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

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 419

Designating the week beginning October 23, 1994, as ‘‘Center City Church

Week’’.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 30, 1994

Mr. HASTERT (for himself and Mr. HALL of Ohio) introduced the following

joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Post Office and

Civil Service

JOINT RESOLUTION

Designating the week beginning October 23, 1994, as

‘‘Center City Church Week’’.

Whereas businesses and people are abandoning urban areas;

Whereas center city churches continue to remain a part of

urban areas and confront the challenges that exist there;

Whereas center city churches serve as refuges for the colorful

array of people clustered in urban areas;

Whereas center city churches are in the forefront of feeding

the hungry, clothing the destitute, and providing new economic opportunities;

Whereas center city churches are in the forefront of reaching

out to at-risk youth with recreation programs, literacy

classes, and job training; and
2

•HJ 419 IH

Whereas center city churches are the urban Good Samaritans

offering life and hope through the gospel of Jesus Christ:

Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That the week beginning October 23, 1994, is designated

4 as ‘‘Center City Church Week’’, and the President is au5 thorized and requested to issue a proclamation calling on

6 the people of the United States to observe the week with

7 appropriate ceremonies and activities.

Æ
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA §

§

v. § CASE NO.: 3:22-CR-00326-L

§

MARKIEST JARMOL CALLINS (7) §

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE CONCERNING PLEA OF GUILTY

After reviewing all relevant matters of record, including the Notice Regarding Entry of a Plea of Guilty, the Consent 

of the defendant, and the Report and Recommendation Concerning Plea of Guilty of the United States Magistrate Judge, 

and no objections thereto having been filed within fourteen days of service in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the 

undersigned District Judge is of the opinion that the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge concerning the 

Plea of Guilty is correct, and it is hereby accepted by the Court. Accordingly, the Court accepts the plea of guilty, and 

MARKIEST JARMOL CALLINS is hereby adjudged guilty of 21 U.S.C § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(C) and 18 U.S.C. § 2, 

namely, Possession With the Intent to Distribute a Controlled Substance, Aiding and Abetting. Sentence will be imposed 

in accordance with the Court's scheduling order.

☒ The defendant is ordered to remain in custody.

☐ The Court accepts the findings of the United States Magistrate Judge by clear and convincing evidence that the 

defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other person or the community if released and should therefore 

be released under § 3142(b) or (c).

☐ Upon motion, this matter shall be set for hearing before the United States Magistrate Judge who set the conditions 

of release for determination, by clear and convincing evidence, of whether the defendant is likely to flee or pose a 

danger to any other person or the community if released under § 3142(b) or (c).

☐ The defendant is not ordered detained pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3143(a)(2) pending determination of whether it has 

been clearly shown that there are exceptional circumstances under § 3145(c) why the defendant should not be 

detained under § 3143(a)(2), and whether it has been shown by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant is 

not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other person or the community if released under § 3142(b) or (c). This 

matter shall be referred to the United States Magistrate Judge who set the conditions of release.

SIGNED this 15th day of November, 2024.

________________________________________

SAM A. LINDSAY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:22-cr-00326-L Document 624 Filed 11/15/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID 1979
EXHIBIT 32.1

# CERTIFICATION PURSUANT
TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly
Report of Image Sensing System, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period
ended March 31, 2006, 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 OfficerMay 5, 2006

---
`[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 78 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.J.Res.78
                       One Hundred Third Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America


                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
  the fifth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-three


                            Joint Resolution

  
 
  Designating the weeks beginning May 23, 1993, and May 15, 1994, as 
``Emergency

                        Medical Services Week''.

Whereas emergency medical services is a vital public service;
Whereas access to quality emergency care dramatically improves the 
  survival and recovery rate of those who experience sudden illness or 
  injury;
Whereas efforts to establish emergency medicine as a medical specialty 
  began 25 years ago with the founding of the American College of 
  Emergency Physicians in 1968;
Whereas the members of emergency medical services teams are ready to 
  provide lifesaving care to those in need 24 hours a day, 7 days a 
  week;
Whereas emergency medical services teams consist of emergency 
  physicians, emergency nurses, emergency medical technicians, 
  paramedics, firefighters, educators, administrators, and others;
Whereas approximately \2/3\ of all emergency medical services providers 
  are volunteers;
Whereas the members of emergency medical services teams, whether career 
  or volunteer, engage in thousands of hours of specialized training and 
  continuing education to enhance their lifesaving skills;
Whereas Americans benefit daily from the knowledge and skills of these 
  highly trained individuals;
Whereas it is appropriate to recognize the value and the accomplishments 
  of emergency medical services providers by designating Emergency 
  Medical Services Week; and
Whereas the designation of Emergency Medical Services Week will serve to 
  educate all Americans about injury prevention and how to respond to a 
  medical emergency: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That the weeks beginning May 
23, 1993, and May 15, 1994, are designated as ``Emergency Medical 
Services Week'' and the President is authorized and requested to issue a 
proclamation calling upon the people of the United States to observe 
such weeks with appropriate ceremonies and activities.







