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

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 899 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 899

To require the country of origin of certain special immigrant religious 
workers to extend reciprocal immigration treatment to nationals of the 
                             United States.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 11, 2015

 Mr. King of Iowa introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
                     the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To require the country of origin of certain special immigrant religious 
workers to extend reciprocal immigration treatment to nationals of the 
                             United States.

    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 ``Religious Worker Visa Reciprocity 
Act of 2015''.

SEC. 2. REQUIRING RECIPROCAL IMMIGRATION TREATMENT.

    Section 204(a)(1)(G) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 
U.S.C. 1154(a)(1)(G)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(iii) Beginning on October 1, 2015, no petition may be approved 
for classification of an alien as a special immigrant under section 
101(a)(27)(C) if the Secretary of Homeland Security has determined that 
the country of the alien's nationality--
            ``(I) is identified as a `Country of Particular Concern' or 
        a country where religious freedom is of significant interest in 
        the 2013 International Religious Freedom Report; or
            ``(II) does not extend reciprocal immigration treatment to 
        nationals of the United States who are seeking resident status 
        in order to work in a religious vocation or occupation.''.
                                 <all>
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-1860

INDIAN MOUNTAIN COAL COMPANY; OLD REPUBLIC INSURANCE 

COMPANY,

Petitioners,

v.

DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS; EMILY 

BOLLING,

Respondents.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. 

(09-0180-BLA)

Submitted: March 29, 2011 Decided: April 8, 2011

Before AGEE, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Mark E. Solomons, Laura Metcoff Klaus, GREENBERG TRAURIG LLP, 

Washington, D.C., for Petitioners. M. Patricia Smith, Solicitor 

of Labor, Rae Ellen James, Associate Solicitor, Patricia M. 

Nece, Counsel for Appellate Litigation, Barry H. Joyner, UNITED 

STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Washington, D.C.; Joseph E. Wolfe, 

Ryan C. Gilligan, WOLFE, WILLIAMS, RUTHERFORD & REYNOLDS, 

Norton, Virginia, for Respondents.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Indian Mountain Coal Company and Old Republic 

Insurance Company seek review of the Benefits Review Board’s 

decision and order affirming the administrative law judge’s 

award of black lung benefits pursuant to 30 U.S.C. §§ 901-945 

(2006). Our review of the record discloses that the Board’s 

decision is based upon substantial evidence and is without 

reversible error. Accordingly, we deny the petition for review 

for the reasons stated by the Board. Indian Mountain Coal 

Co. v. Director, Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs, No. 

09-0180-BLA (BRB Sept. 23, 2009). We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 

presented in the materials before the court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 21-11198

Summary Calendar

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Ramiro Miranda-Silva, 

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:20-CR-604

Before Smith, Stewart, and Graves, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Ramiro 

Miranda-Silva 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). Miranda-Silva has not filed a response. 

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this 

opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited 

circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 1, 2022

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 21-11198 Document: 00516340080 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/01/2022
No. 21-11198

2

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. Accordingly, counsel’s 

motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from 

further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See

5th Cir. R. 42.2.

Case: 21-11198 Document: 00516340080 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/01/2022
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 18 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 18

Expressing support for designation of January 7, 2015, as ``National Be 
                         Active at Work Day''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 7, 2015

   Ms. Michelle Lujan Grisham of New Mexico submitted the following 
   resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and 
                           Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Expressing support for designation of January 7, 2015, as ``National Be 
                         Active at Work Day''.

