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

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1500 

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a boundary study of 

the lands and waters in the greater Salem Sound and the city of Salem 

to determine the suitability and feasibility for inclusion within the boundary of the Salem Maritime National Historic Site, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 12, 2011 

Mr. TIERNEY (for himself, Mr. NEAL, Mr. OLVER, Mr. MCGOVERN, Mr. 

CAPUANO, Mr. LYNCH, Mr. KEATING, and Ms. TSONGAS) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a boundary 

study of the lands and waters in the greater Salem 

Sound and the city of Salem to determine the suitability 

and feasibility for inclusion within the boundary of the 

Salem Maritime National Historic Site, 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 ‘‘Salem Maritime Na5 tional Historic Site Boundary Study Act of 2011’’. 


pwalker on DSKD5P82C1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1500 IH

1 SEC. 2. SPECIAL RESOURCE STUDY. 

2 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Interior (re3 ferred to in this section as the ‘‘Secretary’’) shall conduct 

4 a boundary study of the lands and waters in the greater 

5 Salem Sound including the City of Salem and its environs 

6 (referred to in this section as ‘‘Salem Sound’’) to deter7 mine— 

8 (1) the suitability and feasibility of including 

9 portions of Salem Sound within the boundary of the 

10 Salem Maritime National Historic Site; and 

11 (2) the methods and means for the protection 

12 and interpretation of Salem Sound by the National 

13 Park Service in cooperation as appropriate with 

14 other Federal, State, or local government entities, or 

15 private or nonprofit organizations. 

16 (b) CONSULTATION.—In conducting the study, the 

17 Secretary shall consult with the City of Salem, the Essex 

18 National Heritage Commission, and other interested orga19 nizations, or individuals. 

20 (c) REPORT.—Not later than 3 years after the date 

21 on which funds are made available to conduct the study 

22 required under this section, the Secretary shall submit to 

23 the Committee on Natural Resources of the House of Rep24 resentatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural 

25 Resources of the Senate a report containing— 

26 (1) the results of the study; and 


pwalker on DSKD5P82C1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1500 IH

1 (2) any finding, conclusions, and recommenda2 tions of the Secretary. 

Æ 


pwalker on DSKD5P82C1PROD with BILLS
Consent letter of DeGolyer and MacNaughton



 Exhibit 10.1 
  
 DEGOLYER AND MACNAUGHTON 
 4925 GREENVILLED AVENUE, SUITE 400 
 ONE ENERGY SQUARE 
 DALLAS, TEXAS 75206 
  
 June 28, 2004 
  
 Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. 
 Av.
República do Chile, 65/1703 
 Rio de Janeiro – RJ 
 Brasil 20035-900 
  
 Gentlemen: 
  
 We hereby consent to the references to our firm as set forth in the Annual
Report on Form 20-F of Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. (Petrobras) for the year ended December 31, 2003, which incorporates information from our “Letter Report as of December 31, 2003 on Reserves of Certain Properties in Brazil with Interests
owned by Petróleo Brasileiro S.A.” under the heading “Item 4 – INFORMATION ON THE COMPANY – Exploration, Development and Production – WORLDWIDE ESTIMATED NET PROVED RESERVES,” provided, however, that we are
necessarily unable to verify the accuracy of the reserves contained therein because our estimates of reserves have been combined with estimates of reserves prepared by others. 
  
 Very truly yours, 
  

/s/ DeGOLYER and MacNAUGHTON 
  
 DeGOLYER and MacNAUGHTON
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

August 6, 2018

No. 04-18-00538-CR

IN RE Avery B. CRAWFORD

Original Mandamus Proceeding1

ORDER

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

On August 2, 2018, relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus. After considering the 

petition, this court concludes relator is not entitled to the relief sought. Accordingly, the petition 

for writ of mandamus is DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION. See TEX. R. APP. P.

52.8(a). The court’s opinion will issue at a later date.

It is so ORDERED on August 6, 2018.

_________________________________

Karen Angelini, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 6th day of August, 2018.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court

 

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2017CR10532 & 2017CR10534, styled The State of Texas v. Avery B. 

Crawford, pending in the 186th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Jefferson Moore 

presiding.
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 02-3552

___________

Jon Mills, *

*

Plaintiff-Appellant, *

*

Rodney Rutledge, *

*

Plaintiff, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Eastern District of Arkansas.

State of Arkansas; Mike Huckabee, *

Governor of Arkansas; Mark Pryor, * [UNPUBLISHED]

Attorney General of Arkansas; Larry *

Norris, Director, Arkansas Department *

of Correction; Marvin Evans, Jr., *

Warden, East Arkansas Regional Unit, *

ADC; John Does, 1 - 12 and Jane Doe, *

*

Defendants-Appellees. *

___________

 Submitted: June 24, 2003

 Filed: June 26, 2003 

___________

Before WOLLMAN, FAGG, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.
*

The Honorable William R. Wilson, Jr., United States District Judge for the

Eastern District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the

Honorable Henry L. Jones, Jr., United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District

of Arkansas.

