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

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 654 

Recognizing and supporting the goals of ‘‘World Sleep Day’’, on March 

18, 2016. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 21, 2016 

Mr. HANNA submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 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 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing and supporting the goals of ‘‘World Sleep Day’’, 

on March 18, 2016. 

Whereas it is estimated that one-third of all adults suffer 

from clinically recognized insomnia, and 80 other sleep 

disorders; 

Whereas it is estimated up to 45 percent of the world’s population suffers from some type of sleep alteration; 

Whereas an estimated 50,000,000 to 70,000,000 people in 

the United States chronically suffer from a disorder of 

sleep and wakefulness, hindering daily functioning and 

adversely affecting health and longevity; 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 654 IH 

Whereas the cumulative long-term effects of sleep loss and 

sleep disorders have been associated with a wide range of 

deleterious health consequences including an increased 

risk of hypertension, diabetes, obesity, depression, heart 

attack, and stroke; 

Whereas ‘‘World Sleep Day’’ is an annual event organized by 

the World Sleep Day Committee of the World Sleep Society; 

Whereas ‘‘World Sleep Day’’ celebrates the benefits of good 

and healthy sleep and to draw society’s attention to the 

burden of sleep problems and their clinical, education, research and social aspects, to promote sleep disorders’ prevention and management; and 

Whereas in 2016, the theme for ‘‘World Sleep Day’’ is ‘‘Good 

Sleep is a Reachable Dream’’ and is intended to celebrate 

a large diversity of activities surrounding the message 

that sleep maladies can be ameliorated, but recognition 

must come first: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) supports the goals and ideals of ‘‘World 

3 Sleep Day’’ to raise awareness of sleep disorders and 

4 their better understanding and preventability, and to 

5 reduce the burden of sleep problems on society that 

6 constitute a global epidemic and threaten health and 

7 quality of life for as much as 45 percent of the 

8 world’s population; 

9 (2) applauds the goals and approaches of the 

10 World Sleep Society to advance sleep health world11 wide by promoting and encouraging education, reVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:14 Mar 22, 2016 Jkt 059200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\HR654.IH HR654

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HRES 654 IH 

1 search, and patient care throughout the World, par2 ticularly in those parts of the world where the prac3 tice of sleep medicine is less developed; and 

4 (3) encourages members of the international 

5 community to promote the advancement of sleep 

6 health worldwide. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
# •.- ..... ,

# - .. STATE OF CONNECTIClJ'f DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

STATE OF CONNECTICUT AND NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY COMPANY ) ) ) ) ) ) 

### TR.:..DING AGREEMENT AND ORDER NO. 8151 MODIFICATION



## ., " .TRADING AGREEMENT AND ORDER MODIFICAIrON In the maner ofa Trnding Agreement and Order between the Commissioner ofEnvironmental Protection ("Commissioner") and Nonhensl Nuclear Energy Company ("NNECO"). WHEREAS, the Commissioner and NNECO, having agreed to the terms and conditions set forth in Trading Agreement and Order No. 8152 issued on July 9, 1998, do now, by mutual agreement, modify said Trading Agreement and Order as follows: 1. Change paragraph C.2. to read as follows: NNECO shall complete approved stack testing on the generators 

### by January 31, 1999. All other terms and conditions ofTrading Agreement and Order No. 8J 52 issued 

### by the Commissioner acting under Chapter 446c, Sections 22a-6, 22a-171, 22a-174,**22a~176,** 22a-l77 and 22a-!78 ofthe Conneclicut General $l<.:tutes shall remain in effect. The Northeast Nuclear Energy Company hereby consents to the entl')' ofthis modification to the Trading Agreement and Order without funher notice.
Signature: 

### •

### NOnh.asl~~**E~** compan\
Type Name: 

### PbjJip M Sma]], 

### Its 

### Attorney

Entered as a modification ofan Order ofthe Commissioner 0



# 6.1;1;.. day 0[1:\..
.... 1998.



### CITY OF WATERFORD LAND RECORDS MAILED CERTIFIED MAIL.

RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Certified Document No. Type Title: Assi 

### stant Genera] Counsel Northeast Utilities Service Company Dale: December 30 J 998 

## , mbered 8152 this

(Plinled on Recycled Pape:) 79 EICl Street •**Harl!OI~.** 

## cr 06106·5127 1111p;Jld**~p** .$tatc.Cl.ln An £quel OppOrlUnily E,.,plc.vcr
# C_2019213EN.01008303.xml

| 24.6.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 213/83 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.6.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 213/83

---

Order of the General Court of 30 April 2019 — XM and Others v Commission

(Case T-546/18) (1)

(2019/C 213/81)

Language of the case: French

The President of the Eighth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 399, 5.11.2018.