Whereas physical inactivity is a major contributor to the development of 
        obesity, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and other chronic diseases;
Whereas sitting for long periods of time at work is a risk factor for obesity, 
        cardiovascular disease, metabolic diseases, and other chronic 
        conditions;
Whereas less than 25 percent of jobs require physical activity and jobs that 
        require primarily sedentary work have become increasingly common;
Whereas exercise performed outside of work does not fully counteract the 
        negative impacts of sitting all day;
Whereas stair climbing burns calories at a high rate, enhances cardiovascular 
        fitness, and promotes healthy lungs;
Whereas walking throughout the day improves cardiovascular health, lowers the 
        risk of obesity, and related diseases;
Whereas stretching improves circulation, increases range of motion, and 
        alleviates stress;
Whereas individuals with physical disabilities can often participate in physical 
        activity throughout the work day with minor modifications;
Whereas all of these activities generally require no special equipment and can 
        be performed by most people regardless of their fitness level;
Whereas many people start the new year with resolutions to improve their health;
Whereas there is a growing effort to encourage people to make small changes in 
        their lives to improve their health; and
Whereas January 7, 2015, would be an appropriate date to designate as ``National 
        Be Active at Work Day'': Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) supports the designation of ``National Be Active at 
        Work Day''; and
            (2) encourages the people of the United States to observe 
        the day with the appropriate activities.
                                 <all>
```
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



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a)
and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of Checkers Drive-In Restaurants, Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for the quarter ended September 6, 2004 of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.



/s/ S. Patric PlumleyS. Patric PlumleyChief Financial OfficerOctober 18, 2004




A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### William Richter, Plaintiff, *v.*Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc., Defendant.

Supreme Court, Special Term, New York County,

April 3, 1959.

*221
      *Coudert Brothers (Gerald J. Dunworth*of counsel), for defendant.

*Roger B. Hunting*for plaintiff.

Saul S. Streit, J.

Defendant moves for dismissal of the amended complaint for insufficiency. Plaintiff is an attorney and a notary public. This libel action is another emanation of the controversy raging over the disappearance of Dr. Galindez and the report of the Morris Ernst investigation into that matter. Plaintiff was associated with Morris Ernst in that investigation. In the course thereof an affidavit was taken from one Virginia Wulfing and the published statement complained of purported to report what Virginia Wulfing said of that affidavit, in the following language: ‘ *‘*brought to my home by three men who represented themselves as being reporters from the Daily News. When I made my original statement to CBS, I was under the impression that my father had told me about an incident concerning a cancer patient on March 12. However, the so-called reporters * * * pointed out to me that it couldn’t have been on March 12 because my father didn’t come home from Zahn’s Airport until after midnight, which would have made it March 13. I agreed, and on that basis inserted (12th) after the word (March) in paragraph 4(A), but I didn’t realize that the sentence went on to say, ‘ but in April or May of that year.’ If I had, I couldn’t have agreed to it. None of the three men who brought the affidavit to me told me they were notary publics. They only indicated they were reporters from the New York Daily News. I did not see the affidavits being notarized or stamped. I cannot remember the names of the three men who persuaded me to sign the affidavit. At the same time, I had never heard of Morris Ernst and was not aware I was signing anything more than a release for a newspaper that would not be made public.”

After quoting the statement in that manner, the complaint continues with the published statement, as follows: 1 ‘ This affidavit was notarized by a William Bichter of the Bronx. [Meaning plaintiff.] That William Bichter had verified his signature but declined to answer any further questions which might shed some light on the circumstances under which the affidavit was procured.”

The statement relied on may be capable of producing two meanings, in which event its meaning is for the jury. But, cer*222tainly, it may be said to have the meaning that plaintiff connived disgracefully in obtaining an improperly notarized and falsified affidavit. In this aspect of the case the alleged innuendo is wholly proper and the words used are calculated to injure the plaintiff in his professional and public office. The statement is thus libelous per se.

The motion is denied.
<PAGE>
                                                                      Exhibit 99

                                   AMTROL Inc.

                               1400 Division Road
                        West Warwick, Rhode Island 02893

               LETTER TO COMMISSION PURSUANT TO TEMPORARY NOTE 3T

                                 March 29, 2002



Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549-0408

Ladies and Gentlemen:

Pursuant to Temporary Note 3T to Article 3 of Regulation S-X, AMTROL Inc. has
obtained a letter of representation from Arthur Andersen LLP ("Andersen")
stating that the December 31, 2001 audit was subject to their quality control
system for the U.S. accounting and auditing practice to provide reasonable
assurance that the engagement was conducted in compliance with professional
standards, that there was appropriate continuity of Andersen personnel working
on the audit and availability of national office consultation. Availability of
personnel at foreign affiliates of Andersen is not relevant to this audit.

Very truly yours,

AMTROL Inc.



/s/ Larry T. Guillemette






Larry T. Guillemette
Executive Vice President & CFO
AFS-11-113-E February 28, 2011

Exemption No. 8844B Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2006-26736

Mr. David L. Jones Corporate Aviation Education Director

Aviation Institute of Maintenance

4455 South Boulevard Virginia Beach, VA 23452

Dear Mr. Jones:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption No. 8844, as amended. It explains the basis for our decision and describes its effect.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated Decem ber 26, 2010, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Technical Educational Services, Inc., d.b.a. Aviation Institute of Maintenance (Aviation Institute) (operating unde r Air Agency Certificate V18T077K) for an extension of Exemption No. 8844, as amended. That exemption from § 65.75(a) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations allows Aviation Institute to administer the aviation mechanic general written test to students immediately following their successful completion of the general curriculum but before they meet the experience requirements of § 65.77.

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition

in the Federal Register . The requested extension of the exemption would not set a precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Aviation Institute.

Our Decision

