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

                                                                                                         June 10, 2022


Multi Solutions II, Inc.
4400 Biscayne Boulevard; 10th Floor
Miami, FL 33137


Re:         Amendment No. 11 to Revolving Credit Promissory Note


Reference is made to the Revolving Credit Promissory Note (the “Revolver”) dated April 23, 2012 in consideration of the mutual agreements and covenants contained and other good and valuable consideration, the parties hereto agree to increase the Commitment Amount, as defined in the Revolver, from $600,000 to $700,000 and extend the Maturity Date of the Revolver to December 31, 2025 from December 31, 2023.


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment No. 11 to the Revolving Credit Promissory Note to be duly executed and attested, all as of the date first written above.


BORROWER:


MULTI SOLUTIONS  II, INC., a Florida Corporation




By:          /s/ Robert M. Lundgren
               Name:  Robert M. Lundgren
                              Director


LENDER:


VECTOR GROUP LTD., a Delaware Corporation




By:          /s/ Marc N. Bell               
               Name:  Marc N. Bell
                              Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary
##### 



Exhibit 32.1
 CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as amended; and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 November 9, 2007
    
    /s/ John R. Eckel, Jr.

John R. Eckel, Jr.
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 205 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 205

Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States Postal Service 
  should issue a postage stamp commemorating Langston Hughes, a great 
                       American literary figure.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 30, 2001

   Mr. Blunt (for himself, Mr. Clay, Mr. Skelton, Mrs. Emerson, Mrs. 
Clayton, Mr. Hastings of Florida, Mr. Towns, Ms. Carson of Indiana, Ms. 
     Kilpatrick, Mrs. Jones of Ohio, Mr. Owens, Mr. Hilliard, Mrs. 
   Christensen, and Ms. McKinney) submitted the following concurrent 
  resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States Postal Service 
  should issue a postage stamp commemorating Langston Hughes, a great 
                       American literary figure.

