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

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 420 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. J. RES. 420

          To approve the location of a Thomas Paine Memorial.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 30, 1994

 Mrs. Lowey introduced the following joint resolution; which was read 
        twice and referred to the Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
          To approve the location of a Thomas Paine Memorial.

Whereas section 6(a) of the Act entitled ``An Act to provide standards for 
        placement of commemorative works on certain Federal lands in the 
        District of Columbia and its environs, and for other purposes,'' 
        approved November 14, 1986 (Public Law 99-652; 100 Stat. 3650) provides 
        that the location of a commemorative work in the area described as Area 
        I shall be deemed disapproved unless the location is approved by law not 
        later than 150 days after notification of Congress that the 
        commemorative work may be located in Area I; and
Whereas Public Law 102-407 authorized the Thomas Paine National Historical 
        Association U.S.A. Memorial Foundation to establish a memorial on 
        Federal land in the District of Columbia to Thomas Paine; and
Whereas the Secretary of the Interior has notified the Congress of his 
        determination that the memorial may be located in Area I: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That the location of a Thomas 
Paine Memorial, authorized by Public Law 102-407 and within Area I as 
described in Public Law 99-652, is approved.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit32.2**

 

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

 

 

Pursuant to section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) ofsection 1350, chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the undersignedofficer of NeoPharm, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), does herebycertify with respect to the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q forthe quarter ended September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission (the “10-Q Report”) that:

 

(1)                                  the 10-Q Report fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934; and

 

(2)                                  the information contained in the 10-Q Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 

 
| Dated:  November 8, 2004 | /s/ Lawrence A. Kenyon  |   |
|-------------------------------|-------------------------|--------|
|                          | Lawrence A. Kenyon,     |
|                          | Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
# United States Court of Appeals

For the First Circuit

No. 19-1389

THOMAS FRANCHINI,

Plaintiff, Appellee,

v.

INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY, INC., d/b/a Investor's Business Daily,

Defendant, Appellant,

and

BANGOR PUBLISHING COMPANY, INC., d/b/a Bangor Daily News; MEG HASKELL; EDWARD MURPHY; GANNETT COMPANY, INC., d/b/a USA Today; DONOVAN SLACK; SALLY PIPES; MTM ACQUISITION, INC., d/b/a Portland Press Herald,

Defendants.

**ERRATA SHEET**

The opinion of this Court, issued on November 13, 2020, is
amended as follows:

On page 5, line 16 replace the word "are" with "a" before the phrase "foreword by Milton Friedman."
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   OTHER
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-29-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-06-1996
<CASH>                                         268,384
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   83,951
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     78,802
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               485,659
<PP&E>                                       5,546,523
<DEPRECIATION>                                 913,218
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,032,379
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,522,749
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                           750
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        2,940,249
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                 (3,711,887)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,032,379
<SALES>                                      5,979,299
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,979,299
<CGS>                                        1,840,423
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                6,074,533
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               637,266
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             223,281
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (938,251)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (938,251)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (938,251)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.01)
        

</TABLE>
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

JENNIFER VANDERSTOK, et al. Case No. 4:22-cv-00691-O

 Plaintiffs, District Judge Reed O’Connor

 v.

MERRICK GARLAND, in his official 

capacity as Attorney General of the United 

States, et al., 

 Defendants.

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Martin M. Tomlinson, of the United States Department of 

Justice Civil Division, eligible to practice in this Court pursuant to Local Rule 83.11, hereby enters his 

appearance in this action on behalf of all Defendants. 

