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

House Calendar No. 78 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 546 

[Report No. 114–360] 

Providing for consideration of the conference report to accompany the bill 

(H.R. 22) to authorize funds for Federal-aid highways, highway safety 

programs, and transit programs, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 2, 2015 

Mr. WOODALL, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for consideration of the conference report to accompany the bill (H.R. 22) to authorize funds for Federal-aid highways, highway safety programs, and transit 

programs, and for other purposes. 

1 Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it 

2 shall be in order to consider the conference report to ac3 company the bill (H.R. 22) to authorize funds for Federal4 aid highways, highway safety programs, and transit pro5 grams, and for other purposes. All points of order against 

6 the conference report and against its consideration are 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 546 RH 

1 waived. The conference report shall be considered as read. 

2 The previous question shall be considered as ordered on 

3 the conference report to its adoption without intervening 

4 motion except: (1) one hour of debate; and (2) one motion 

5 to recommit if applicable. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
House Calendar No. 78 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 546 

[Report No. 114–360] 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for consideration of the conference report 

purposes. programs, and transit programs, and for other funds for Federal-aid highways, highway safety to accompany the bill (H.R. 22) to authorize 

DECEMBER 2, 2015 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### Azabu Buildings Co., Ltd. v. Fordham University

20551

8/31/98

Affirmed in part, Reversed in part, Vacated & Remanded in part
# C_2021422EN.01001001.xml

| 18.10.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 422/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.10.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 422/10

---

Judgment of the General Court of 8 September 2021 — Naturgy Energy Group v Commission

(Case T-328/18) (1)

(State aid - Environmental incentive adopted by Spain in favour of coal-fired power plants - Decision to initiate the procedure laid down by Article 108(2) TFEU - Obligation to state reasons - Manifest error of assessment - Selective nature)

(2021/C 422/13)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Naturgy Energy Group, SA, formerly Gas Natural SDG, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: F. González Díaz and J. Blanco Carol, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Němečková and D. Recchia, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the applicant: EDP España, SA (Oviedo, Spain) (represented by: J. Buendía Sierra and A. Lamadrid de Pablo, lawyers), Viesgo Producción, SL, successor in title to Viesgo Generación, SL (Santander, Spain) (represented by: F. Plasencia Sánchez, L. Ques Mena and L. de Pedro Martín, lawyers)

Re:

APPLICATION under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2017) 7733 final of 27 November 2017, concerning State Aid SA.47912 (2017/NN) — Environmental incentive adopted by Spain in favour of coal-fired power plants, initiating the formal investigation procedure laid down by Article 108(2) TFEU.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Naturgy Energy Group, SA to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Naturgy Energy Group, SA to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;

| 3. | Orders Viesgo Producción, SL and EDP España, SA to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders Viesgo Producción, SL and EDP España, SA to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 268, 30.7.2018.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 517 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
H. Res. 517

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                      November 5, 2015.
    Resolved, That the following named Members be, and are hereby, elected to 
the following standing committee of the House of Representatives:
     Committee on Ways and Means: Mr. Brady of Texas, Chair, and Mr. Rice of 
South Carolina.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
#### The State, ex rel. Morgan, *v.*Board of Trustees of and The Ohio State Archaeological & Historical Society.

(No. 31727

Decided October 26, 1949.)

*196
      *Mr. Franh G.*Shearer, for relator.

*Mr. Herbert S. Duffy,*attorney general, and *Mr. Joseph P. Kiimeary,*for respondents.

By the Court.

Counsel for relator contends that the relator is an employee with a contractual relationship existing between him and the respondents acting as an agency of the state, the duties of which agency are prescribed by statute, and that the performance of those duties may be compelled by mandamus.

Certain sections of the General Code are pleaded in the petition as designating the respondent society as an agency of the state. Those sections relate only either to personnel of the board of trustees or to the *197duties of the society as custodian of memorial and historical properties.

Blackstone’s Commentaries, Book III, Chapter 7, page 110, defines mandamus as follows:

> “A writ of *mandamus*is, in general, a command issuing in the king’s name from the court of king’s bench, and directed to any person, corporation, or inferior court of judicature within the king’s dominions, requiring them to do some *particular*thing therein specified, which appertains to their office and duty, and which .the court of king’s bench has previously determined, or at least supposes, to be consonant to right and justice.”