Whereas Langston Hughes was born in 1902 in Joplin, Missouri;
Whereas literary critics consider Langston Hughes one of the greatest American 
        poets of the 20th century;
Whereas Langston Hughes' innovative use of blues and jazz rhythms to express his 
        cultural heritage earned him recognition as the greatest African 
        American poet;
Whereas in addition to poetry, Langston Hughes wrote novels, short stories, 
        plays, opera lyrics, and books for children, and was the first African 
        American to earn his living solely as a writer;
Whereas Langston Hughes was the central figure of the Harlem Renaissance of the 
        1920s, during which African American art, music, and literature first 
        achieved national recognition;
Whereas Langston Hughes was an inspiration and mentor for many African American 
        writers and continues to influence writers today;
Whereas Langston Hughes became one of the most powerful spokesmen against racism 
        during the 20th century by utilizing passion and humor in his writings; 
        and
Whereas the United States Postal Service has issued postage stamps commemorating 
        other great American literary figures: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of Congress that--
            (1) the United States Postal Service should issue a postage 
        stamp commemorating Langston Hughes; and
            (2) the Citizens' Stamp Advisory Committee should recommend 
        to the Postmaster General that such a postage stamp be issued.
                                 <all>
```
ACCEPTED12-14-00140-CRTWELFTH COURT OF APPEALSTYLER, TEXAS4/13/2015 2:47:37 PMCATHY LUSKCLERK
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 115 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

<DOC>
116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 115

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 11, 2019

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To require the Department of State to establish a policy regarding the 
 use of location-tracking consumer devices by employees at diplomatic 
            and consular facilities, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Protecting Diplomats from 
Surveillance Through Consumer Devices Act''.

SEC. 2. SECURING UNITED STATES DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR FACILITIES 
              AGAINST CYBERSURVEILLANCE.

    (a) Policy on Location-Tracking Consumer Devices.--Not later than 
60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of 
State shall establish a policy on the use of location-tracking consumer 
devices, including GPS-enabled devices, at United States diplomatic and 
consular facilities by United States Government employees, contractors, 
locally employed staff, and members of other agencies deployed to or 
stationed at such facilities.
    (b) Security Briefing.--Existing and new employees at United States 
diplomatic and consular facilities, including contractors, locally 
employed staff, and members of other agencies deployed to or stationed 
at such facilities, shall, as a part of the security briefings provided 
to such employees, be informed of the policy described in subsection 
(a) and given instructions on the use of location-tracking consumer 
devices both on and off the premises of such facilities.
    (c) Coordination.--The Secretary of State shall coordinate with the 
heads of any other agencies whose employees are deployed to or 
stationed at United States diplomatic and consular facilities in the 
formulation of the policy described in subsection (a) and the 
dissemination of such policy pursuant to subsection (b).
    (d) Report.--Not later than 30 days after the formulation of the 
policy described in subsection (a), the Secretary of State shall submit 
to the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives and 
the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate a report on the 
details of such policy.

            Passed the House of Representatives January 10, 2019.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
ExLPWT^- MOTION DENIED Xm 7WE. CjOukt oFDATE* MiO~IS dftwwurt-L/*flflg/W.S

BY- 4^— ncXJEWP ftgnOM fDR ftEVEK5iU.' ftMQ M£k3 Tttfl^ffffifccaWWW-A*6*4*

to tfrie.Horo^wue SUPA£^ CjOUftrr 3UO€SOF 7#£- COURTS ^ l v

C$/tes jOou),SenwcXWitters^,fe ^plrcanV-pro s^ asrcl l^ggfeijota ^r

fe/ersA oi^ A&o +TMd purS&vVt- Ao TEX.#.%?,fi sotei, ^ suppcrV o? su*ft\

^ r\,A\ „<^ ^n*wW Ch «W-\CW¥>^ offish waft Cxtf)fir*n tinch; *W fifes

yij i7/eotp,m pretrial Ineaicfaq, no jWs\cm or XMft ]m\W&Mc] aMpn *% mrcfwdrtof), AqSuy>rn afresh crfftcWlfe o*\k y\o SVsV pn&aixwy \ruVialv

h, T^ceS ^(^ Uuo.See UxO, ^>e^ fli+ifele H-rriva^ ^.n w.» ccAe Cm ftot

uita*& Apphca^s fWAVaM JtakSlxfcVt ftcs^eWss verves4W<d

aj^^Uuo onto "fe^ft.Ac«xft <&&.& -& ito-u>L 5ee ^-ne^v. ^e^H*.

Ttv v.

w& c^use.Tsic^>,pool'33hft&cAiwte+<^ev±<&4W; fcpro^iicf p)K^ 6 GimrW° Ryuj^otWforoed Hucge mdxdmems. from k#tarw

CuVawjTsAawd ^\oxo^ks1%is granted because 4^e NuiaS.clouJlw Diskm
fekwOW,T$to 77383

L ft>£\e IcU
CAPABILITIES STATEMENT

DELAYS ARE COSTLY. 

YOU NEED A PROACTIVE PARTNER.

Brownrigg Insurance is a proactive partner for business growth. Our laser 

precision focus anticipates your concerns, so you feel validated and heard. 

TRAIL FORWARDTM with our team.

IT’S MORE THAN INSURANCE, 

WE CARE ABOUT YOUR SUCCESS.

▶ Relationships with over 160 insurance carriers means you have 

access to the coverage you need most.

▶ No matter how complicated your needs are, we can handle it. Our 

customers range from large international companies to small 

local businesses.

▶ We value your time. We promise to always have an answer to you 

within 24hrs. When you need us most, we’re here for you.

 Isn’t about time you had insurance that doesn’t slow you down?

DUNS

052000286

NAICS

524210

524291

524298

621 8th Street

Oregon City, OR 97045

Office: 503-655-3025

Fax: 503-655-5029

www.brownrigg.insure
ADAPTABLE.

Our customers develop relationships with carriers best suited to their 

respective industries. Through extensive loss control procedures, risk 

analysis and sincere relationships with each insurance carrier, we provide 

competitive pricing. We specialize in risk mitigation and loss control. 

Furthermore, our partnership with the Export-Import Bank of the United 

States creates opportunities for growth through trade credit insurance.

Our agency manages unique insurance programs with specific needs that 