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 21 Filed 08/18/22 Page 1 of 3 PageID 330
2

DATED: August 18, 2022 BRIAN M. BOYNTON

Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General

ALEXANDER K. HAAS

Director, Federal Programs Branch

LESLEY FARBY

Assistant Director, Federal Programs Branch

/s/ Martin M. Tomlinson 

MARTIN M. TOMLINSON

Trial Attorney

Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch

U.S. Department of Justice

1100 L Street, NW

Washington, DC 20005

Phone: (202) 353-4556

Email: martin.m.tomlinson@usdoj.gov

Counsel for Defendants

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 21 Filed 08/18/22 Page 2 of 3 PageID 331
3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

On August 18, 2022, I electronically submitted the foregoing document with the clerk of court 

for the U.S. District Court, Northern District of Texas, using the electronic case filing system of the 

court. I hereby certify that I have served all parties electronically or by another manner authorized by 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5(b)(2).

/s/ Martin M. Tomlinson

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 21 Filed 08/18/22 Page 3 of 3 PageID 332
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

June 5, 2013

s0529 

# Order

Clerk June 5, 2013

146523

- 4

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 146523

- 4

COA: 309384, 310456

Oakland CC: 2008

- 222726

- FC

SCHUYLER DION CHENAULT,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 27, 2012

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, an d it is GRANTED. The parties shall

include among the issues to be briefed: (1) whether the Court of Appeals’ decision in

People v Lester , 232 Mich App 262, 281 (1998), correctly articulates what a defendant

must show to establish a Brady violation; (2) whether the Court of Appeals erred when it

reversed the trial court’s grant of a new trial, which was premised on the prosecution’s

violation of the rule from Brady v Maryland , 373 US 83; 83 S Ct 1194; 10 L Ed 2d 215

(1963); and (3) whether trial coun sel rendered ineffective assistance of counsel under

Strickland v Washington , 466 US 668; 104 S Ct 2052 ; 80 L Ed 2d 674 (1984), for failing

to exercise reasonable diligence after learning of the existence of the videotaped

interviews.

The Criminal Law Sect ion of the State Bar of Michigan, the Prosecuting Attorneys

Association of Michigan, and the Criminal Defense Attorneys of Michigan are invited to

file briefs amicus curiae. Other p ersons or groups interested in the determination of the

issue s presented i n this case may move the Court for permission to file briefs amicus

curiae.
Exhibit 32.2





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 Andean Development Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Lance Larson, Principal Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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, as amended; and

(2)

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



By/s/ Lance Larson



Lance Larson

Principal Accounting Officer



Date:  May 16, 2005
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1017 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1017

 To amend title 10, United States Code, to authorize the Secretary of 
    Defense to assign Department of Defense personnel to assist the 
 Immigration and Naturalization Service and the United States Customs 
           Service perform their border protection functions.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 18, 1993

Mr. Traficant introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 10, United States Code, to authorize the Secretary of 
    Defense to assign Department of Defense personnel to assist the 
 Immigration and Naturalization Service and the United States Customs 
           Service perform their border protection functions.

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

SECTION 1. DETAIL OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PERSONNEL TO ASSIST 
              IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE AND CUSTOMS 
              SERVICE.

    (a) Authority of Secretary of Defense.--Section 374 of title 10, 
United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
subsection:
    ``(d)(1) During each fiscal year, the Secretary of Defense may make 
not more than 10,000 Department of Defense personnel available to 
assist--
            ``(A) at the request of the Attorney General, the 
        Immigration and Naturalization Service in preventing the entry 
        of terrorists, drug traffickers, and illegal aliens into the 
        United States; and
            ``(B) at the request of the Secretary of the Treasury, the 
        United States Customs Service in the inspection of cargo, 
        vehicles, and aircraft at points of entry into the United 
        States.
    ``(2) Section 377 of this title shall apply in the case of 
Department of Defense personnel made available under paragraph (1).''.
    (b) Clerical Amendments.--The heading of such section is amended to 
read as follows:
``Sec. 374. Use of personnel to maintain and operate equipment and to 
              provide other assistance
    (2) The item relating to such section in the table of sections at 
the beginning of chapter 18 of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
to read as follows:

``374. Use of personnel to maintain and operate equipment and to 
                            provide other assistance.''.
    (c) Effective Date.--Subsection (d) of section 374 of title 10, 
United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall take effect on 
October 1, 1993.