---
IV 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 342 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the 

enhancement of unity in America. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 25, 2015 

Ms. JACKSON LEE (for herself, Mr. LEWIS, Mr. PALLONE, Mr. RUSH, Ms. 

KAPTUR, Mr. CONYERS, Mr. COHEN, Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia, Ms. SEWELL of Alabama, and Mr. VEASEY) submitted the following resolution; 

which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives 

regarding the enhancement of unity in America. 

Whereas, on June 18, 2015, the United States Supreme 

Court correctly concluded in Walker III v. Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans, Inc. (No. 14–144) 

that messages on State license plates constitute ‘‘government speech’’, not private speech protected by the First 

Amendment; 

Whereas the Court also held that it is within the authority 

of a State such as Texas to reject messages on Stateissued license plates, such as a depiction of the Confederate battle flag, that offend the sensibilities of its citizens; 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 342 IH 

Whereas divisive symbols, license plates, specialty license 

plates, replicas, and flags on public buildings or government property, which constitute ‘‘government speech’’, 

convey the vestiges of the history of slavery that has divided the United States; 

Whereas the role of government is to promote equal protection under the Constitution and combat fear, oppression, 

and intimidation; 

Whereas these divisive symbols have historically targeted and 

perpetuated fear, oppression, and intimidation of certain 

groups of Americans; 

Whereas the continued existence of these divisive symbols as 

‘‘government speech’’ is also a denial of equal protection 

under the law; 

Whereas the United States can only be a perfect union where 

all are and feel equally protected under the law; and 

Whereas equal protection under the law promotes a more perfect union, fairness, tolerance, peace, and a sense of community oneness, all unalienable rights enshrined in the 

Constitution: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep2 resentatives that the United States can achieve a more 

3 perfect union— 

4 (1) through avoidance of ‘‘government speech’’, 

5 as the State of Texas did in Walker III v. Texas Di6 vision, Sons of Confederate Veterans, Inc., which 

7 promotes or displays symbols, signs, and vestiges of 

8 racism, oppression, and intimidation in the States, 

9 localities, and territories; 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HRES 342 IH 

1 (2) by immediately abating the use of ‘‘govern2 ment speech’’ through signs, actions, and words that 

3 promote division and tear at the fabric of the Amer4 ican society; and 

5 (3) by promoting tolerance and unity by taking 

6 actions to ensure that ‘‘government speech’’ does not 

7 foster division, disharmony, intolerance through gov8 ernment-issued or sponsored flags, signs, images, or 

9 other symbols whether displayed in public or private. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### In the Matter of the Construction of the Will of Ella B. Davis, Deceased.

Surrogate’s Court, New York County,

January 22, 1959.

*James A. McKaigney*for Dorothy Tierney, as executrix, petitioner.

*Marie C. Connolly,*as special guardian for Bichard C. Finnegan, an infant, respondent.

Joseph A. Cox, S.

The decedent herein under paragraph Sixth of his will bequeathed two thirteenths of 90% of her residuary estate to her infant grandnephew Bichard Finnegan by the following provisions of her will:

> “Sixth: * * *

> “ (b) with respect to the remaining 90% of my said residuary estate, I direct my Executrix hereinafter named to divide the same into thirteen equal parts and I give, devise and bequeath the same as follows:

> # * *

> “ (iv) Two (2) such equal parts to my grandnephew, biohabd 6. FIUHEGAN.

> *3
>       *“*If any of the above named residuary legatees and devisees under this subparagraph (b) hereof shall predecease me, I direct that the share, part or portion to which such legatee and devisee, so dying, would have been entitled shall be divided pro-rata among the surviving legatees and devisees.”

