alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
This page intentionally

left blankThis page intentionally

left blankThis page intentionally

left blankThis page intentionally

left blankThis page intentionally

left blankThis page intentionally

left blankThis page intentionally

left blankThis page intentionally

left blankThis page intentionally

left blankThis page intentionally

left blank
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1344 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1344

To require the purchase of domestically made flags of the United States 
             of America for use by the Federal Government.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 4, 2011

Mr. Braley of Iowa (for himself, Mr. DeFazio, Ms. DeLauro, Ms. Sutton, 
Mr. Lipinski, and Ms. Edwards) introduced the following bill; which was 
      referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To require the purchase of domestically made flags of the United States 
             of America for use by the Federal Government.

    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 ``All-American Flag Act''.

SEC. 2. REQUIREMENT FOR PURCHASE OF DOMESTICALLY MADE UNITED STATES 
              FLAGS FOR USE BY FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

    Only such flags of the United States of America, regardless of 
size, that are 100 percent manufactured in the United States, from 
articles, materials, or supplies 100 percent of which are grown, 
produced, or manufactured in the United States, may be acquired for use 
by the Federal Government.

SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    Section 2 shall apply to purchases of flags made on or after 180 
days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
InThe Matter Of: 

### SERVED: SEPTEMBER29, 2014 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS WASHINGTON, DC

DocketNo. FAA-2014-0324 GLOBAL AIRCRAFT INTERIORS, INC. ) ) ) ) ) ) Respondent Case No. 2011EA110043

ORDER GRANTING CONTINUANCE OF THE RULE 16 LITIGATION SCHEDULING CONFERENCE OnAugust 1, 2014, an Order Setting Rule 16 Litigation Scheduling Conference and Directing Rule 26(f) Planning and Submissionwas filed. Among otherthings, this Order setthe Rule 16 Litigation Conference for September 30, 2014, at 10:00 a.m. Easterntime, and directed the parties to file a Rule 26(f) Proposed Scheduling and Discovery Plan onorbefore September 23, 2014. On September 23,2014, the FAA filed the Agency's Proposed Scheduling/Discovery Plan, noting thatthe Respondent's counsel had not responded to the FAA's request to concur withthe Plan. On September 29,2014, the FAA filed the Agency's Request for Postponement of Litigation Scheduling Conference, moving for a postponement ofthe Litigation Scheduling Conference to allowthe FAA attorney to attend an all-day continuing legal education course on September 30, 2014, and to allow the parties more time to discuss a mutually agreeable, proposed discovery schedule. The FAA attorney asserts that he has conferred withthe Respondent's counsel, and provides a list ofmutually convenient, proposed, alternate dates. Having reviewedthe case file, all pleadings and motions, all relevant caselaw, statutes, regulations, rules, and authority, and being fully advised;IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. Pursuantto 14 C.F.R. 

### § 13.205(a)(1) and (8), the FAA's motion for a continuance ofthe Rule 16 Litigation Scheduling Conference is granted. 2. The Rule 16 Litigation Scheduling Conference, set for September 30, 2014, is continued to Monday, October 6, 2014, at 1:30 p.m. Eastern time.

Attachment: Service List

Page 2 of2SERVICE LIST- BYU.S. MAIL

Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 ORIGINAL & ONE COPY

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl0001


### Mr. Zachary M. Berman 

### Complainant's Counsel Federal Aviation Administration Office ofthe Regional Counsel 1AviationPlaza Jamaica, NY 11434 TEL: 718-553-3258 FAJ(: 718-995-5699 

### Mr. Sande E. Lichtenstein 

### Respondent's Counsel Lichtenstein & Schindel 158 West BostonPostRoad P.O. Box 787 Mamaroneck, NY 10543 TEL: 914-698-3313 Judge J.E. Sullivan 

### US. AdministrativeLawJudge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation ONE COPY

1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-6941 FAJ(: 202-366-7536 DocketNo. FAA-2014-0324 (Civil Penalty Action)

1 Service was byU.S. Mail. For service inperson orby expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
II

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 627

To require the general application of the antitrust laws to major league

baseball, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 27, 1995

Mr. HATCH (for himself, Mr. THURMOND, Mr. LEAHY, Mr. MOYNIHAN, and

Mr. GRAHAM) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To require the general application of the antitrust laws to

major league baseball, 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. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Major League Baseball

5 Antitrust Reform Act of 1995’’.

6 SEC. 2. APPLICATION OF THE ANTITRUST LAWS TO PRO7 FESSIONAL MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL.

8 The Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 12 et seq.) is amended

9 by adding at the end the following new section:
2

•S 627 IS

1 ‘‘SEC. 27. (a) Subject to subsection (b), the antitrust

2 laws shall apply to the business of professional major

3 league baseball.