                                 <all>
```
----

Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 70/2001 of 12 January 2001 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises

(2005/C 305/03)

(Text with EEA relevance)

----
EXHIBIT 32.1

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Image Sensing Systems, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, James Murdakes, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, 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.



/s/ James Murdakes
James Murdakes
Chief Executive Officer
August 5, 2004
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ronald Baxter, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Giaccio, J.), rendered January 6, 1988, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf., People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Mangano, P. J., Kunzeman, Sullivan and Ritter, JJ., concur.
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER ON MOTION

Cause Number: 01-14-00179-CV

Trial Court Cause 

Number: 2012-07156

Style: Victor Kareh M.D.

v. Tracy Windrum, Individually, as Representative of the Estate of Lancer Windrum, and 

on Behalf of her Minor Children B.W., J.W., and H.W.

Date motion filed*: January 9, 2015

Type of motion: Motion for Extension of Time to File Reply Brief

Party filing motion: Appellant

Document to be filed: Reply Brief

Is appeal accelerated? Yes No

If motion to extend time:

Original due date: January 20, 2015

Number of previous extensions granted: 1

Date Requested: February 4, 2015

Ordered that motion is:

 Granted

If document is to be filed, document due: February 4, 2015

Absent extraordinary circumstances, the Court will not grant additional motions to extend time

The Court will not grant additional motions to extend time.

 Denied

 Dismissed (e.g., want of jurisdiction, moot)

 Other: _____________________________________ 

Judge's signature: /s/ Evelyn V. Keyes

 Acting individually Acting for the Court

Date: January 13, 2015
III

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 105

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 27 (legislative day, APRIL 19), 1993

Received

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Providing for an adjournment of the House from the legislative day of Thursday, May 27, 1993, to Tuesday, June

8, 1993, and an adjournment or recess of the Senate

from Friday, May 28, 1993, until Monday, June 7, 1993.

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That when the House adjourns on the legisla3 tive day of Thursday, May 27, 1993, it stand adjourned

4 until noon on Tuesday, June 8, 1993, or until noon on

5 the second day after Members are notified to reassemble

6 pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, which7 ever occurs first; and that when the Senate recesses or

8 adjourns at the close of business on Friday, May 28, 1993,

9 pursuant to a motion made by the Majority Leader, or

10 his designee, in accordance with this resolution, it stand

11 recessed or adjourned until noon, or until such time as
2

HCON 105 RDS

1 may be specified by the Majority Leader or his designee

2 in the motion to adjourn or recess, on Monday, June 7,

3 1993, or until noon on the second day after Members are

4 notified to reassemble pursuant to section 2 of this concur5 rent resolution, whichever occurs first.

6 SEC. 2. The Speaker of the House and the Majority

7 Leader of the Senate, acting jointing after consultation

8 with the Minority Leader of the House and the Minority

9 Leader of the Senate, shall notify the Members of the

10 House and the Senate, respectively, to reassemble when11 ever, in their opinion, the public interest shall warrant it.

Passed the House of Representatives May 27, 1993.

Attest: DONNALD K. ANDERSON,

Clerk.
Case 4:22-cr-00267-Y Document 50 Filed 09/14/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 57
Case 4:22-cr-00267-Y Document 50 Filed 09/14/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 58
IR-4 Project Headquarters Rutgers, The State UniversityofNewJersey 500 College Road East, Suite 201W Princeton, NJ 08540 732.932.9575 fax: 609-514-2612 www.ir4.rutgers.edu



