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

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4842 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4842

  To extend the temporary suspension of duty on certain manufacturing 
                               equipment.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 26, 2012

 Mr. Wilson of South Carolina introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To extend the temporary suspension of duty on certain manufacturing 
                               equipment.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN MANUFACTURING EQUIPMENT.

     (a) In General.--Heading 9902.84.85 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to certain manufacturing 
equipment) is amended by striking the date in the effective period 
column and inserting ``12/31/2015''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4620 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4620

 To amend title 40, United States Code, to add certain counties in the 
   State of Mississippi to the region represented by the Appalachian 
                          Regional Commission.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 24, 2012

 Mr. Thompson of Mississippi introduced the following bill; which was 
     referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 40, United States Code, to add certain counties in the 
   State of Mississippi to the region represented by the Appalachian 
                          Regional Commission.

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

SECTION 1. APPALACHIAN REGION DEFINED.

    Section 14102(a)(1)(E) of title 40, United States Code, is 
amended--
            (1) by inserting ``Grenada,'' after ``Clay,''; and
            (2) by inserting ``Tallahatchie,'' after ``Prentiss,''.
                                 <all>
```
|                                                                                               
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                               
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                 
|View History: Annual                                                                           
|View History: Annual                                                                           
|View History:                                                                                  
|                                                                                               
|Texas - RRC District 1 Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions and Discoveries (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                               
|                                                                                               
|Texas - RRC District 1 Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions and Discoveries (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                               

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2010's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        | 753    | 1,217  | 2,951  | 696   
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 113    | 581    |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
|                                                           
|-----------------------------------------------------------
|                                                           
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)             
|View History: Annual                                       
|View History: Annual                                       
|View History:                                              
|                                                           
|New Mexico--West Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                           
|                                                           
|New Mexico--West Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                           

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 0      | 0      | 29    
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 88     | 121    | 83     | 80     | 42     | 106    | 71     | W      | 0      | 0     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
EXHIBIT  99.2


                             CERTIFICATE 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 (the "Report") on the Form 10-QSB of
Standard Capital Corporation (the "Company") for the three months ended November
30,  2004,  as  filed  with  the  Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof,  I,  E.  Del  Thachuk,  Chief Executive Officer, President and Director,
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

1.   The Quarterly Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a)
     or  15  (d)  of  the  Securities  and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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



Date:  October 24, 2005
                                    /s/   "E.  Del  Thachuk"
                                 -------------------------------
                                       E.  Del  Thachuk
                                  Chief  Executive  Officer,
                                   President  and  Director
#### Veerasammy Maripen et al., Plaintiffs, v Westinghouse Electric Corporation et al., Respondents, and V. L. Falotico, Inc., Doing Business as Simins Falotico Group, Inc., Appellant. (And Other Actions.)

Order of the Supreme Court, New York County (Kristin Booth Glen, J.), entered on December 15, 1989, which, *inter alia,*directed defendant V. L. Falotico, Inc., doing business as Simins Falotico Group, Inc., to make available certain documents for discovery and inspection, is unanimously affirmed, with costs and disbursements.

