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

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 235 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 235

 Concerning the negotiation of limitations on nuclear weapons testing.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 24, 1994

  Mr. Sabo (for himself, Mr. Kopetski, Mr. Dellums, and Mr. Gephardt) 
 submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to 
                    the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
 Concerning the negotiation of limitations on nuclear weapons testing.

Whereas, on January 25, 1994, the United States joined with thirty-seven other 
        nations to begin negotiations for a comprehensive treaty to ban 
        permanently all nuclear weapons testing;
Whereas, on March 14, 1994, the President decided to extend the current United 
        States nuclear testing moratorium at least through September 1995;
Whereas the United States is seeking to extend indefinitely the Non-
        Proliferation Treaty at the April 1995 NPT Extension Conference;
Whereas conclusion of a comprehensive test ban treaty would contribute toward 
        successful negotiations to extend the Non-Proliferation Treaty; and
Whereas, agreements to eliminate nuclear testing and control the spread of 
        nuclear weapons would contribute to the national security of the United 
        States, its allies, and other nations around the world: Now, therefore, 
        be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That Congress--
            (1) applauds the President for maintaining the United 
        States nuclear testing moratorium and for taking a leadership 
        role toward negotiation of a comprehensive test ban treaty;
            (2) encourages all nuclear powers to refrain from 
        conducting nuclear explosions, prior to conclusion of a 
        comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty; and
            (3) urges the Conference on Disarmament to make all 
        possible progress toward a comprehensive test ban treaty by the 
        end of 1994.

                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 221 (Wednesday, November 15, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 69014]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-29188]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[Report No. 2450]


Petitions for Reconsideration of Action in Rulemaking Proceedings

November 7, 2000.
    Petitions for Reconsideration have been filed in the Commission's 
rulemaking proceedings listed in this Public Notice and published 
pursuant to 47 CFR 1.429(e). The full text of this document is 
available for viewing and copying in Room CY-A257, 445 12th Street, 
SW., Washington, DC or may be purchased from the Commission's copy 
contractor, ITS, Inc. (202) 857-3800. Oppositions to these petitions 
must be filed by November 30, 2000. See Section 1.4(b)(1) of the 
Commission's rules (47 CFR 1.4(b)(1)). Replies to an opposition must be 
filed within 10 days after the time for filing oppositions have 
expired.
    Subject: Revision of the Commission's Rules to Ensure Compatibility 
with enhanced 911 Emergency Calling Systems (CC Docket No. 94-102).
    Number of Petitions Filed: 2.
    Subject: Amendment of Parts 1, 2 and 101 of the Commission's rules 
to License Fixed Services at 24 GHz (WT Docket No. 99-327).
    Number of Petitions Filed: 2.

Federal Communications Commission.
Magalie Roman Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-29188 Filed 11-14-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-M
_______________________________________ __ 

### Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan



## September 22, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice



## 136415 Michael F. Cavanag h Elizabeth A. Weave r Marilyn Kell y Maura D. Corriga n 

## PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Robert P. Young, Jr. 

## Plaintiff-Appellee, Stephen J. Markman, J ustices 

## v SC: 136415 COA: 284076 Clinton CC: 05-007710-FC STEVEN JAMES GILBERT, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _________________________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the April 7, 2008 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

s0915 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

September 22, 2008

Clerk
| | Re: | Annual Statement of Compliance for Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities, Inc., Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates,
Series 2015-NXS2
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





Per the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of July 1, 2015 (the "Agreement"),
the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Certificate Administrator ("Wells Fargo"), hereby
certifies as follows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2016 (the "Reporting Period"):





(a) A review of Wells Fargo's activities during the Reporting Period and
of its performance under the Agreement has been made under such officer's supervision; and



(b) To the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, Wells
Fargo has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.







February 27, 2017

































Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
#### HILL v. STATE.

No. 22475.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 3, 1943.

Doss Hardin, of Dallas, for appellant.

Dean Gauldin, Crim. Dist. Atty., and Chas. A. Pippen, Asst. Dist. Atty., both of Dallas, and Spurgeon E. Bell, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

HAWKINS, Presiding Judge.

After the judgment of conviction had been affirmed, 171 S.W.2d 880, appellant was granted a writ of certiorari by the Supreme Court of the United States. Later the petition for certiorari was dismissed, 64 S.Ct. 72, 88 L.Ed. -, upon application of counsel for appellant, thus the jurisdiction of this court re-attached.