are not automatically issued on a general policy:

▶ Special Industry Forms

▶ Policy Exceptions

▶ Customized Endorsements

SWIFT. 

Our products are tailored to create seamless experiences for both your 

domestic and foreign needs.

▶ Property & Casualty

▶ Professional Liability

▶ Trade Credit Insurance

▶ Umbrella & Excess Liability

▶ Kidnap and Ransom

▶ Cyber Liability 

▶ Pollution Liability

▶ Workers’ Compensation

▶ Excess Workers Compensation

▶ Directors & Officers Liability

INDUSTRIES

Manufacturing

Automotive

Construction

Non-Profits

Technology

Sports & Leisure

Agriculture

Emerging Markets 

International Businesses

Special Events

Wholesale & Distribution

Pharmaceutical

Life Sciences

Trucking

Multinational

Export-Import / Trade Credit
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

April 7, 2015

No. 04-12-00630-CV

THE HUFF ENERGY FUND, L.P., WRH Energy Partners, L.L.C., William R."Bill" Huff, 

Rick D'Angelo, Ed Dartley, Bryan Bloom, and Riley-Huff Energy Group, LLC,

Appellants

v.

LONGVIEW ENERGY COMPANY,

Appellee

From the 365th Judicial District Court, Zavala County, Texas

Trial Court No. 11-09-12583-ZCVAJA

Honorable Amado J. Abascal, III, Judge Presiding

ORDER SUBMITTING CAUSE FOR CONSIDERATION EN BANC

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

Karen Angelini, Justice 

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Jason Pulliam, Justice

A majority of the en banc court votes to resubmit the above cause for en banc review and 

disposition. Accordingly, the October 1, 2014 submission date is hereby WITHDRAWN.

The above cause is set for oral arguments before the en banc court on June 3, 2015 at 

9:00 a.m. The parties will be notified at a later date about the time to be allotted for oral 

arguments.

It is so ORDERED on April 7, 2015.

PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO: ___________________________________

 Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
# C_2004094EN.01002501.xml

| 17.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 94/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 94/25

---

Action brought on 17 February 2004 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Kingdom of the Netherlands

Case C-76/04

(2004/C 94/53)

An action against the Kingdom of the Netherlands was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 17 February 2004 by the Commission of the European Communities, represented by E. Traversa and W. Wils, acting as Agent.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2001/17/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 March 2001 on the reorganisation and winding-up of insurance undertakings or, in any event, by failing to notify the Commission of those provisions, the Kingdom of the Netherlands has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2001/17/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 March 2001 on the reorganisation and winding-up of insurance undertakings or, in any event, by failing to notify the Commission of those provisions, the Kingdom of the Netherlands has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

1

| — | order the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

The period prescribed for implementation of the Directive expired on 20 April 2003.

---

(1)  OJ 2001 L 110, p. 28.

1

---
AMS Boneless Beef Supplier Indicator Organism Performance - Fiscal Year: 20201/,2/ 

Standard Plate Count3/ Total Coliforms4/ 

# Lots Produced # Exceeding % Exceeding # Exceeding % Exceeding # Exce

Supplier (% of Total) Critical Limit Critical Limit Critical Limit Critical Limit Critical 

S1 8,032 (14.6) 0 0 1 0.01 0 

S2 1,127 (2.0) 19 1.69 1 0.09 0 S4 13,262 (24.1) 5 0.04 23 0.17 32 

S5 6,429 (11.7) 0 0 2 0.03 0 

S6 120 (0.2) 0 0 9 7.50 1 

S10 5,563 (10.1) 22 0.40 40 0.72 17 

S11 1,551 (2.8) 12 0.77 24 1.55 5 

S12 133 (0.2) 0 0 1 0.75 0 

S14 7,146 (13.0) 12 0.17 1 0.01 1 S21 6,916 (12.6) 1 0.01 2 0.03 4 

S29 2,488 (4.5) 3 0.12 0 0 0 

S43 1,127 (2.0) 0 0 0 0 0 

S44 1,188 (2.2) 0 0 2 0.17 1 

Total 55,082 (100.0) 74 0.13 106 0.19 61 

1/A full description of the boneless beef purchase program specification is available at https://www.ams.usda.gov/selling-food/product-specs#Beef. 2/Production Dates: October 1, 2019 to September 30, 2020. 3/Standard Plate Count Critical Limit: 100,000 CFU/g.4/Total Coliforms Critical Limit: 1,000 CFU/g.5/Generic E. coli Critical Limit: 500 CFU/g.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1097 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1097

To amend title 18, United States Code, to prevent unjust and irrational 
                         criminal punishments.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 7, 2019

   Mr. Scott of Virginia (for himself and Mr. Massie) introduced the 
  following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title 18, United States Code, to prevent unjust and irrational 
                         criminal punishments.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Justice Safety Valve Act of 2019''.

SEC. 2. AUTHORITY TO IMPOSE A SENTENCE BELOW A STATUTORY MINIMUM.

    Section 3553 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) by redesignating subsection (g) as subsection (h); and
            (2) by inserting after subsection (f) the following:
    ``(g) Authority To Impose a Sentence Below a Statutory Minimum To 
Prevent an Unjust Sentence.--
            ``(1) General rule.--Notwithstanding any provision of law 
        other than this subsection, the court may impose a sentence 
        below a statutory minimum if the court finds that it is 
        necessary to do so in order to avoid violating the requirements 
        of subsection (a).
            ``(2) Court to give parties notice.--Before imposing a 
        sentence under paragraph (1), the court shall give the parties 
        reasonable notice of the court's intent to do so and an 
        opportunity to respond.
            ``(3) Statement in writing of factors.--The court shall 
        state, in the written statement of reasons, the factors under 
        subsection (a) that require imposition of a sentence below the 
        statutory minimum.
            ``(4) Appeal rights not limited.--This subsection does not 
        limit any right to appeal that would otherwise exist in its 
        absence.''.
                                 <all>
```
FOR THE SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS 