Defendant-appellant complains about a directive by the Supreme Court requiring additional discovery and inspection in connection with two actions seeking damages for personal injury and wrongful death arising out of an explosion at the Lutheran Medical Center in Brooklyn. In that regard, the various parties herein, despite repeated court conferences and scheduled appointments to exchange information, have not yet been able to complete discovery. According to appellant, defendant-respondent Westinghouse Electric Corporation was ac*174corded sufficient opportunity to inspect the requested documents but failed to do so. It, therefore, challenges the court’s setting the matter down for discovery once again on certain specified dates. However, regardless of whether or not Westinghouse neglected to take advantage of previous chances to examine the material in question, the fact remains that the court possesses broad latitude with respect to ordering discovery and inspection (CPLR 3103 [a]; *see also, Cynthia B. v New Rochelle Hosp. Med. Center,*60 NY2d 452; *Church & Dwight Co. v UDDO & Assocs.,*159 AD2d 275). The record here simply does not indicate any abuse or improvident exercise of discretion on the part of the calendar court. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Milonas and Smith, JJ.
|                                                                                                             
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                             
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                               
|View History: Annual                                                                                         
|View History: Annual                                                                                         
|View History:                                                                                                
|                                                                                                             
|No chart available.                                                                                          
|No chart available.                                                                                          
|                                                                                                             
|                                                                                                             
|Texas--RRC District 10 Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Reserves New Field Discoveries (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                                             

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 0     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | --     | --     | --     | --    
|2020's                                                                                                                            | --     | --     |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 20-1873

___________________________

United States of America,

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee,

v.

Donald Mauzy, also known as Lucky,

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant.

 ____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City

 ____________

 Submitted: October 28, 2021

Filed: November 4, 2021

[Unpublished]

____________

Before COLLOTON, SHEPHERD, and STRAS, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

Donald Mauzy appeals the sentence imposed by the district court1 after he

pleaded guilty to drug trafficking and firearms offenses, pursuant to a plea agreement

1The Honorable Roseann A. Ketchmark, United States District Judge for the

Western District of Missouri.
containing an appeal waiver. His counsel has moved for leave to withdraw, and has

filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the

sentence as substantively unreasonable. 

We will enforce the appeal waiver in this case because we conclude that the

waiver is valid, enforceable, and applicable to this appeal. See United States v. Scott,

627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010); United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th

Cir. 2003) (en banc). Further, we have independently reviewed the record under

Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and have found no non-frivolous issues for

appeal outside the scope of the appeal waiver.

Accordingly, we grant counsel leave to withdraw, and dismiss this appeal.

______________________________

-2-
EXHIBIT
      99.2




**FREDERIC
        P. ZOTOS**
 1623
        Avalon Drive
 Hull,
        MA
        02045
 
 Tel:
        (781) 925-0780 Fax:
        (781) 925 - 8665 Mobile:
        (781) 267-3667 E-Mail:
        fzotos@pathogenics.com
 
 January
        1, 2006
 
 William
        L. Sklar, Director
 Michael
        L. Ferrari, Director
 Pathogenics,
        Inc.
 99
        Derby
        Street
 Suite
        200
 Hingham,
        MA 02043
 United
        States
 
 Re:  Salary
        deferral and accrual for the period September 30 th -
        December 31 st ,
        2005
 
 Dear
        Bill
        and Mike:
 
 This
        letter constitutes my written notification to the Company and you its acting
        board of directors to defer and accrue my salary for the Company’s fourth
        quarterly fiscal period September 30 th -
        December 31st, 2005 in accordance with the terms of my Employment Agreement
        (between Pathogenics, Inc. and Frederic P. Zotos, dated March 15, 2005, and
        as
        first amended January 1, 2006). The pertinent terms of the Employment Agreement
        are as follows:
 
 “.
        . .
        the Employee may choose to defer and accrue a portion of the Base Salary.
        The
        salary deferral and accrual shall end and Company will pay the Employee in
        full
        the deferred and accrued salary amount hereunder upon the earlier of either
        the
        Employee’s own determination, the termination of employment of the Employee