                                Speaker of the House of Representatives.







                             Vice President of the United States and    
                                                President of the Senate.`
#### LEWIS v. STATE.

No. 21731.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 12, 1941.

J. M. Woods, of San Antonio, for appellant.

Spurgeon E. Bell, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant was convicted in the district court of Bexar County on a charge of negligent homicide and his punishment as*805sessed at five days in the county jail, together with a fine of $50.

The procedure appears to be regular. No statement of facts or bills of exception are presented and there is nothing for this court to review.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
p.1 

OAR Box 1802 

Prepped by Charmelle Mathews 

Document Number: 

17) IV-E-12 

Docket Number: 

A-90-37 

Printed 11/4/200811:57:59 AM Sheet 17 of 117 
P.2 

ZEZT-^-l^r. 

July 20,1998 

MEMORANDUM 

SUBJECT: Record of December 23,1997 Conference Call with PatRaher- and-JohnHolmes 

TO: NSR Reform Docket (Number A=92=8) A- -30- 37 ' r 

FROM: Dennis Crumpler, NSR Reform Team Leader, IIG 

ITPID 

Participants: 

L 

JUL 2 8 

Lydia Wegman 

Bruce Buckheit 

Tom Curran 

Greg Foote 

Carol Holmes 

Mark Kataoka 

Dennis Crumpler 

Dan DeRoeck 

Lynn Hutchinson 

Pat Raher 

John Holmes 

US EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards 

US EPA, Office of Enforcement and 

Compliance Assurance 

US EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards 

US EPA, Office of General Counsel 

US EPA, Office of Enforcement and 

Compliance Assurance 

US EPA, Office of General Counsel 

US EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards 

US EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards 

US EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards 

Hogan & Hartson 

Consultant for Hogan & Hartson 

This conference call was convened as a follow-up to a lunch-time meeting on 

December 16, 1997 in New Orleans, Louisiana, regarding overlapping issues of EPA's evolving 

new source review rules for transition areas under the new National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards for ozone and PM25i and the NSR Reform revisions that were proposed in the Federal 

Register, July 23, 1996 . The following items were discussed: 

Several variants of the actual-to-future-actual-emissions applicability test that is currently 
P.3 

allowed for existing utilities and the proposed extension of the test to other industries in 

the notice for the NSR Reform. The group agreed that enforceable limits on futureactual-emissions was not very different than the existing system, and so would probably 

not enjoy wide spread acceptance as a better system. 

Mr Raher suggested that many industry constituents would prefer moving ahead with 

Reform to adopting new rules for NSR permitting system for the transition areas under 

the new NAAQS that was described in a October 31,1997 concept paper. Mr. Raher and 

Mr. Holmes identified the most favored Reforms according to industry constituents they 

represent. Mr. Raher stated that the proposed Class I provisions, would need to be 

revised in order for industry to be willing to accept them. 

Everyone agreed that a meeting with this group NRDC and the Federal Land Managers 

was necessary to begin working out a resolution of theXlass I issues.
April 19, 2017

VIA EDGAR

United States Securities and Exchange Commission

|Re: | First Mining Finance Corp. (the
      Company)
|--- | ------------------------------------------------
|    | Annual Report on Form 40-F                      
|    | Consent of Expert                               
|    |                                                 

This letter is provided in connection with the Companys Form
40-F annual report for the year ended December 31, 2016 (the Annual
Report) to be filed by the Company with the United States Securities and
Exchange Commission (the SEC). The Annual Report incorporates by
reference the Annual Information Form of the Company for the year ended December
31, 2016.

I, Todd McCracken, P.Geo., of WSP Canada Inc., hereby consent
to the use of my name in connection with reference to my involvement in the
preparation of the following technical report:

Technical Report and Resource
Estimation Update on the Goldlund Project, with an effective date of September
20, 2016 (the Technical Report).

and to references to the Technical Report, or portions thereof,
in the Annual Report and to the inclusion and incorporation by reference of the
information derived from the Technical Report in the Annual Report.