Paragraph Seventh of decedent’s will which is the subject of this construction proceeding reads as follows:

> “ Seventh: If my grandnephew, richard g. einnegan, shall be a minor at the time his share of my estate shall become payable in final distribution, such share shall be held by my Executrix for him, and my Executrix is authorized in her sole discretion to pay, apply or accumulate the net income or to pay or apply the principal for his benefit, paying income accumulations, if any, to him upon attaining the age of twenty one years together with the then principal of his share, and my Executrix shall have the same management powers and duties with respect to any such share as those which are hereinafter granted to my said Executrix.”

It is apparent and this court holds that it was the intention of the testatrix to make an absolute gift to her grandnephew which vested in him at the time of her death and to create a power in trust in the executrix for the management and control of the fund during the infant’s minority. *(Matter of Kellog,*187 N. Y. 355; *Matter of Babbage,*201 Misc. 750; *Downing*v. *Marshall,*23 N. Y. 366; Beal Property Law, § 131.) As the will provides that the executrix file no bond, a certificate will issue to the said executrix as donee of a power in trust without bond.

Submit decree construing the will accordingly.
Order entered April 1, 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas** No. 05 - 12 - 01659 - CV EST ATE OF CLOYD D. YOUN G, DECEASED On Appeal from the Probate Court No. 1 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. Pr - 09 - 02344 - 1 

### O RDER The C ourt has before it appellant Vivian Young’s March 28, 2013 unopposed second motion to extend time to file brief. The Court GRANTS the motion and ORDERS appellant to file her brief by May 9, 2013
. No further extensions will be granted absent a showing of exceptional circumstances.
/s/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS JUSTICE
United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 19, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

In the

United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

_______________

No. 03-10625

Summary Calendar

_______________

OLUMUYIWA AYODEJI ADELEKE,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

VERSUS

BANK OF AMERICA,

Defendant-Appellee.

_________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

m 3:02-CV-319-L

_________________________

Before SMITH, DEMOSS and

STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

*

Olumuyiwa Adeleke sued his former employer, claiming violations of title VII. In a

careful, detailed, and comprehensive order

signed on May 30, 2002, and entered on

June 3, 2003, the district court granted summary judgment to the bank. Adeleke appeals

pro se.

We affirm, essentially for the reasons given

by the district court. This was an ordinary

workplace dispute, and Adeleke was terminated for wellestablished and documented reasons. As the district court demonstrated, there

is no showing that any employment statute

was violated.

AFFIRMED.

*

Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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 CIR. R. 47.5.4.
Cleveland Office 26180 Curtiss Wright Parkway Cleveland, Ohio 44143

February 21, 2017

US Department of Transportation Docket Management Facility West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, D.C. 20590

Subject: Petition for Exemption Extens ion-14 CFR 91.203(a) & (b) and 47.49

RE: Docket FAA-2015-1818 and Exemption 12476, Expiration 08/31/2017

Greetings,

Flexjet, Air Carrier Operating Certificat e J7SA150H, represented by Rachel Anesi, ranesi@flightoptions.com , Director of Quality Systems, 26180 Curtiss-Wright Parkway, Cleveland,
OH 44143 petitions for an extension of Exemption Number 12476

.
Granting of this exemption extension would cont inue to provide relief for Flexjet from the requirement of 14 CFR 91.203(a) & (b) and 47.49 to the extent necessary to permit temporary operation of our U.S. registered aircraft in do mestic operations without the registration and/or
airworthiness certific ates on board. Exemption 12476 was issued to Flexjet on August 13, 2015 and will expire on August 31, 2017, unless superseded or amended.

In weighing the decision to grant this exemption ex tension to Flexjet, I respectfully request parallel consideration equal to those CF R Part 121 and 135 operators who ar e exempt from this regulation and have received an extension, given our ability to sustain the same equivalent level of safety. Extending Exemption 12476 does not adversely affect safety and is in the public interest, which warranted the original issuance of the exemption.

The conditions and limitation memorialized in Exemption 12476 will continue status quo to assure; (1) administrative procedural controls remain in effect and (2) the airworthiness status and operational control remain unchanged.

Exemption 12476 has been in use for almost two year s; safety has not been compromised from the regulatory exemption and the absence of any unfa vorable feedback from government agencies or aircraft owners demonstrates that the public intere st has not been negatively impacted. If granted this extension, we will continue to sustain the equivalent level of safety every day.