4 ‘‘(b) Nothing in this section shall be construed to af5 fect—

6 ‘‘(1) the applicability or nonapplicability of the

7 antitrust laws to professional baseball’s amateur

8 draft, the minor league reserve clause, the Profes9 sional Baseball Agreement, or any other matter re10 lating to the minor leagues;

11 ‘‘(2) the applicability or nonapplicability of the

12 antitrust laws to any restraint by professional base13 ball on franchise relocation; or

14 ‘‘(3) the application of Public Law 87–331 (15

15 U.S.C. 1291 et seq.) (commonly known as the

16 Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961).’’.

Æ
Exhibit
      13.1





Compañía
      de Minas Buenaventura S.A.A.


Certification
      Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


(18
      U.S.C. Section 1350)





Pursuant
      to the requirements of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.
      Sections 1350(a) and (b)), the undersigned hereby certifies as
      follows:





1.
            I
                am the Chief Executive Officer of Compañía de Minas Buenaventura S.A.A.
                (the “Company”).





2.
            (A)The
                Company’s Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2007
                accompanying this Certification, in the form filed with the Securities
                and
                Exchange Commission (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of
                Section 13(a) of the United States Securities Exchange Act of 1934
                (the
                “Exchange Act”); and





(B)  The
      information in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
      financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated:  July
      15,
      2008





/S/
      ROQUE BENAVIDES GANOZA


Roque
      Benavides Ganoza


Chief
      Executive Officer
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7129
MICHAEL BLACK, Petitioner - Appellant, versus ARTHUR F. BEELER, Warden-FMC, Butner, NC, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-03-195-5-HO) Submitted: September 30, 2003 Decided: October 8, 2003 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Black, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Michael Black, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Black v. Beeler , No. CA-03-195-5-HO (E.D.N.C. July 7, 2003). 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.

AFFIRMED
EXHIBIT
32.1








SECTION
1350 CERTIFICATIONS





In
connection with the Annual Report of Security Capital Corporation (the
“Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Frank
West, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, to the best of my
knowledge and belief, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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;
and





2)
            The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.





Date:           March
14, 2008








/s/ Frank
West


Frank
West


Chief
Executive Officer
II

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2065

To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to require open campus security

crime logs at institutions of higher education.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 11, 1996

Mrs. FEINSTEIN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and

referred to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources

A BILL

To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to require

open campus security crime logs at institutions of higher

education.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Open Campus Police

5 Logs Act of 1996’’.

6 SEC. 2. DAILY RECORD AND DISCLOSURE OF REPORTED

7 CRIMES.

8 (a) AMENDMENT.—Section 485(f) of the Higher

9 Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1092(f) is amended by

10 adding at the end the following new paragraph:
2

•S 2065 IS

1 ‘‘(8) Each institution participating in any program

2 under this title which maintains either a police or security

3 department of any kind shall make, keep, and maintain

4 a daily log, written in a form that can be easily under5 stood, recording in chronological order all crimes against

6 persons or property reported to its police or security de7 partment, the date, time, and location of such crimes, and,

8 if an arrest has been made, the names and addresses of

9 all persons arrested and charges against such persons ar10 rested. The provision of this paragraph shall not be con11 strued to require an institution to identify in its log, unless

12 otherwise provided by law, the names of the persons re13 porting the crime, the victim or victims, any witnesses or

14 suspects who have not been arrested, or other information

15 relating to any investigation of the crime. All entries in

16 such daily logs shall, unless otherwise provided by State

17 or Federal law, be open to public inspection.’’.

18 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

19 this section shall take effect on the date of enactment of

20 this Act.