It is made known to the court that appellant has died pending this appeal and same is here now abated.
|                                                                                         
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                         
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                           
|View History: Annual                                                                     
|View History: Annual                                                                     
|View History:                                                                            
|                                                                                         
|Wisconsin Refinery Alkylates Production Capacity as of January 1 (Barrels per Stream Day)
|                                                                                         
|                                                                                         
|Wisconsin Refinery Alkylates Production Capacity as of January 1 (Barrels per Stream Day)
|                                                                                         

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1980's                                                                                                                            |        |        | 1,600  | 1,600  | 1,600  | 1,600  | 1,600  | 1,600  | 1,400  | 1,600 
|1990's                                                                                                                            | 1,600  | 1,600  | 1,600  | 1,600  | 1,600  | 1,600  | NA     | 1,500  | NA     | 1,500 
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 1,500  | 1,500  | 1,500  | 1,500  | 1,500  | 1,600  | 1,600  | 1,600  | 1,600  | 1,600 
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 1,600  | 1,600  | 1,600  | 1,600  | 1,600  | 1,600  | 1,600  | 1,600  | 1,700  | 1,700 
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 1,700  | 1,700  | 1,700  | 1,700  | 1,700  |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 6/14/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: June 2025
#### FERRELL v. STATE.

No. 26258.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 11, 1953.

No attorney on appeal, for appellant.

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

WOODLEY, Judge.

On a plea of guilty before the court appellant was assessed a fine of $300 and thirty days in jail for the sale and possession for purpose of sale of beer in a dry area.

The record contains no statement of facts and no bills of exception and the proceedings are regular.

The judgment is affirmed.
Case 2:22-cr-00065-Z-BR Document 33 Filed 09/21/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 77
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 305 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 305

Expressing the sense of Congress that the total amount appropriated for 
  fiscal year 1996 for defense programs should not exceed the amount 
  appropriated for those programs for fiscal year 1995 reduced by 10 
                                percent.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 3, 1994

  Ms. Furse submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Expressing the sense of Congress that the total amount appropriated for 
  fiscal year 1996 for defense programs should not exceed the amount 
  appropriated for those programs for fiscal year 1995 reduced by 10 
                                percent.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of Congress that the total amount appropriated for 
national defense programs (budget category 050) for fiscal year 1996 
should not exceed $236,430,000,000, such amount being the amount 
appropriated for those programs for fiscal year 1995 reduced by 10 
percent.
                                 <all>
```
|                                                                           
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                           
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                             
|View History: Annual                                                       
|View History: Annual                                                       
|View History:                                                              
|                                                                           
|Nebraska Number of Operable Refineries as of January 1 (Number of Elements)
|                                                                           
|                                                                           
|Nebraska Number of Operable Refineries as of January 1 (Number of Elements)
|                                                                           

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1980's                                                                                                                            |        |        | 1      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0     
|1990's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | NA     | 0      | NA     | 0     
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 6/14/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: June 2025
(logo) Rialto CAPITAL

 

**2016 Annual Statement of ServicerCompliance (Item 1123)**

 

               

Pooling and ServicingAgreement (the “Pooling and Servicing Agreement”) dated as of May1, 2015 by and among Credit Suisse First Boston Mortgage Securities Corp. asDepositor, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association as Master Servicer, RialtoCapital Advisors, LLC as Special Servicer, Park Bridge Lender Services LLC asOperating Advisor, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association as CertificateAdministrator and Wilmington Trust, National Association as Trustee relating tothe Credit Suisse First Boston Mortgage Securities Corp., CSAIL 2015-C2Commercial Mortgage Trust, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series2015-C2 

**(CSAIL 2015-C2)**

 

 

The undersigned, a dulyauthorized officer of Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC, as special servicer (the“Special Servicer”) herein certifies to the following:

 

1. All servicing activitiesand performance of such servicing activities under the Pooling and ServicingAgreement are performed on behalf of the Special Servicer.

 

2. A review of the servicingactivities and performance by the Special Servicer for the period of January 1,2016 to December 31, 2016 (the “Reporting Period”) in accordancewith the Pooling and Servicing Agreement has been conducted under my supervision.

 

3. To the best of myknowledge, based on such review, the Special Servicer has fulfilled all of itsobligations under the terms of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, in allmaterial respects for the Reporting Period and if there has been a failure tofulfill any such obligations in any material respect, each failure and thenature and status thereof has been specifically identified herein.

 

 

Certified by: /s/ Adam Singer

Adam Singer, Managing Director

Date: March 1, 2017
#### Ex parte Foy CROWELL.

No. 23170.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 6, 1945.

J. E. Newberry and M. M. Wade, both of Dallas, for appellant.

Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Relator has filed his affidavit, in accordance with the law, requesting the dismissal of the appeal which is accordingly done.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 275 Agreed to House (ATH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 275

       Waiving the requirement in section 132 of the Legislative 
Reorganization Act of 1946 that the Congress adjourn sine die not later 
                       than July 31 of each year.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 29, 1994

 Mr. Moakley submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
                        considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
       Waiving the requirement in section 132 of the Legislative 
Reorganization Act of 1946 that the Congress adjourn sine die not later 
                       than July 31 of each year.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That, notwithstanding the provisions of section 132(a)(1) of the 
Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (2 U.S.C. 198), the House of 
Representatives and the Senate shall not adjourn for a period in excess 
of three days, or adjourn sine die, until both Houses of Congress have 
adopted a concurrent resolution providing either for an adjournment (in 
excess of three days) to a day certain or for adjournment sine die.
                                 <all>
```
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________ No. 98-2483SI