Yours truly,

/s/ Todd
      McCracken, P.Geo.Todd McCracken, P.Geo.Manager  MiningWSP Canada Inc.
April 19, 2017

VIA EDGAR

United States Securities and Exchange Commission

|Re: | First Mining Finance Corp. (the
      Company)
|--- | ------------------------------------------------
|    | Annual Report on Form 40-F                      
|    | Consent of Expert                               
|    |                                                 

This letter is provided in connection with the Companys Form
40-F annual report for the year ended December 31, 2016 (the Annual
Report) to be filed by the Company with the United States Securities and
Exchange Commission (the SEC). The Annual Report incorporates by
reference the Annual Information Form of the Company for the year ended December
31, 2016.

I, Christopher Elliott, FAusIMM, of SRK Consulting (Canada)
Inc., hereby consent to the use of my name in connection with reference to my
involvement in the preparation of the following technical report:

Preliminary Economic Assessment for
the Springpole Gold Project, Ontario, Canada dated October 7, 2016 (the
Technical Report).

and to references to the Technical Report, or portions thereof,
in the Annual Report and to the inclusion and incorporation by reference of the
information derived from the Technical Report in the Annual Report.

Yours truly,

/s/ Christopher Elliott, FAusIMMChristopher Elliott, FAusIMMPrincipal Consultant (Mining)SRK Consulting (Canada) Inc.
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
 Pursuant to 10 CFR 110.70(b)(2) “Public notice of receipt of an application,” please take notice that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has received the following application for an export license. Copies of the application are available electronically through ADAMS and can be accessed through the Public Electronic Reading Room (PERR) link <
                    *http://www.nrc.gov/​
                        ( print page 69346)
                        NRC/​ADAMS/​index.html*
                    > at the NRC Homepage. A request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene may be filed within 30 days after publication of this notice in the 
                    **Federal Register**
                    . Any request for hearing or petition for leave to intervene shall be served by the requestor or petitioner upon the applicant, the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington D.C. 20555; the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555; and the Executive Secretary, U.S. Department of State, Washington, D.C. 20520. In its review of the application for a license to export special nuclear material noticed herein, the Commission does not evaluate the health, safety or environmental effects in the recipient nation of the material to be exported. The information concerning this application follows. NRC Export License Application
Name of applicant 
                             Date of application  
                             Date received  
                             Application number
Description of Material
Country of destinationMaterial type
Total qty.
End useTransnuclear, Inc.
Highly-Enriched Uranium (93.30%)
10.05 kg Uranium/9.377 kg Uranium-235
Fabrication of target material for the production of medical isotopes at the Chalk River Laboratories
Canada.October 23, 2000October 24, 2000XSNM03171
 For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Dated this 8th day of November 2000 at Rockville, Maryland. Ronald D. Hauber, Deputy Director, Office of International Programs.


[FR Doc. 00-29380 Filed 11-15-00; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

FORT WORTH DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA § 

 § 

VS. § CRIMINAL NO. 4:22-CR-254-Y 

 § 

REYNALDO AVILA-GONZALEZ (1) § 

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND ADJUDGING DEFENDANT GUILTY 

The Court has reviewed all relevant matters of record in this case, 

including especially (1) the Consent to Administration of Guilty Plea 

and Allocution by United States Magistrate Judge and (2) the Report of 

Action and Recommendation on Plea Before the United States Magistrate 

Judge. No objections to either have been filed within fourteen (14) 

days of service in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Therefore, 

the Court concludes that the report and recommendation of the magistrate 

judge on the plea of guilty is correct, and it is hereby accepted by the 

Court. Accordingly, the Court accepts the plea of guilty, and defendant 

is hereby adjudged guilty. The defendant’s sentence will be imposed in 

accordance with the Court’s sentencing scheduling order. 

SIGNED October 24, 2022. 

 

 _________________________________ 

 TERRY R. MEANS 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:22-cr-00254-Y Document 33 Filed 10/24/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 66
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

LESTER LORENZO RUMMANS,

Plaintiff,

v.

Case No. 3:22-cv-02046-M-BT

HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL 

ASSOCIATION AS TRUSTEE FOR 

MASTR REPERFORMING LOAN 

TRUST 2005-2, SPECIALIZED LOAN 

SERVICING, LLC, and NORTHSKY 

LLC, 

Defendants.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

ORDER

The United States Magistrate Judge made Findings, Conclusions, and a Recommendation 

in this case. The Court has made a de novo review of those portions of the Findings, 

Conclusions, and Recommendation to which objections were made. The objections are overruled 

as is the request to supplement the summary judgment record, which has been closed for quite 

some time. The Court ACCEPTS the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the 

United States Magistrate Judge. 