Æ
LAW OFFICES

PIERRE MURPHY

SUITE 800

1200 NEW HAMPSHIRE AVENUE, NW

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20036

TELEPHONE:

TELECOPIER:

•• E-MAIL: ._

June 27, 2013

VIA ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION

Docket OST-98-3305

Dockets Facility (SVC-121.30)

U.S. Department of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

West Building Ground Floor

Room W12-140

Washington, D.C. 20590

Re: Haiti Aviation, S.A., d/b/a Air D' Ayiti

Dear Ms. Hairston:

Pursuant to the Passenger Manifest Information rule, 14 C.F.R. §243.13 of the

Department's Regulations, Haiti Aviation, S.A., d/b/a Air D'Ayiti ("Air D'Ayiti")

respectfully submits this letter summarizing how Air D' Ayiti will collect and transmit the

required Passenger Manifest Information.

Air D' Ayiti is a Haiti-flag with exemption authority I to conduct scheduled foreign air

transportation of persons, property and mail between Haiti and the U.S. Haiti has been

assessed a "Category 2" rating by the FAA International Safety Assessment Program, and Air

D' Ayiti is therefore required to conduct its operations to the U.S. exclusively pursuant to a

wet lease from a duly authorized U.S. air carrier.

Air D' Ayiti, therefore, adopts and incorporates the method of its wet lessor, the U.S.

certificated air carrier Falcon Air Express, Inc., for collection of the information required by

this rule.

See: Docket OST-2002-12196 (APA invoked).
Should you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sircerely,

A~

--I/

Pierre hy

Atto ey for

Haiti Aviation, S.A., d/b/a Air D' Ayiti

cc: Sebastian Toussaint
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER OF ABATEMENT

Appellate case name: In re Woody K. Lesikar, Individually, and as Trustee of the 

Woody K. Lesikar Special Trust

Appellate case number: 01-20-00391-CV

Trial court case number: 2008-65920A

Trial court: 334th District Court of Harris County

Relator, Woody K. Lesikar, individually, and as Trustee of the Woody K. Lesikar 

Special Trust, has filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this Court, seeking this Court to 

compel the trial court to vacate its May 21, 2020 order, requiring relator to deposit 

$500,000 in the court’s registry. The May 21, 2020 order was signed by the Honorable 

Steven Kirkland. Judge Kirkland has ceased to hold the office of judge of the 334th District 

Court of Harris County, Texas.

Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 7.2, the Honorable Dawn Rogers is 

substituted for the Honorable Steven Kirkland as the respondent in this original proceeding. 

See TEX. R. APP. P. 7.2(a). Further, this original proceeding for petition of writ of 

mandamus is abated and remanded to the trial court to allow Judge Rogers to reconsider 

the ruling made the basis of relator’s petition. See TEX. R. APP. P. 7.2(b) (“If the case is an 

original proceeding under Rule 52, the court must abate the proceeding to allow the 

successor to reconsider the original party’s decision.”). 

Within thirty days of the date of this order, the parties are directed to notify the Clerk 

of this Court of any action taken on reconsideration of the rulings made the basis of relator’s 

petition and file any orders regarding reconsideration of those rulings in a supplemental 

mandamus record. The Court will then consider a motion to reinstate or motion to dismiss 

this proceeding, as appropriate.

This original proceeding is abated, treated as a closed case, and removed from this 

Court’s active docket.
It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: ____/s/ April Farris______

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: __January 14, 2021____
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**Certification of Principal Financial OfficerPursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of TheSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

August 15, 2005

 

In connection with the Large Scale Biology CorporationQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2005as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, Ronald J. Artale, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, asadopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to myknowledge:

 

(1)          theReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)          thatinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of Large Scale BiologyCorporation for the fiscal period covered by the Report.

 
|   | By:    | /s/ Ronald J. Artale                                                  |   |
|--------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |   | Ronald J. Artale                                                      |
|   |   | Senior Vice  President, Chief Operating                               |
|   |   | Officer and  Chief Financial Officer  Large Scale Biology Corporation |

 

----
PRELIMINARY TECHNICAL SUPPORT DOCUMENT (TSD): 

ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER 

PRODUCTS AND INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT: 

Residential Central Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps 

March 2010 

U.S. Department of Energy 

Assistant Secretary 

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 

Building Technologies Program 

Appliances and Commercial Equipment Standards 

Washington, DC 20585 
This Document was prepared for the Department of Energy
 

by staff members of
 

Navigant Consulting, Inc., 

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory,
 

and 

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO . A

- 3367

- 17T3
THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON , f/k/a THE BANK OF NEW YORK AS TRUSTEE FOR THE CERTIFICATEHOLDERS OF CWABS INC., ASSET

- BACKED CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2005

- 7, Plaintiff

- Respondent,

v. SEBASTIAN PACHOLEC, Defendant

- Appellant , and UNIFUND CCR, LLC, Defendant

.

