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

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3487 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 19, 2013 

Received 

AN ACT 

To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act to extend 

through 2018 the authority of the Federal Election Commission to impose civil money penalties on the basis 

of a schedule of penalties established and published by 

the Commission, to expand such authority to certain 

other violations, and for other purposes. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 3487 RDS

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

3 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTY AU4 THORITY OF FEDERAL ELECTION COMMIS5 SION THROUGH 2018. 

6 Section 309(a)(4)(C)(iv) of the Federal Election 

7 Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 437g(a)(4)(C)(iv)) is 

8 amended by striking ‘‘December 31, 2013’’ and inserting 

9 ‘‘December 31, 2018’’. 

10 SEC. 2. EXPANSION OF ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTY AU11 THORITY OF FEDERAL ELECTION COMMIS12 SION. 

13 (a) APPLICATION TO QUALIFIED DISCLOSURE RE14 QUIREMENTS.—Section 309(a)(4)(C)(i) of the Federal 

15 Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 

16 437g(a)(4)(C)(i)) is amended by striking ‘‘any require17 ment of section 304(a) of the Act (2 U.S.C. 434(a))’’ and 

18 inserting ‘‘a qualified disclosure requirement’’. 

19 (b) SCHEDULE OF PENALTIES FOR EACH VIOLA20 TION.—Section 309(a)(4)(C)(i)(II) of the Federal Elec21 tion Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 

22 437g(a)(4)(C)(i)(II)) is amended by inserting ‘‘, for viola23 tions of each qualified disclosure requirement,’’ before 

24 ‘‘under a schedule of penalties’’. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

HR 3487 RDS

1 (c) DEFINITION OF QUALIFIED DISCLOSURE RE2 QUIREMENT.—Section 309(a)(4)(C) of the Federal Elec3 tion Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 437g(a)(4)(C)) is 

4 amended— 

5 (1) by redesignating clause (iv), as amended by 

6 section 1, as clause (v); and 

7 (2) by inserting after clause (iii) the following 

8 new clause: 

9 ‘‘(iv) In this subparagraph, the term 

10 ‘qualified disclosure requirement’ means any re11 quirement of— 

12 ‘‘(I) subsections (a), (c), (e), (f), (g), 

13 or (i) of section 304; or 

14 ‘‘(II) section 305.’’. 

15 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

16 The amendments made by this Act shall take effect 

17 on the earlier of— 

18 (1) December 31, 2013; or 

19 (2) the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Passed the House of Representatives November 18, 

2013. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATIONS
PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350)






In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Hyperdynamics Corporation
(Hyperdynamics), on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2008, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), Kent P. Watts, Chief
Executive Officer of Hyperdynamics, does hereby certify, pursuant to 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350), that to his knowledge:




(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 result of operations of the Company.





Date:
      May 19, 2008By:
            /s/
      Kent P. WattsKent
      P. WattsChief
      Executive Officer
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13

- 60277 Summary Calendar

DORIS VIANEY CULEBRO TRINIDAD HERNANDEZ , Petitioner

v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL , Respondent

Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A099 158 876

Before BENAVIDES, CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Doris Vianey Culebro Trinidad Hernandez , a native and citizen of
Mexico , has filed a petition for review of the order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming the denial of h er application for withholding of removal. Hernandez sought withholding of removal based on threatening phone calls she and her family received from individuals in Mexico demanding

money.

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED January 9, 2014

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 13-60277 Document: 00512494855 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/09/2014N o. 13

- 60277

We review the order of the BIA and will consider t he underlying decisi on of the immigration judge only if it had some impact upon the BIA’s decision. Orellana

- Monson v. Holder , 685 F.3d 511, 517 (5th Cir. 2011). “To be eligible for withholding of removal, an applicant must demonstrate a clear probability of persecution on the basis of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.” Chen v. Gonzales , 470 F. 3d 1131, 1138 (5th Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted)

. Hernandez contends that the BIA erred in dete rmining that she failed to demonstrate past persecution and a clear probability of future persecution. She also challenges the BIA’s alternative determination that she failed to demonstrate membership in a particular social group for purposes of withholdi ng of removal. The BIA’s determination that an alien is not eligible for withholding of removal is reviewed under the substa ntial evidence standard. Chen , 470 F.3d at 1134. Under that standard, we will not reverse the BIA’s decision unless the evidence not only supports a contrary conclusion but compels it. Id. Members of Hernandez’s family continue to live in Mexico, and she and her family have not been harmed beyond receiving threatenin g phone calls demanding money

. Economic extortion does not constitute a form of persecution under immigration law

. Castillo

- Enriquez v. Holder , 690 F.3d 667, 668 (5th Cir. 2012) . T he BIA’s determination that Hernandez failed to make the requisite showing regarding persecution is supported by substantial evidence

. The petition for review is DENIED.

2 Case: 13-60277 Document: 00512494855 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/09/2014
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.



## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2009-3102 TERESITA LAZARTE,

Petitioner,

v. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT, Respondent. Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection Board

in SF0831080468-I-1. ON MOTION Before LINN Circuit Judge. ORDER Upon consideration of the Office of Personnel Management's motion for an extension of time, until April 27, 2009, to file its brief, IT IS ORDERED THAT: The motion is granted. FOR THE COURT 

### MAY -12009 /s/ Jan Horbaly Date Jan Horbaly Clerk

cc: Teresita Lazarte Leslie Cayer Ohta, Esq. s8 MeV_ U.S. COURT OF AMAI.3 FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT MAY -1 Z009
CLERK
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                         173,279
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  438,467
<ALLOWANCES>                                    25,000
<INVENTORY>                                  1,366,507
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,979,841
<PP&E>                                       9,977,278
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,529,873
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,514,161
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,075,549
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        11,605
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,867,454
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,514,161
<SALES>                                      5,927,125
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             6,068,763
<CGS>                                        3,995,471
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,914,244
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 3,184
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             370,388
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (219,053)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    64,753
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (154,300)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (154,300)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.013)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.013)


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3458 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3458

 To treat payments by charitable organizations with respect to certain 
                    firefighters as exempt payments.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 12, 2013

Ms. Slaughter introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To treat payments by charitable organizations with respect to certain 
                    firefighters as exempt payments.

    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 ``Fallen Firefighters Assistance Tax 
Clarification Act of 2013''.

SEC. 2. PAYMENTS BY CHARITABLE ORGANIZATIONS WITH RESPECT TO CERTAIN 
              FIREFIGHTERS TREATED AS EXEMPT PAYMENTS.

    (a) In General.--For purposes of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, 
payments made to--
            (1) any firefighter who was injured as a result of the 
        ambush of firefighters responding to an emergency on December 
        24, 2012, in Webster, New York,
            (2) the spouse of any firefighter who died as a result of 
        such ambush, or
            (3) any dependent (as defined in section 152 of such Code) 
        of any firefighter who died as a result of such ambush,
by an organization described in paragraph (1) or (2) of section 509(a) 
of such Code shall be treated as related to the purpose or function 
constituting the basis for such organization's exemption under section 
501 of such Code if such payments are made in good faith using a 
reasonable and objective formula which is consistently applied.
    (b) Application.--Subsection (a) shall apply only to payments made 
on or after December 24, 2012, and before the later of--
            (1) January 1, 2014, or
            (2) the date which is 30 days after the date of the 
        enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```