SO ORDERED this 8th day of February, 2024.

Case 3:22-cv-02046-M-BT Document 40 Filed 02/08/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID 660
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

FORT WORTH DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA § 

 § 

VS. § CRIMINAL NO. 4:22-CR-301-Y 

 § 

GERARDO HARO LOERA (2) § 

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND ADJUDGING DEFENDANT GUILTY 

The Court has reviewed all relevant matters of record in this case, 

including especially (1) the Consent to Administration of Guilty Plea 

and Allocution by United States Magistrate Judge and (2) the Report of 

Action and Recommendation on Plea Before the United States Magistrate 

Judge. No objections to either have been filed within fourteen (14) 

days of service in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Therefore, 

the Court concludes that the report and recommendation of the magistrate 

judge on the plea of guilty is correct, and it is hereby accepted by the 

Court. Accordingly, the Court accepts the plea of guilty, and defendant 

is hereby adjudged guilty. The defendant’s sentence will be imposed in 

accordance with the Court’s sentencing scheduling order. 

SIGNED December 15, 2022. 

 

 _________________________________ 

 TERRY R. MEANS 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:22-cr-00301-Y Document 64 Filed 12/15/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 132
#### In the Matter of Hui’s Realty, Inc., Respondent, v Transcontinental Construction Services, Ltd., Appellant.

Order Order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, New York County (Karla Moskowitz, J.), entered on August 30, 1990, which, *inter alia,*granted the petition seeking an order discharging a mechanic’s lien, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Order of the same court entered on August 20, 1990, which denied respondent’s motion for a stay pending appeal and directed each party to post a bond in connection with a related arbitration, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Lien Law § 11 requires a party to serve a notice of lien on the owner, and expressly states that failure to file proof of service within 35 days after the notice of lien is filed shall terminate the notice as a lien. The record at bar supports the IAS court’s determination that the respondent did not file such proof of service. The language of Lien Law § 11 is clear and unambiguous. Although a court may disturb a harsh disposition that is not authorized by the statute *(see, e.g.,*
      *303
      *Tewari v Tsoutsouras,*75 NY2d 1; *Kolb v Strogh,*158 AD2d 15), no such leniency is authorized where, as here, the result is mandated by the statute. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Sullivan, Milonas, Rosenberger and Kassal, JJ. *[See,*147 Misc 2d 1086.]
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE

Mark K. Leeman Gregory F. Zoeller

Logansport, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana

Michael Gene Worden

Deputy Attorney General

Indianapolis, Indiana

______________________________________________________________________________

In the

Indiana Supreme Court

_________________________________

No. 08S02-1306-CR-423

ROBERT BOWEN,

Appellant (Defendant below),

v.

STATE OF INDIANA,

Appellee (Plaintiff below).

_________________________________

Appeal from the Carroll Circuit Court

No. 08C01-1007-FB-8

The Honorable Donald E. Currie, Judge

_________________________________

On Petition For Rehearing 

_________________________________

October 31, 2013

Per Curiam.

Bowen’s sentencing order did not identify the reasons for the consecutive sentences that 

were imposed. We rejected the argument in Bowen’s transfer petition that concurrent sentences 

were required, but we sustained his argument that a new sentencing order was and we remanded 
2

the case with instructions for preparation of a new sentencing order “without a hearing.” Bowen 

v. State, 988 N.E.2d 1134 (Ind. 2013). Bowen’s rehearing petition notes that the judge who 

originally sentenced him is no longer on the bench and he argues that the current judge cannot 

clarify the original sentencing decision. Bowen again requests that the case be remanded with 

instructions for imposition of concurrent sentences. We again reject that request, but expand our 

remand instructions as follows: 

On remand for a new sentencing order that responds to concerns raised by the 

Supreme Court, the trial court may discharge this responsibility by (1) issuing a 

new sentencing order without taking any further action, (2) ordering additional 

briefing on the sentencing issue and then issuing a new order without holding a 

new sentencing hearing, or (3) ordering a new sentencing hearing at which 

additional factual submissions are either allowed or disallowed and then issuing 

a new order based on the presentations of the parties. 

Taylor v. State, 840 N.E.2d 324 (Ind. 2006). 

Accordingly, we grant rehearing for the limited purpose of modifying the remand 

instructions, and otherwise deny the rehearing petition. 

All Justices concur.
Case 1:22-cr-00063-H-BU Document 24 Filed 12/13/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 50
Case 1:22-cr-00063-H-BU Document 24 Filed 12/13/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 51