Respectfully, 

## Rachel Anesi

Rachel Anesi Flexjet Director of Quality Systems/Agent for Service
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

SCOTT ALLISON DAMASIEWICZ

,

Petitioner

,

v. Case No. 5D 16

- 2848

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Respondent

.
________________________________/

Opinion filed September 9 , 2016

Petition for Belated Appeal A Case of Original Jurisdiction.

Jonathan Meltz, of The Meltz Law Firm, Miami, for Petitioner

.

No Appearance for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for belated appeal is granted. A copy of this opinion shall be filed with

the trial court and be treated as the notice of appeal from the April 18, 2016

, judgment

and sentence in C ase N o. 2012

- CF

- 001406

- E

- 03 , in the Circuit Court in and for Lake

County, Florida. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(c)( 6 )(D).

PETITION GRANTED

.

EDWARDS, TORPY and BERGER

, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit 31.1**
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Vinod Gupta, certify that:
1.     I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of *info*USA Inc.;
2.     Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement ofa material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
3.     Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4.     The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
a)     designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;
b)     evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and
c)     Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recentfiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annualreport) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
5.     The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
a)     all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and
b)     any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.
Date: August 13, 2003     /s/ Vinod Gupta
# C_2019230EN.01003501.xml

| 8.7.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 230/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.7.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 230/35

---

Judgment of the General Court of 14 May 2019 — Zweirad-Center Stadler v EUIPO — Triumph Designs (Triumph)

(Case T-12/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark Triumph - Earlier EU word mark TRIUMPH - Partial rejection of the application for registration - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Identical signs - Enhanced distinctiveness of the earlier mark acquired through use - Similarity between products - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2019/C 230/43)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Zweirad-Center Stadler GmbH (Regensburg, Germany) (initially represented by: P. Ruess and A. Doepner-Thiele, subsequently by P. Ruess, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Walicka and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Triumph Designs Ltd (Swadlincote, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Malynicz QC)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 November 2017 (Case R 665/2017-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Triumph Designs and Zweirad-Center Stadler.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Zweirad-Center Stadler GmbH to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO); |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Zweirad-Center Stadler GmbH to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO);

| 3. | Orders Triumph Designs Ltd to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders Triumph Designs Ltd to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 72, 26.2.2018.

---
<PAGE>


                                                                   EXHIBIT 24.01

                                POWER OF ATTORNEY

        KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS that each individual whose signature
appears below constitutes and appoints Joel J. Kocher, David A. Buckel and Allen
Shulman, and each of them, his lawful attorneys-in-fact and agents, with full
power of substitution, for him and in his name, place and stead, in any and all
capacities, to sign any and all amendments to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of
Interland, Inc. for the fiscal year ended August 31, 2001 and to file the same,
with all exhibits thereto and all documents in connection therewith, with the
Securities and Exchange Commission, granted unto said attorneys-in-fact and
agents, and each of them, full power and authority to do and perform each and
every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in and about the
premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as he might or could do in
person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that said attorneys-in-fact and
agents or any of them, or his or their substitute or substitutes, may lawfully
do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Signature                                        Title                                                 Date
---------                                        -----                                                 ----
<S>                                              <C>                                                   <C>
            /s/ Joel J. Kocher                   Chairman of the Board, President, and                 December 20, 2001
------------------------------------------       Chief Executive Officer
              Joel J. Kocher                     (Principal Executive Officer)


           /s/ David A. Buckel                   Senior Vice President and Chief Financial             December 20, 2001
------------------------------------------       Officer (Principal Financial and
              David A. Buckel                    Accounting Officer)


          /s/ Kenneth Gavranovic                 Vice-Chairman of the Board                            December 20, 2001
------------------------------------------
            Kenneth Gavranovic


         /s/ Gregg A. Mockenhaupt                Director                                              December 31, 2001
------------------------------------------
           Gregg A. Mockenhaupt


           /s/ John B. Balousek                  Director                                              December 20, 2001
------------------------------------------
             John B. Balousek


              /s/ Robert Lee                     Director                                              December 20, 2001
------------------------------------------
                Robert Lee


           /s/ Robert T. Slezak                  Director                                              December 20, 2001
------------------------------------------
             Robert T. Slezak
</TABLE>