That common-law definition was the genesis of Section 14 of the Act of March 9,1835 (33 Ohio Laws, 57), and Section 12283, General Code, which now defines mandamus as “a writ issued, in the name of the state, to * * * a corporation, board, or person, commanding the performance of an act which the law specially enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station.”

Counsel for relator has cited no provision of the Constitution or statute of this state specially enjoining upon the respondents the duty to employ the relator under either written or oral contract, to retain him in employment, to furnish him with reasons for removal and grant him a hearing thereon, or to reinstate and compensate him after his discharge.

The demurrer to the petition is sustained and a writ of mandamus is denied.

*Writ denied.*

Weygandt, C. J., Matthias, Hart, Zimmerman, Stewart, Turner and Taet, JJ., concur.
February 28, 2005

26247

#### State v. Johnson

Affirmed
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit 

___________________________

No. 20-1896

___________________________

 

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Ambrose Rayshawn Spires, also known as Ambrose Spries

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Southern District of Iowa - Eastern

____________

Submitted: November 19, 2020

Filed: November 24, 2020

[Unpublished]

____________

 

Before ERICKSON, WOLLMAN, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.

____________

 

PER CURIAM.

After considering a number of factors, the district court1 reduced Ambrose 

Spires’s life sentence to 360 months in prison under the First Step Act. See Pub. L. 

1

The Honorable John A. Jarvey, Chief Judge, United States District Court for 

the Southern District of Iowa.
-2- 

No. 115-391, 132 Stat. 5194 (2018). Though he challenges the decision on a host of 

grounds, we affirm.

We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion when it declined

to reduce Spires’s sentence even further, see United States v. Harris, 960 F.3d 1103, 

1106 (8th Cir. 2020) (articulating the standard of review), or when it denied his

motion for reconsideration, see United States v. King, 854 F.3d 433, 443 (8th Cir. 

2017) (same). Nor is a motion like this one the proper way to open a collateral attack 

on his original sentence. See United States v. Moore, 963 F.3d 725, 728 (8th Cir. 

2020) (explaining how motions under the First Step Act are different from “original, 

plenary sentencing” proceedings); see also United States v. Denson, 963 F.3d 1080, 

1089 (11th Cir. 2020) (refusing to entertain this type of attack). 

We accordingly affirm the judgment of the district court and grant counsel 

permission to withdraw.

______________________________
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 230 (Friday, December 1, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 84034]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-26419]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 12275]


Notice of Determinations; Culturally Significant Object Being 
Imported for Exhibition--Determinations: ``Bethlehem Reborn: The 
Wonders of the Church of the Nativity'' Exhibition

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: I 
hereby determine that a certain object being imported from abroad 
pursuant to an agreement with its foreign owner or custodian for 
temporary display in the exhibition ``Bethlehem Reborn: The Wonders of 
the Church of the Nativity'' at the Museum of the Bible, Washington, 
District of Columbia, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues 
yet to be determined, is of cultural significance, and, further, that 
its temporary exhibition or display within the United States as 
aforementioned is in the national interest. I have ordered that Public 
Notice of these determinations be published in the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Reed Liriano, Program Coordinator, 
Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-
632-6471; email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#a5d6c0c6d1cccacb9791909ce5d6d1c4d1c08bc2cad3"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="ccbfa9afb8a5a3a2fef8f9f58cbfb8adb8a9e2aba3ba">[email protected]</span></a>). The mailing address is U.S. 
Department of State, L/PD, 2200 C Street NW (SA-5), Suite 5H03, 
Washington, DC 20522-0505.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The foregoing determinations were made 
pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 
1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 
Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 
of August 28, 2000, and Delegation of Authority No. 523 of December 22, 
2021.

Nicole L. Elkon,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Professional and Cultural Exchanges, 
Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2023-26419 Filed 11-30-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2


                          CONSENT OF BDO SEIDMAN, LLP,
                    INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



The Board of Directors
MicroTel International, Inc.

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements (Nos. 333-74281, 333-71035, 333-69571, 333-12567 and 333-65528) on
Form S-8 of our report dated February 25, 2002, relating to the consolidated
financial statements and financial statement schedules of MicroTel
International, Inc. appearing in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2002.

/S/ BDO SEIDMAN, LLP
BDO SEIDMAN, LLP

Costa Mesa, California
March 31, 2003
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

___________________________

No. 02-23-00063-CV

___________________________

On Appeal from the 360th District Court

Tarrant County, Texas

Trial Court No. 360-696318-21

Before Womack, Wallach, and Walker, JJ.