The FAA has determ ined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 8844, as amended, remains valid with respect to this exemption and is in the public interest.2

Therefore, under the authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has delegated to me, I grant your petition.

The Effect of Our Decision

Our decision extends the term ination date of Exemption No. 8844, as amended, to February 28, 2013, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

All conditions and limitations of Exemption No. 8844 remain the same. This letter must be attached to, and is a part of, Exemption No. 8844.

Sincerely,

/s/

John W. McGraw Acting Director, Flight Standards

Service
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION IX

75 Hawthorne Street

San Francisco, CA 94105-3901

Mr. Richard W. Corey

Deputy Executive Officer

California Air Resources Board

Post Office Box 2815

Sacramento, California 95812

Dear Mr. Corey:

JUN 072012

On April 25, 2012, the California Air Resources Board submitted revisions to the California State

Implementation Plan. We have reviewed materials submitted with the following rules and found that

they fulfill the completeness criteria in 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 51, Appendix V.

APCD/AQMD Rule # Rule Title

Butte County 207 Wood Burning Devices

Eastern Kern 201.2 Synthetic Minor Source

Eastern Kern 201.3 Federal Enforceable Limits on Potential

to Emit

Eastern Kern 210.4 Prevention of Significant Deterioration

(PSD)

Placer County 102 Definitions

This addresses all revisions in this submittal. In the coming months we will review the complete

revisions for action pursuant to Clean Air Act section 110(k).

Questions regarding our completeness review should be directed to Cynthia G. Allen at (415) 947-4120.

cc: Mr. W. James Wagoner, APCO

Butte County AQMD

Mr. David L. Jones, APCO

Eastern Kern APCD

Sincerely,

ST.

4L

Printed on Recycled Paper
Exhibit 24.3**POWER OF ATTORNEY**     WHEREAS, CENTRAL ILLINOIS PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY, an Illinois corporation (hereinreferred to as the “Company”), is required to file with the Securities and Exchange Commission,under the provisions of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, its annual report on Form10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006; and     WHEREAS, each of the below undersigned is a director of the Company.     NOW, THEREFORE, each of the undersigned hereby constitutes and appoints Gary L. Rainwaterand/or Scott A. Cisel and/or Warner L. Baxter and/or Steven R. Sullivan and/or Martin J. Lyonsand/or Jerre E. Birdsong the true and lawful attorneys-in-fact of the undersigned, for and in thename, place and stead of the undersigned, to affix the name of the undersigned to said Form 10-Kand any amendments thereto, and, for the performance of the same acts, each with power to appointin their place and stead and as their substitute, one or more attorneys-in-fact for theundersigned, with full power of revocation; hereby ratifying and confirming all that saidattorneys-in-fact may do by virtue hereof.     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have hereunto set their hands this 9th day of February2007:     Daniel F. Cole, Director      /s/ Daniel F. Cole        Gary L. Rainwater, Director      /s/ G. L. Rainwater        Steven R. Sullivan, Director      /s/ Steven R. Sullivan        Thomas R. Voss, Director      /s/ Thomas A. Voss        STATE OF MISSOURI )    ) SS.  CITY OF ST. LOUIS )       On this 9th day of February, 2007, before me, the undersigned Notary Public in and for saidState, personally appeared the above-named directors of Central Illinois Public Service Company,known to me to be the persons described in and who executed the foregoing power of attorney andacknowledged to me that they executed the same as their free act and deed for the purposes thereinstated.     IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal.       /s/ Debby Anzalone     Debby Anzalone    Notary Public- Notary Seal    STATE OF MISSOURI- ST. LOUIS COUNTY    Commission #06435722    My Commission Expires 05/04/2010
**Exhibit23.8**

 

 

February 22, 2010

 

Nexen Inc.

801-7th Avenue S.W.

Calgary, Alberta  T2P 3P7

 

Boardof Directors:

 

Wehereby consent to references to McDaniel & Associates Consultants Ltd.contained in the section entitled “Basis of Reserves Estimates” within “Reserves,Production and Related Information” as set out in Part I, Items 1&2Business and Properties of the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the yearended December 31, 2009, of Nexen Inc. (the Form 10-K)and to the use of our two Report of Third Party letter reports dated February 8,2010, concerning our evaluation of certain Canadian oil and gas propertiesowned by Nexen Inc. and our audit of Nexen Inc.’s Syncrude propertyownership which are included as exhibits in the Form 10-K.

 
| Sincerely,                                          |   |
|-----------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                                |   |
| **McDaniel & Associates Consultants Ltd.** |   |
|                                                |   |
|                                                |   |
| /s/ P. A. Welch                                     |   |
|                                                |   |
| P. A. Welch, P. Eng.                                |   |

 

 

2200, Bow Valley Square 3, 255 - 5 Avenue SW, Calgary AB  T2P 3G6 Tel: (403) 262-5506  Fax: (403)233-2744  www.mcdan.com

 

----
# Connecticut_county_differential
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND> This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from 
the consolidated statement of financial position of Terra Nitrogen Company, L.P.
as of June 30, 1998 and the related consolidated statement of income for the six
months then ended and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements. 
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                            JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                              JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                         44,329
<SECURITIES>                                        0         
<RECEIVABLES>                                   3,097
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                    24,886
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               73,842 
<PP&E>                                        281,355
<DEPRECIATION>                              (112,451)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                257,925
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          27,350
<BONDS>                                         8,588
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                            0
<OTHER-SE>                                    215,665<F1>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  257,925
<SALES>                                       149,021 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              149,747
<CGS>                                         109,925         
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 109,925 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              1,225
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                33,967
<INCOME-TAX>                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            33,967
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0 
<NET-INCOME>                                   33,967
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    1.40
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       0
<FN>

<F1> Due to the nature of the partnership, this represents partners capital.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>