AT TEXARKANA, TEXAS 

CHRISTIAN SIBLEY '

Appellant 

V. ' CASE NO. 06-15-00009-CR

TRIAL COURT NO. 2013-2143

THE STATE OF TEXAS 

Appellee '

SECOND MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME 

TO FILE APPELLANT=S BRIEF 

TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS: 

NOW COMES, CHRISTIAN SIBLEY, the Appellant herein, and moves the Court for an 

extension of time to file Appellant=s Brief in this cause, pursuant to Rules 38.6 and 10.5 (b) of 

the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, and in support thereof would show the Court as follows: 

I.

The Appellant in this cause was convicted in County Court at Law One, Gregg County, 

Texas in cause number 2013-2143 for the offense of Escape from Custody. On October 20, 

2014, punishment was assessed at three hundred thirty (330) days in the County Jail. 

II. 

The Reporter=s record was filed on February 9, 2015. The Appellant=s Brief is due on or 

about April 10, 2015. 

III. 

The Appellant hereby requests an extension of time to file Appellant=s Brief. 

The undersigned counsel has been unable to devote sufficient time to the review of the 

record, research and preparation of Appellant=s Brief for the following good and sufficient 

reasons: 

ACCEPTED

06-15-00009-CR

SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS

TEXARKANA, TEXAS

4/10/2015 2:11:04 PM

DEBBIE AUTREY

CLERK

 FILED IN 6th COURT OF APPEALS TEXARKANA, TEXAS 4/10/2015 2:11:04 PM DEBBIE AUTREY Clerk
1. Defense Counsel has been involved in a very busy trial and appellate schedule in both 

state and federal courts.