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

IN THE INTEREST OF B.M., A CHILD
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT

We have considered the parties’ “Rule 42.1(a)(2) Joint Motion to Dismiss 

Appeal and Remand to Trial Court for Entry of Agreed Final Judgment.” It is the 

court’s opinion that the motion should be granted; therefore, we set aside the trial 

court’s judgment without regard to the merits and remand this case to the trial court 

to render judgment in accordance with the parties’ agreement.1 See Tex. R. App. P. 

42.1(a)(2)(B); Innovative Off. Sys., Inc. v. Johnson, 911 S.W.2d 387, 388 (Tex. 1995)

(order).

Each party must bear its own costs of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(d), 43.4.

Per Curiam

Delivered: June 22, 2023

1Although the phrase “Joint Motion to Dismiss” appears in the title of the 

motion, the parties do not actually request that we dismiss this appeal—and

understandably so, because “we cannot both set aside the trial court’s judgment and 

dismiss [an] appeal.” Lone Tree Res. & Consulting, Inc. v. Persepolis, Inc., No. 02-21-

00246-CV, 2021 WL 6143641, at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Dec. 30, 2021, no pet.) 

(per curiam) (mem. op.).
20939

#### State v. Vergara

Affirmed
##### 



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2005 of
Belden & Blake Corporation;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this 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
report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)), for the registrant and have:
    5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
   Date:
November 18, 2005
    
    By:
    
    /s/ James M. VanderhiderJames M. Vanderhider, President and Chief
Financial Officer
# C_2019016EN.01002602.xml

| 14.1.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 16/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 16/26

---

Appeal brought on 3 May 2018 by UF against the order of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) delivered on 7 March 2018 in Case T-422/17 UF v European Parliament and Council of the European Union

(Case C-300/18 P)

(2019/C 16/33)

Language of the case: Lithuanian

Parties

Appellant: UF (represented by: L. Gudaitė, advokatė)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Parliament and Council of the European Union

By order of 11 October 2018 the Court of Justice (Tenth Chamber) decided that the appeal was manifestly unfounded.

---
#### Theodore HAYES; Aqeela Fogle, Appellants v. Philip E. HARVEY

No. 16-2692

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

Dated: December 29, 2017

*447Michael Donahue, Esq., Rachel Garland, Esq., George D. Gould, Esq., Community Legal Services, Philadelphia, PA, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.

Susanna Randazzo, Esq., Kolber & Ran-dazzo, Philadelphia, PA, for Defendant-Appellee.

Present: SMITH, Chief Judge, McKEE, AMBRO, CHAGARES, JORDAN HARDIMAN, GREENAWAY, JR., VANASKIE, SHWARTZ, KRAUSE, RESTREPO, BIBAS, and FISHER *, Circuit Judges

*

 Will participate as a member of the en banc court pursuant to 3d Cir. I.O,P. 9.6.4.

ORDER SUR PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC '

D. Brooks Smith, Chief Judge

A'majority of the active judges having voted for rehearing en banc in the above captioned case, it is ordered that the petition for rehearing is GRANTED. The Clerk of this Court shall list the case for rehearing en banc at the convenience of the Court. The opinion and judgment entered October 18, 2017 are hereby vacated.
EXHIBIT 23


INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

Magnum Hunter Resources, Inc.

     We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
333-45552,  333-82552,  and 333-84650 on Form S-3 and Registration Statement No.
333-76774 on Form S-4 of Magnum Hunter Resources, Inc. of our report dated March
22,  2002,  appearing  in this  Annual  Report  on Form  10-K of  Magnum  Hunter
Resources, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2001.


/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Dallas, Texas
April 12, 2002
##### 



Exhibit 21.01  Subsidiaries of the Registrant
 
  State (or
    
    Percentagejurisdiction) in
    
    Ownership byName
    
    which Incorporated
    
    RegistrantCommuniTech.Net, Inc.
    
    Missouri
    
    
    100
    %HostPro, Inc. (f/k/a Micron PC Web Services, Inc.)
    
    Delaware
    
    
    100
    %Wazoo Web, Inc.
    
    Georgia
    
    
    100
    %MEI California, Inc.
    
