends and non-cash conversion of Series A
preferred stock by $883.9 million in 2003.(A)
    
    Dividend expense is grossed up for taxes based on the Companys effective tax rate.