-2-

Arkansas inmate Jon Mills appeals the district court’s* denial of Mills's motion

to reopen his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Having carefully reviewed the record, we

affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1
 
                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
 
    We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
and Post Effective Amendments on Form S-3 Nos. 333-08319 and 333-51913 of Lehman
Brothers Inc. and in the related Prospectuses, of our report dated January 7,
1999, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Lehman Brothers
Inc. included in its 1998 Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended November
30, 1998.
 
                                          /s/ Ernst & Young LLP
 
                                          ERNST & YOUNG LLP
 
New York, New York
February 26, 1999
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 21 - LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY

1.   Prima Inc., a California corporation and a wholly-owned subsidiary of ITEC

2.   Laser Printer Accessories Corporation, a Delaware corporation and a wholly-
     owned subsidiary of ITEC (Inactive)

3.   Personal Computer Products, Inc., doing business as PCPI Technologies, a
     California corporation and a wholly-owned subsidiary of ITEC 

4.   Co-Processors, Inc., a California corporation and a wholly-owned subsidiary
     of ITEC (Inactive)

5.   NewGen Imaging Systems, Inc., a California corporation and a wholly-owned
     subsidiary of ITEC.



                                       39
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1584 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1584

To amend title 23, United States Code, to exempt maintenance activities 
                  from certain analysis requirements.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 15, 2011

 Mr. Lankford introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the 
 Committees on Energy and Commerce and Natural Resources, 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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title 23, United States Code, to exempt maintenance activities 
                  from certain analysis requirements.

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

SECTION 1. EXEMPTION OF MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES FROM CERTAIN ANALYSIS 
              REQUIREMENTS.