    California
    
    
    100
    %Micron Electronics (H.K.) Limited
    
    Hong Kong
    
    
    100
    %Micron Electronics Overseas Trading, Inc.
    
    Barbados
    
    
    100
    %Micron Electronics International, Inc.
    
    Delaware
    
    
    100
    %Micron Electronics Asia-Pacific Holdings, Inc.
    
    B.V.I.
    
    
    100
    %Micron Electronics Asia-Pacific Operations, Inc.
    
    B.V.I.
    
    
    100
    %Micron Electronics Asia-Pacific Trading, Ltd.
    
    Hong Kong
    
    
    100
    %Interland Government Contracting, Inc. (f/k/a Hostcentric, Inc.)
    
    Delaware
    
    
    100
    %Perfect Privacy, LLC
    
    Connecticut
    
    
    100
    %Web Astro GP, Inc.
    
    Delaware
    
    
    100
    %Web Astro LP, Inc.
    
    Delaware
    
    
    100
    %WebSource Media, L.P.
    
    Delaware
    
    
    100
    %WDC Holdco, Inc.
    
    Delaware
    
    
    100
    %Trellix Corporation
    
    Delaware
    
    
    100
    %
 E-12
```

[Federal Register: March 26, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 58)]
[Notices]               
[Page 14577]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr26mr10-38]                         

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

 
Sunshine Act Meetings

Time and Date: Wednesday, March 31, 2010; 2 p.m.-5 p.m.

Place: Hearing Room 420, Bethesda Towers, 4330 East West Highway, 
Bethesda, Maryland.

Status: Commission Meeting--Closed to the Public.

Matter to be Considered: 

Compliance Weekly Report--Commission Briefing

    The staff will brief the Commission on the status of various 
compliance matters.
    For a recorded message containing the latest agenda information, 
call (301) 504-7948.

Contact Person for More Information: Todd A. Stevenson, Office of the 
Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West 
Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, (301) 504-7923.

    Dated: March 24, 2010.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-6939 Filed 3-24-10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
```
**Exhibit 21.1****Subsidiaries**Listed below are all the subsidiaries of Home Solutions of America, Inc., as well as thejurisdiction under the laws of which each was organized, and the percentage of the outstandingvoting stock of each owned by Home Solutions of America, Inc. as of December 31, 2006.         State or  Percentage of jurisdiction of                              Name voting stock owned OrganizationCornerstone Marble & Granite, Inc. 100% FloridaFiber-Seal Systems, L.P. 100% TexasFireline Restoration, Inc. 100% FloridaHome Solutions Restoration of Louisiana, Inc. 100% LouisianaP.W. Stephens, Inc. 100% CaliforniaSouthern Exposure Unlimited of Florida, Inc. 100% FloridaS.E. Tops of Florida, Inc. 100% FloridaSouthernStone Cabinets, Inc. 50% FloridaFSS Holdings Corp. 100% TexasSouthern Exposure Holdings, Inc. 100% Florida
:H:ON'D.A 


March 19,2009 

Amerloan Honda Motor Co., Ino. 

1919 Torrance Boulevard 

Torrance, CA 90501-2746 

Phone (310) 783-2000 

The Honorable Ray LaHood 

Secretary 

United States Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Dear Secretary LaHood: 

On behalf of American Honda Motor Co., Inc, I am writing to express our strong 

support for the application of Delta Air Lines for new nonstop service between 

Detroit and Haneda_ 

Approval of Delta's new service would be a major benefit for our region, where 

our corporation has a strong trade and market connection with Japan. With daily 

service between Columbus Ohio and Detroit Metro Airport, our business could 

benefit from efficient connections to Tokyo's Haneda airport. Our travelers would 

benefit from the convenience of flying into Tokyo's downtown Haneda airport. 

Detroit is a proven and successful gateway to Asia, and is an airport that can 

support trans-pacific routes. This summer, Delta is adding new service to Seoul 

and Hong Kong, fulfilling the commitment Delta made to DTW to make it the 

airline's gateway to Asia. The addition of Haneda as a destination is a natural fit 

that would clearly benefit our business travelers. 

Thank you for consideration of this reque
EXHIBIT 32.1



GENAERA CORPORATION



CERTIFICATION OF

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Genaera Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2004 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Roy C. Levitt, M.D., President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/ Roy C. Levitt                    
|Roy C. Levitt, M.D.                  
|President and Chief Executive Officer
|May 10, 2004