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

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 118 (Friday, August 3, 2012)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1398-E1399]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

   TRIBUTE TO DR. ED BRIDGES, DIRECTOR OF THE ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF 
                          ARCHIVES AND HISTORY

                                 ______
                                 

                             HON. JO BONNER

                               of alabama

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, August 2, 2012

  Mr. BONNER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor Dr. Ed C. Bridges, longtime 
Director of the Alabama Department of Archives and History, which is 
the oldest state archives agency in the United States. After 30 years 
of service in this position, Dr. Bridges will be retiring at the end of 
the current fiscal year.
   Dr. Bridges is a graduate of Furman University, where he achieved 
both the Woodrow Wilson and Danforth Fellowships. He went on to receive 
his Masters and Doctorate in History from the University of Chicago. 
This fervent pursuit of knowledge eventually translated into a lifelong 
career.
   Before holding his current position as Director, Dr. Bridges wore 
many hats in the academic world; including, teaching at the high school 
level in South Carolina, teaching at the

[[Page E1399]]

collegiate level at the Georgia Institute of Technology, doing contract 
research at the Georgia Department of Natural Resources, and serving 
six years at the Georgia Department of Archives.
   Outside of his academic work, Dr. Bridges has also participated in 
numerous state and community activities. He has served as President of 
the Alabama Historical Association, as a member of the Alabama 
Historical Commission, on the Governor's Mansion Advisory Board, and 
many more. He received the Alabama Humanities Foundation's Annual 
Humanities Award and was inducted into the College of Communications 
Hall of Fame at the University of Alabama. Dr. Bridges expertise is 
also recognized beyond the State of Alabama, having represented the 
United States in archival exchanges with both the former Soviet Union 
and the People's Republic of China, and as vice chairman of the 
Information Policy Task Force of State Governments.
   Ed Bridges embodies the very best qualities of a true scholar, one 
who knows that knowledge means nothing without the will to pass it on 
to others and to future generations. Dr. Bridges has done this and more 
though his outstanding career.
   On behalf of the people of Alabama and my colleagues in the Alabama 
Delegation, I would like to extend my personal appreciation to Dr. 
Bridges for his service to Alabama's past, present, and future through 
his stewardship and tremendous leadership of the Alabama Department of 
Archives and History. I would like to wish him, his wife Martha and 
their family the very best in their future endeavors.

                          ____________________
```
**Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 11 February 2010 – Deutsche BKK v OHIM (Deutsche BKK)**

**(Case T-289/08)**

Community trade mark – Application for Community word mark Deutsche BKK – Absolute ground for refusal – Descriptive character and no distinctive character – No distinctive character acquired through use – Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
– Article 73 and Article 74(1), first sentence, of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 75 and Article 76(1), first sentence, of
Regulation No 207/2009)

Community trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark – Absolute grounds for refusal – Marks composed exclusively of signs or indications which may serve to designate the characteristics of goods – Marks devoid of distinctive character – Exception – Distinctive character acquired through use (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 7(1)(b), (c) and (3) (see paras 40, 47-49,
95)

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | ACTION brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 29 May 2008 (Case R 318/2008‐4) concerning an application for registration of the word mark ‘Deutsche BKK’ as a Community trade mark. |

**Information relating to the case**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| Applicant for the Community trade mark: | Deutsche BKK |
| Community trade mark sought: | Word mark Deutsche BKK for services in Classes 36, 41 and 44 – Application No 4724894 |
| Decision of the Examiner: | Registration refused |
| Decision of the Board of Appeal: | Appeal dismissed |

**Operative part**

The Court:

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

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Orders Deutsche Betriebskrankenkasse (Deutsche BKK) to pay the costs. |
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4519 

To amend the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to repeal certain disclosure 

requirements related to resource extraction, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 1, 2017 

Mr. HUIZENGA introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To amend the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to repeal 

certain disclosure requirements related to resource extraction, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. REPEAL OF RESOURCE EXTRACTION DISCLO4 SURE REQUIREMENTS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (q) of section 13 of the 

6 Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m) is here7 by repealed. 

8 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—The Dodd-Frank 

9 Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (12 

10 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) is amended— 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4519 IH

1 (1) by striking section 1504; and 

2 (2) in the table of contents in section 1(b) of 

3 such Act, by striking the item relating to section 

4 1504. 

Æ 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
# Susquehanna - Appalachian Regional Commission

- Northern Tier Regional Planning and Development Commission Executive Director Frank Thompson Email  &#x69;&#x6e;&#102;&#111;&#64;n&#x6f;&#x72;&#x74;&#104;er&#x6e;&#x74;&#x69;&#101;&#114;&#46;&#x6f;&#x72;&#x67;The post Northern Tier Regional Planning and Development Commission appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 117 (Thursday, August 2, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H5689]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                           NEVADA'S SALES TAX

  (Ms. BERKLEY asked and was given permission to address the House for 
1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.)
  Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Speaker, Congress must do right by Nevada's middle 
class families and make permanent the sales tax deduction, a measure 
that benefits so many middle class families in Nevada. Over 300,000 
Nevadans claimed $456 million in deductions for State and local sales 
tax in 2009 alone. Nevada is one of only nine States that has no State 
income tax and, instead, revenue is raised through a sales tax.
  Nevadans should be able to deduct their sales tax from their Federal 
income tax, just as citizens from income tax States do now. The sales 
tax deduction helps families across Nevada by leaving more money in 
their pockets. This creates jobs, stimulates economic growth, and keeps 
money in their pockets.
  It's a matter of priority, Mr. Speaker. We must make the sales tax 
deduction permanent in order to give middle tax families the certainty 
of knowing they will have extra money in their pockets to put food on 
their table, gas in their cars, and be able to pay the mortgage on 
their family home.

                          ____________________
```
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 01-50949