_____________ James J. Probasco, * * Appellant, *

* v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Southern Richard Arnold; Steve Grgurich; Jim * District of Iowa. Wright; Jack Hardy; Larry Davis; Cleo * Sellers; Nick Konrady; Todd Folkert; * [UNPUBLISHED] Paul Goldsmith, * * Appellees. *

_____________ Submitted: January 7, 1999

Filed: January 19, 1999

_____________ Before FAGG, BEAM, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.

_____________ PER CURIAM. Jame s J. Probasco appeals the district court's adverse grant of summary ju dgment in Probasco's lawsuit against Richard Arnold and other current and former emplo yees of Lucas County, Iowa. Having considered the record and the parties ' briefs , we are satisfied the district court's judgment was correct, and an extende d discussion is not warranted. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.-2-

A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-6321
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus SHAHBORN EMMANUEL, a/k/a Lord Shahborn Emmanuel, a/k/a Michael O’Neil, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees, Chief District Judge. (5:95-cr-00006-2) Submitted: May 16, 2006 Decided: May 24, 2006 Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Shahborn Emmanuel, Appellant Pro Se. Gretchen C. F. Shappert, United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Shahborn Emmanuel appeals a district court order denying his motion to withdraw his guilty plea. We have reviewed the record and the district court order and affirm for the reasons cited by the district court. SeeUnited States v. Emmanuel , No. 5:95-cr-00006-2 (W.D.N.C. Feb. 2, 2006). 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
UNITED STATES
                    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

                         Washington, D.C. 20549

                               FORM 10-QSB/A

[X]   QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the Quarter ended April 30, 1996

[   ]   TRANSITION REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE EXCHANGE ACT
For the transition period           to
                          ---------    ----------
Commission file number     -    0-25614

                 GLOBUS CELLULAR & USER PROTECTION, LTD.
                 (formerly Leridges International, Inc.)
           (Exact name of Small Business Issuer in its charter)

        NEVADA                                       88-0228274
(State or other jurisdiction of          (I.R.S. Employer incorporation
   or organization                               Identification No.)
        
        
          1980 Windsor Road
    Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada               V1Y 4R5
 (Address of principal executive offices)          (Zip Code)

Registrant's Telephone number, including area code:    (604) 860-3130

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed all reports
required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange
Act of 1934 during the preceding twelve months (or such shorter period
that the Registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been 
subject to file such filing requirements for the past thirty days.

Yes    x      No
    ------       ------
Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer's classes of
common stock, as of the close of the period covered by this report:

3,297,241 Shares of Common Stock ($.001 par value)
          (Title of Class)

Transitional Small Business Disclosure Format (check one):      
Yes        No   x
    -----     -----














                                   SIGNATURE

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the 
registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the 
undersigned thereunto duly authorized.




Date:   June 14                         /s/  Dr. Paul F. Bickert
                                        ---------------------------
                                        Dr. Paul F. Bickert, President
Exhibit 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION 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 of Secured Digital  Applications,  Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly  period ending June 30, 2005 as
filed with the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof  (the
"Report"),   I,  Patrick  Soon-Hock  Lim,  Chief  Executive  Officer  (principal
executive officer) 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, to
my 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.


/s/ Patrick Soon-Hock Lim
-------------------------
Patrick Soon-Hock Lim
Chairman & Chief Executive Officer
June 15, 2006