    Section 116 of title 23, United States Code, is amended by adding 
at the end the following:
    ``(e) Exemption of Maintenance Activities From Certain Analysis 
Requirements.--In maintaining the Federal-aid system to include 
construction occurring within existing rights-of-way previously 
acquired and reserved for transportation purposes pursuant to this 
section, a State department of transportation shall not be required to 
secure any permit or conduct any analysis under Federal law (including 
any permit, review, analysis, clearance, or impact statement under the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the 
Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), the Clean 
Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.), the Endangered Species Act of 1973 
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), or the National Historic Preservation Act (16 
U.S.C. 470 et seq.)).''.
                                 <all>
```
I am writing to request an exemption from 14 CFR § 121.317(f) and (k) to the extent required for me to

be able to use the aircraft lavatory while the Fasten Seat Belt sign is illuminated.

My physical condition is as follows: IBS

‐ Diarrhea predominant. As a result of my physical co ndition, I

need access to the aircraft lavatory during the flight because my condition is a functional, motility

disorder and I cannot control the urgency at times, especially under stressful conditions.

I understand that the regulation is written to create a high level of safety for each individual passenger

by ensuring that they are securely restr ained in their seats during all phases of flight. The regulation also

ensures that an individual does not cause harm to other passengers on the airplane by being thrown

into them during turbulent or emergency conditions.

I propose that I be limited to occupying a seat in clos e proximity to the aircraft lavatory to reduce the

time I am not restrained on my seat while the Fasten Seat Belt sign is illuminated. This ensures a high

level of safety for me and a high level of safety for the other passengers and crew on the airplane.

The publi c interest is served by the fact that this exemption will allow me to use commercial air

transportation. Without this exemption, I would be unable to fly commercially because of my need to

access the lavatory when necessary.

I also request that the processing of this petition not be delayed for publi cation and comment in the

Federal Register. I want to travel on or about July 2 nd

, 2012. If you take the time to put this in the

Federal Register, it will delay the process and I may not be able to travel in this timeframe. If it is

necessary to put a summary in the Federal Register, I submit the following:

This is a request for an exe mption from FAR 121.317 (f) and (k) to the extent required for me to be able

to use the aircraft lavatory while the Fasten Seat Belt sign is illuminated. Due to my disability, without

this exemption, I would be unable to fly because I have a functional disorder which requires me to

access the lav atory without reasonable notice at times. Unlike those who do not suffer from this

disorder, I am unable to wait to use a lavatory.

Thank you.

Fern Case
Exhibit 99.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT
TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I,  John  "JT"  Thatch,  as  CEO/President/acting  CFO of New  Millennium  Media
International, Inc. (the "Company") certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as  adopted  by  Section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of  2002,  that  to my
knowledge:

(1) The  accompanying  Form 10-Q report for the period  ending March 31, 2003 as
filed with the U.S.  Securities and Exchange  Commission  (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.

New Millennium Media International, Inc.


By: /s/__________________________________  Dated this 15th day of August 2003
    John "JT" Thatch
    CEO/President/Director/acting CFO
EXHIBIT32.2

 

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO

18U.S.C. SECTION1350,

ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Petrol Oil and Gas, Inc. (the"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2004, as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the"Report"), I, John C. Garrison, President and Chief Executive Officer ofthe Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

-  The    Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the    Securities Exchange Act of 1934; andThe    information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material    respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 

/S/JohnC. Garrison                               

John C.Garrison

Presidentand Chief Executive Officer

November15, 2004
#### Raymond Earl SCOTT, Appellant, v. STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 30783.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 3, 1959.

*852Ben G. Levy, Houston, for appellant.

Dan Walton, Dist. Atty., Thomas D. White, Samuel H. Robertson, Jr., and Wallace C. Moore, Asst. Dist. Atty., Houston, and Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

MORRISON, Presiding Judge.

The offense is rape; the punishment, 10 years.

Prosecutrix, an eleven-year old girl, resided temporarily at 32 Taylor Courts in Houston, while the appellant, an eighteen-year old young man, resided at 17 Taylor Courts. Prosecutrix testified that she had seen the appellant before the night of the rape but did not know his name; that while she was asleep the appellant came in her room; that he then choked her, told her if she hollered he would kill her, dragged her out of the house to a spot nearby where he ravished her without her consent. As soon as she was released, the prosecutrix made her way back home, where she made prompt outcry, and was carried to the hospital where the examining physician found a tear in her vagina which required suturing.

Appellant was arrested, identified by the prosecutrix in a lineup, and his underpants were shown by the testimony of a chemist to have semenal stains on and around the fly.

Appellant, testifying in his own behalf, denied the rape and stated that he was at home in bed. He was in a measure corroborated by two women who lived in the same house, but the State called a police officer on rebuttal who testified that the two women had told him on the night when the appellant was arrested that they did not know when the appellant had come home.

There are no formal bills of exception, and only two questions are raised in the brief.

Appellant first contends that the State failed to prove penetration. We do not agree. Prosecutrix was shown to refer to her private parts as “my self” and the appellant’s private parts as “his self.” She testified that he placed “his self” into “my self,” that it hurt, and that she bled. The doctor’s testimony further established penetration.

Appellant next contends that he was deprived of the right to examine an alleged statement which the prosecutrix made to the investigating officers. There is nothing in this record to indicate that the prosecutrix had in fact made a written statement concerning this offense. The record discloses the following question and answer, and nothing more: “Q. Did you make a statement, did you tell the police officer anything? A. Yes, sir.” Without a showing that prosecutrix had in fact made a written statement and that the same was in the hands of the investigating officers or the prosecution staff, nothing is presented for review.

Finding the evidence sufficient to support the conviction and no reversible error appearing, the judgment is affirmed.
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

No. 21

- 20148 Summary Calendar

**United States of America,**

Plaintiff

— Appellee **,**

versus

**Andres Vargas,**

Defendant

— Appellant

**.**

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:20

- CR

- 477

- 1

Before **Jolly, Willett,** and **Engelhardt,** Circuit Judges

. **Per Curiam :**  *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Andres Vargas
has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Vargas has not filed a response. We have reviewed

* Pursuant to **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  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 cuit**  **R ule**  47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED December 20, 2021
Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 21-20148 Document: 00516137881 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/20/2021No. 21

- 20148

2 counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appella te review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to
withdraw is **GRANTED** , counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the **APPEAL IS DISMISSED**

. See **5th Cir. R.** 42.2

. Case: 21-20148 Document: 00516137881 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/20/2021
EXHIBIT32

 

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO

18U.S.C. SECTION1350,

ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of YFC 355 Corp. (the"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2003, asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the"Report"), I, Anthony N. DeMint, President and Chief AccountingOfficer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

-  The    Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the    Securities Exchange Act of 1934; andThe    information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material    respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

/s/Anthony N.DeMint                       

AnthonyN. DeMint

Presidentand Chief Accounting Officer

October27, 2003
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

UNDER

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

PACIFIC
MERCANTILE BANCORP

Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q

for the
quarter ended March 31, 2007

The undersigned, who is the Chief Executive Officer of Pacific Mercantile Bancorp (the
Company), hereby certifies that (i) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2007, as filed by the Company with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Quarterly Report), to which this
Certification is an Exhibit, fully complies with the applicable requirements of Section 13(a) and 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and (ii) the information contained in this Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                   |  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                            
|------------------ |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: May 10, 2007 |  | /s/ RAYMOND E. DELLERBA                                                                                                                                                                                                    
|                   |  | Raymond E. Dellerba, President and Chief Executive Officer                                                                                                                                                                 
|                   | 
|                   |  | A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
June 12, 2014

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

ERIC DEMOND DOUGLAS, Appellant

NO. 14-13-00046-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

________________________________

This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. 

Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the 

judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED.

We further order appellant pay all costs expended in the appeal.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.