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MARIANO GARCIA-TORRES,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. DR-01-CR-102-1-FB

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

June 19, 2002

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Mariano Garcia-Torres appeals the sentence imposed following

his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United States

after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Garcia-Torres

complains that his sentence was improperly enhanced pursuant to

8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) based on his prior deportation following an

aggravated felony conviction. Garcia-Torres argues that the

sentencing provision violates the Due Process Clause because it

permitted the sentencing judge to find, under a preponderance of

the evidence standard, a fact which increased the statutory
No. 01-50949

-2-

maximum sentence to which he otherwise would have been exposed. 

Garcia-Torres thus contends that his sentence is invalid and

argues that it should not exceed the two-year maximum term of

imprisonment prescribed in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). 

In Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235

(1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in

8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of

separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing

provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. Id. at 239-47. 

Garcia-Torres acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by

Almendarez-Torres, but asserts that the decision has been cast

into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). 

He seeks to preserve his argument for further review. 

Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi,

530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984

(5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1202 (2001). This court

must follow Almendarez-Torres “unless and until the Supreme Court

itself determines to overrule it.” Dabeit, 231 F.3d at 984

(internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The judgment of

the district court is AFFIRMED.

The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of

filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks

that the judgment of the district court be affirmed and that an

appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED. 

 AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
# Floyd - Appalachian Regional Commission

- New River Valley Planning District Commission Executive Director Kevin Byrd Email &#x6e;&#x72;&#x76;&#112;&#100;c&#64;&#x6e;&#x72;&#x76;&#x70;&#100;&#99;&#46;o&#x72;&#x67;The post New River Valley Planning District Commission appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

 Respondent

 v.

SHANE ALVIN GEEDY,

 Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 648 MAL 2014

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the

Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 19th day of February, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.

Mr. Justice Eakin did not participate in the consideration or decision of this

matter.
**Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 6 May 2010 – Commission v Poland**

**(Case C‐545/08)**

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Electronic communications – Directives 2002/21/EC and 2002/22/EC – High-speed internet access provider – Obligation to obtain authorisation for the access tariffs to high-speed internet services and to fix those tariffs on the
basis of the costs of the provision of such services – No market analysis

1.                     *Procedure – Application initiating proceedings – Formal requirements – Identification of the subject-matter of the dispute
– Brief summary of the pleas in law on which the application is based (Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 38(1)(c))
(see paras 25-26)*

2.                     *Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Right of the Commission to bring judicial proceedings – Exercise of that right
not dependent on a specific interest in bringing an action (Art. 226 EC) (see para 30)*

3.                     *Approximation of laws – Telecommunications sector – Electronic communications networks and services – Legislative background
– Directive 2002/21 – Universal service and users’ rights – Directive 2002/22 – Transitional arrangements (European Parliament
and Council Directives 2002/21, Arts 16 and 27(1) and 2002/22, Arts 16 and 17) (see paras 46-50, 57-72, operative part)*

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Infringement of Articles 16 and 17 of Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services (Universal Service Directive) (OJ 2002 L 108, p. 51), and Articles 16 and 27 of Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services (Framework Directive) (OJ 2002 L 108, p. 33) – Imposing on an operator a requirement to obtain authorisation for the tariff for providing retail access services to high-speed internet without a market analysis having been carried out. |

**Operative part:**

The Court:

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | | declares that, by regulating retail tariffs for access to high-speed internet without previously carrying out a market analysis, the Republic of Poland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 16 in conjunction with 17 of Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services (Universal Service Directive) and Articles 16 and 27 of Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services (Framework Directive); |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Orders the Republic of Poland to pay the costs. |
# C_2010063EN.01004302.xml

| 13.3.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 63/43 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.3.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 63/43

---

Order of the President of the Court of 21 October 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de la Comunidad Autónoma del País Vasco (Spain)) — Emilia Flores Fanega v Instituto Nacional de la Seguridad Social (INSS), Tesorería General de la Seguridad Social (TGSS), Bolumburu S.A.

(Case C-452/08) (1)

1

2010/C 63/68

Language of the case: Spanish

Language of the case: Spanish

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

---

(1)  OJ C 6, 10.1.2009.