### SUBJECT: Statement ofNo CBI in Crop Group Petitions FROM: Bill Barney, Crop Grouping Manager, IR-4 Project To: Laura Nallen, Biologist, MinorUse Team Registration Division (7505P) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Date: July 16, 2014 CC: BarbaraMadden (EPA), Dan Kunkel (IR-4), Jerry Baron (IR-4)
DearMs. Nallen:
Per your request I can confirm that the following Crop Grouping petitions do not contain any confidential business information (CBI) that would prevent them from being loadedto the public docket: 1. Volume 1& 2: CROP GROUPING PETITION- BRASSICA HEAD AND STEM VEGETABLES, TECHNICAL AMENDMENT TO 40 CFR 180.41 (c) (5); (Broccoli; Brussels Sprouts; Cabbage, Head; Cabbage, Chinese (napa); Cauliflower) 2. Volumes 1, 2 & 3: CROP GROUPING PETITION- LEAFY VEGETABLES, TECHNICAL AMENDMENT (ADDITION) TO 40 CFR 180.41 (c) AND 180.1 (g) 3. Volumes 1 &2: CROP GROUPING PETITION- STALK, STEM AND LEAFY PETIOLE VEGETABLE, TECHNICAL AMENDMENT (ADDITION) TO 40 CFR 180.41 (c) 4. Volumes 1 & 2: CROP GROUPING PETITION- TROPICAL AND SUBTROPICAL FRUIT, EDIBLE PEEL, TECHNICAL AMENDMENT (ADDITION) TO 40 CFR 180.41 (c) AND 180.1 (h) 5. Volumes 1 & 2: CROP GROUPING PETITION- TROPICAL AND SUBTROPICAL FRUIT, INEDIBLE PEEL, TECHNICAL AMENDMENT (ADDITION) TO 40 CFR 180.41 (c) AND 180.1 (g) 

### Sincerely,



# LJ~~



# ~ Bill Barney Crop Grouping Manger IR -4 Project

Majorfundingfor IR-4 isprovided by Special Research Grants andHatchActFundsfrom USDA-CSREES , in cooperation with the StateAgriculturalExperimental Stations and USDA-ARS.

THE STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW JERSEY 

# UTGERS
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

June 25, 2012

h0618

Order 

June 25, 2012

144704

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 144704

COA: 301226

Kalamazoo CC: 2010-000090-FC

KEVIN DELANDO TURNER,

Defendant-Appellant.

____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 24, 2012 

judgment 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.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.3

                            PENN-AKRON CORPORATION'S

                         OBLIGATION TO FORWARD PAYMENTS



The undersigned, on behalf of Penn-Akron Corporation, hereby acknowledges that
Penn-Akron Corporation has assigned it rights to monies due or to become due
under certain contracts and/or purchase orders to PrinVest Corp.

As it may take a few weeks before all such assignments result in the proper
redirection of payments to PrinVest's lockbox and, as subsequent payments may
be occasionally misdirected to Penn-Akron Corporation, it is agreed, effective
immediately, all payments received by Penn-Akron Corporation which relate to
any contracts and/or purchase orders previously assigned to PrinVest will be
forwarded directly to PrinVest within two (2) business days of their receipt.

Failure to remit any such payments directly and immediately to PrinVest
Financial Corp in accordance with Section 6 of the Financing and Security
Agreement executed by and between Penn-Akron Corporation and PrinVest Financial
Corp, on June 8, 2000, will be deemed an Event of Default thereunder
and such diversion of funds may, at the sole discretion of the PrinVest
Financial Corp, result in the following:

     1.   A five percent (5%) conversion fee, based on the face value of each
          assigned payment that is received, but not forwarded to Lender.

     2.   Renotification to the account debtor to make all future payments
          directly to the PrinVest's lockbox.

     3.   Other remedies available to the Borrower as permitted under the
          Financing and Security Agreement (as it may have been amended) and
          the Uniform Commercial Code.




ACCEPTED AND EXECUTED this 8th day of June 2000 .
                           ----       ----,   -


PENN-AKRON CORPORATION

By: /s/ Christopher J.S. Baker
   ------------------------------------------------------------------
   Signature of President, CFO, Controller or Corporate Officer

   Chief Financial Officer
   ------------------------------------------------------------------
   Title

   6/8/2000
   ------------------------------------------------------------------
   Date


                                    Page 1
Case 4:22-cv-00825-P Document 12-1 Filed 09/20/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 756