__ _____________________________

Submitted September 10, 2019

– Decided Before Judges Ostrer and Susswein. On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Ocean County, Docket No. F

- 033592

- 15

.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court." Although it is posted on the internet , this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited. R. 1:36

- 3.

October 2, 20192 A

- 3367

- 17T3 Sebastian Pacholec, appellant pro se. Stern Lavinthal & Frankenberg, LLC, attorneys for respondent (Mark S. Winter, of counsel and on the brief).
PER CURIAM Defendant Sebastian Pacholec appeals from the judgment entered against him in this mortgage fo reclosure action. It is not disputed that defendant borrowed $207,500 and has not made any payments since 2010. After this appeal was filed, the trial judge, Judge Francis R. Hodgson, Jr., issued a ten

page, single

- spaced amplification letter pursuant to Rule 2:5

- 1(b). The trial court's amplification is thorough, detailed, and well

- reasoned. We affirm the judgment against defendant substantially for the reasons set forth in Judge Hodgson's amplification letter. Defendant's contentions on appeal do not warrant extensive discussion in this written opinion. See R. 2:11

- 3(e)(1)(E). The record before us establishes that defendant obtained a loan for $207,500 that was secured by a mortgage on real property. That mor tgage was eventually assigned to plaintiff Bank of New York Mellon, giving it standing to initiate the foreclosure action. Despite defendant's claim to the contrary, we agree with Judge Hodgson that the note included a default provision that authorized pl aintiff to proceed against the3 A

- 3367

- 17T3

collateral property. We also are satisfied that the trial judge properly rejected the defenses raised by defendant under the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) and Fair Foreclosure Act (FFA). 15 U.S.C. §§ 1601 to 1667f; N.J.S.A. 2A :50

- 53 to

- 68. The trial court properly concluded, for example, that defendant failed to meet the burden of proof on the affirmative defense of payment, and that plaintiff satisfied all of the pertinent process requirements set forth in TILA and FFA, incl uding timely service of a Notice of Intent to foreclose. To the extent that Judge Hodgson's amplification letter does not address an argument raised by defendant on appeal, the contention lacks sufficient merit to warrant discussion in this written opini on. R. 2:11

- 3(e)(1)(E). Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 27 (Thursday, February 8, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 8736]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-02606]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 12322]


International Security Advisory Board (ISAB) Meeting Notice

Closed Meeting

    In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. 1009(a)(2), the Department of State announces a 
meeting of the International Security Advisory Board (ISAB) to take 
place on March 12, 2024, at the Department of State, Washington, DC.
    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 
U.S.C. 1009(d), and 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(1), it has been determined that 
this Board meeting will be closed to the public because the Board will 
be reviewing and discussing matters properly classified in accordance 
with Executive Order 13526. The purpose of the ISAB is to provide the 
Department with a continuing source of independent advice on all 
aspects of arms control, disarmament, nonproliferation, outer space, 
critical infrastructure, cybersecurity, the national security aspects 
of associated technologies, international security, and related aspects 
of public diplomacy. The agenda for this meeting will include 
classified discussions related to the Board's ongoing studies on 
current U.S. policy and issues regarding arms control, international 
security, nuclear proliferation, associated technologies, climate and 
energy security.
    For more information, contact Michelle Dover, Executive Director of 
the International Security Advisory Board, Department of State, 
Washington, DC 20520, telephone: (202) 736-4930.

Michelle Dover,
Executive Director, International Security Advisory Board, Department 
of State.
[FR Doc. 2024-02606 Filed 2-7-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-27-P
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement
No. 333-45672 on Form S-8 of Belmont Bancorp. of our report dated February 5,
2002, except for Note 24, which date is March 26, 2002, on the consolidated
financial statements of Belmont Bancorp. as of December 31, 2001 and 2000 and
for each of the three years ended December 31, 2001; which report is included in
this Annual Report on Form 10-K.


                                          Crowe, Chizek and Company LLP

Columbus, Ohio
March 26, 2002