2. Counsel underwent surgery in Boston Massachusetts and is still under a doctor’s care.

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the undersigned counsel, on behalf of 

Appellant, respectfully prays that this Honorable Court extend the time for filing Appellant=s 

Brief for an additional thirty (30) days, to Monday, May 11, 2015. 

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,

__/s/ Clement Dunn_______

Attorney for Appellant

140 E. Tyler Street, Suite 240

Longview, TX 75601

(903) 753-7071 Fax (903) 753-8783

State Bar # 06249300
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

As Attorney of Record for Defendant, I do hereby Certify that a true and correct copy of 

the above and foregoing document was this date provided to the Attorney for the State.

Date: 04-10-15

__/s/ Clement Dunn_______

Attorney for Appellant
FOR THE SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS

AT TEXARKANA, TEXAS

CHRISTIAN SIBLEY '

Appellant

V. ' CASE NO. 06-15-00009-CR

TRIAL COURT NO. 2013-2143

THE STATE OF TEXAS

Appellee '

ORDER

BE IT REMEMBERED, that on the _____ day of __________________, 2015, came

on to be considered the above and foregoing Second Motion for Extension of Time to File 

Appellant=s Brief. After consideration of the same, it is the opinion of the Court that Appellant=s 

Motion be:

( ) GRANTED, and the present cause is hereby extended until _________________, 

2015.

( ) DENIED, to which ruling the Appellant excepts.

( ) SET FOR HEARING ON THE _____ day of __________________, 2015, at 

_____ o=clock_____.

SIGNED:

_____________________________

JUDGE PRESIDING
CLERK OF THE SUPREME COURT ELIZABETH A. BRO BY: IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA DAVID P. BIESINGER, DPM, AN INDIVIDUAL, Appellant,

vs. ABSOLUTE FOOT CARE SPECIALISTS, A NEVADA CORPORATION, Res • ondent. No. 83544 

# FILE

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL Cause appearing, appellant's motion for a voluntary dismissal of this appeal is granted. This appeal is dismissed. NRAP 42(b).

It is so ORDERED.

cc: Hon. Mark R. Denton, District Judge Paul M. Haire, Settlement Judge Takos Law Group, Ltd. Bailey Kennedy Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA CLERK'S ORDER (0) 1947 <4SDtz. 

## 06Els
116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1065 

AN ACT 

To provide for a study on the use of social media in security 

clearance investigations. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 1065 EH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Social Media Use in 

3 Clearance Investigations Act of 2019’’. 

4 SEC. 2. STUDY ON USE OF SOCIAL MEDIA IN SECURITY 

5 CLEARANCE INVESTIGATIONS. 

6 Not later than 6 months after the date of enactment 

7 of this Act, the Director of the Office of Management and 

8 Budget shall submit to Congress a report on the examina9 tion of social media activity during security clearance in10 vestigations, including— 

11 (1) the current use of publicly available social 

12 media in security clearance background investiga13 tions; 

14 (2) any legal impediments to examining publicly 

15 available social media activity, and whether those 

16 impediments are statutory or regulatory in nature; 

17 (3) the results of any pilot programs to incor18 porate social media checks in such investigations, in19 cluding the effectiveness and cost of such programs; 

20 (4) options for widespread implementation of 

21 the examination of social media activity during such 

22 investigations; and 

23 (5) estimates on the cost for such options as 

24 part of— 

25 (A) all Top Secret investigations; or 
3 

•HR 1065 EH

1 (B) all Secret and Top Secret investiga2 tions. 

Passed the House of Representatives February 11, 

2019. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 
116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1065 

AN ACT 

To provide for a study on the use of social media 

in security clearance investigations.