        under the terms of this Agreement, or the expiration of the Term of this
        Agreement. The Employee shall receive interest on any amount of deferred
        and
        accrued salary hereunder at an annual percentage rate of ten percent (10%).”
(Employment Agreement, §3(a))
  This
        salary deferral and accrual shall end and the Company will pay me in full
        the
        deferred and accrued salary for this period when it has sufficient funds
        to do
        so, but in no event later than January 31, 2007.
  Sincerely,
  /s/
        Frederic P. Zotos
 Frederic
        P. Zotos, Esq.
 President
        & CEO
Order entered November .E3 , 2012 

In The 

Court of Zippeaffs 

jriftb Mi5trict of Texa5 at 71Baffao 

No. 05-12-01041-CR 

MICAL DANTRAL FORD, Appellant 

V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. F08-72750-M 

ORDER 

The Court REINSTATES the appeal. 

On October 29, 2012, we ordered the trial court to make findings regarding why 

appellant's brief had not been filed. On November 2, 2012, we received appellant's brief, 

together with an extension motion. Therefore, we VACATE the October 29, 2012 order. 

We GRANT the November 2, 2012 extension motion and ORDER appellant's brief 

filed as of the date of this order. 

L 

DAVID L. BRIDGES 

JUSTICE
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Willie Thornton, Appellant.

(Appeal No. 2.)

Judgment *936unanimously affirmed. Same memorandum as in *People v Thornton*([appeal No. 1] 167 AD2d 935 [decided herewith]). (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Easier, J.—attempted sodomy, first degree.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Denman, Green and Balio, JJ.
#### REED v. STATE.

No. 26091.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Dec. 3, 1952.

No attorney on appeal for appellant.

George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

The appeal is from a conviction for driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor. The jury assessed his punishment at a fine of $100.

The record on appeal contains neither a statement of facts nor bills of exception. Nothing is presented for the consideration of this court and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Exhibit



Certain identified information in this Exhibit, indicated by the mark “[***],” has been excluded because it is both (i) not material and (ii) would be competitively harmful if publicly disclosed.



Exhibit 10.24
SECOND AMENDMENT TO
PRIVATE LABEL BANKING PROGRAM AGREEMENT


This SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE PRIVATE LABEL BANKING PROGRAM AGREEMENT, effective as of September 30, 2017 (the “Second Amendment Effective Date”), is by and between T-MOBILE USA, INC., a corporation organized and existing under the laws of Delaware, with offices located at 12920 SE 38th Street, Bellevue, Washington 98006-1250 (“Company”), and CUSTOMERS BANK, a Pennsylvania state-chartered banking institution with a mailing address of 99 Bridge Street, Phoenixville, Pennsylvania 19460 (“Bank”), and amends the Agreement (as defined below) (this “Second Amendment”). Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Agreement.


RECITALS


WHEREAS, Bank and Company entered into that certain Private Label Banking Program Agreement, effective as of February 24, 2017 (the “Agreement”), as amended by the First Amendment effective September 30, 2017 (“the First Amendment”);


WHEREAS, the Agreement sets forth each Party’s rights and responsibilities with respect to developing, marketing, and offering the Program; and


WHEREAS, Bank and Company desire to enter into this Second Amendment to amend certain terms and conditions of the Agreement as set forth below.


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises, covenants, and agreements herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties hereby agree as follows:


1.1 AMENDMENTS TO THE AGREEMENT


Section 9.2 of the Agreement is hereby amended to add the following subsection to clarify the nature of the payments to the Bank:


“9.2     (d) The payments made under section 9.2(a), 9.2(b)(i), and 9.2(c) are intended to compensate the Bank for expenses they incur during the preliminary project phase, including but not limited to expenses related to planning activities, conceptual formulation of ideas, and evaluation and selection of alternatives related to the performance and functional requirements of the Program. They are also intended to compensate the Bank for expenses related to training, data migration or conversion activities, and other operating expenses.”


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement is executed by the Parties’ authorized officers or representatives and shall be effective as of the date first above-written.
	
					
	T-MOBILE USA, INC. (COMPANY)
	 
	CUSTOMERS BANK (CUBI)

	 
	 
	 
	 
	 

	By:
	/s/ [***]
	 
	By:
	/s/ [***]

	Name:
	[***]
	 
	Name:
	[***]

	Title:
	[***]
	 
	Title:
	[***]

	Date:
	10/24/2017 | 7:51 AM PDT
	 
	Date:
	 






Reviewed and Approved as to Form
/s/ [***]
T-Mobile Legal
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U. S. C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES -0XLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the Annual Report of Cal Alta Auto
 Glass, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB
for the period ending December 31, 2006,as filed with the
 Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"), I, Frank Aiello, President 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; and

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

April 14, 2008                            /s/ Frank Aiello
                                         -------------------
                                              Frank Aiello
                                              President/CEO/
				Principal Accounting Officer