1

---
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 118 (Friday, August 3, 2012)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1413-E1414]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

IN RECOGNITION OF THE FIRST ANNUAL STAND DOWN EVENT AT CAPE COD ACADEMY

                                 ______
                                 

                        HON. WILLIAM R. KEATING

                            of massachusetts

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, August 2, 2012

  Mr. KEATING. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the first annual 
Stand Down event at Cape Cod Academy.
   On August 11, 2012, at its Stand Down event, Cape Cod Academy in 
Osterville will open its doors to local veterans and will provide these 
men and women with a variety of services and support. The term ``stand 
down'' originated as a military term, designating that a combat unit 
was temporarily moved away from the front lines for rest and 
rehabilitation. The tradition of hosting service-oriented events for 
veterans, and giving them the ``Stand Down'' name, originated in the 
United States after the Civil War, when returning soldiers were offered 
food and medical treatment in the towns they passed on their long 
journeys home. Modern Stand Down events have evolved as an opportunity 
to provide needed services to local veterans.
   The Stand Down event at Cape Cod Academy will provide services--such 
as general health screenings and dental care, benefits assistance, 
registry of motor vehicles services, the availability of clergy, and 
free clothing and hygiene items--in a safe and welcoming environment. 
Most of the volunteers at this event will be Cape Cod Academy students. 
It is truly admirable that these young people are ready and willing to 
give their time on a Saturday afternoon to honor our local veterans.
   As more than thirty thousand veterans call Cape Cod home, it is 
crucial that we offer assistance to the men and women who have served 
our nation. Cape Cod Academy, its students, and its faculty have truly 
done the community a great service by planning and hosting this event. 
I look forward to seeing the Academy's success as it continues this 
newly-annual tradition in the future.
   Mr. Speaker, it brings me great pride to recognize the first annual 
Stand Down event at Cape Cod Academy. I urge my colleagues to join me 
in recognizing the students and faculty who have worked to bring this 
event to life, and the importance that this event will have to the Cape 
Cod community.

[[Page E1414]]

                          ____________________
```
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">Shirom Acupuncture, P.C., as Assignee of Gretcher Casanova, Appellant,<br><br>against<br><br>NYCTA-MABSTOA, Respondent.</font></b></div><br><br><p>Gary Tsirelman, P.C. (Irena Golodkeyer of counsel), for appellant.Foley, Smit, O'Boyle &amp; Weisman (Aaron E. Meyer of counsel), for respondent.</p><p>Appeal from a judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Larry Love, J.), entered February 6, 2015. The judgment, entered pursuant to an order of that court entered March 6, 2013 granting the branch of defendant's motion seeking to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (5) and denying plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment, dismissed the complaint.</p><p>ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with $25 costs.</p><p>In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, defendant moved, pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (5), to, among other things, dismiss the complaint on the ground that the action had been commenced after the expiration of the three-year limitation period of CPLR 214 (2), which, defendant contended, was applicable to self-insurers such as defendant. Plaintiff cross-moved for summary judgment and argued, among other things, that the action is subject to a six-year statute of limitations. By order entered March 6, 2013, the Civil Court, insofar as is relevant, granted the branch of defendant's motion seeking to dismiss the complaint and implicitly denied plaintiff's cross motion. On February 6, 2015, a judgment was entered dismissing the complaint.</p><p>For the reasons stated in <i>Contact Chiropractic, P.C. v New York City Tr. Auth.</i> (31 NY3d 187 [2018]), the judgment is affirmed.</p><p>PESCE, P.J., ALIOTTA and ELLIOT, JJ., concur.</p><br>ENTER:<br>Paul Kenny<br>Chief Clerk<br>Decision Date: November 09, 2018<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_2_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
Exhibit 31.2



CERTIFICATION



I, Patrick J. Tewell, certify that:



1.  I have reviewed the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of TransCommunity Financial Corporation for the period ended March 31, 2007;



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:



(a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;



(b)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



(c)  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and



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):



(a)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely 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 other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.







|                   |  |                        
|------------------ |  | -----------------------
|Date:
May 14, 2007 |  | /s/  Patrick J. Tewell 
|                   |  | Patrick J. Tewell      
|                   |  | Chief Financial Officer
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v James Blackwell, Appellant.

— Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The record fully supports the suppression court’s finding that defendant was advised of his *Miranda*rights *(see, Miranda v Arizona,*384 US 436), and that he knowingly and intelligently waived his rights and orally admitted his participation in the burglary for which he was arrested. Defendant’s argument that he was denied his right to counsel because he was at that time represented by an attorney on a prior pending charge is without merit. The record is clear that the police questioned him solely on matters unrelated to the prior pending charge *(see, People v Bing,*76 NY2d 331). (Appeal from Judgment of Monroe County Court, Connell, J. — Burglary, 2nd Degree.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Boomer, Green, Pine and Balio, JJ.