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

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 303 Engrossed in House (EH)]

103d CONGRESS

  2d Session

                             H. J. RES. 303

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

   To designate June 6, 1994, as ``D-Day National Remembrance Day''.

                                     

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. J. RES. 303

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
   To designate June 6, 1994, as ``D-Day National Remembrance Day''.

Whereas June 6, 1994, marks the fiftieth anniversary of D-Day, the day of the 
        beginning of the Allied assault at Normandy, France, during World War 
        II;
Whereas the D-Day assault, known as Operation Overlord, was the most extensive 
        amphibious operation ever to occur, involving on the first day of the 
        operation five thousand ships, over eleven thousand sorties of Allied 
        aircraft, and one hundred and fifty-three thousand American, British, 
        and Canadian troops;
Whereas five separate beaches were assaulted, with American forces commanded by 
        Lieutenant General Omar Bradley attacking Omaha and Utah beaches and 
        British and Canadian forces commanded by General Miles Dempsey attacking 
        Gold, Juno, and Sword beaches;
Whereas American troops suffered significant losses during the assault, 
        including over six thousand five hundred casualties;
Whereas the D-Day assault was among the most critical events of World War II, 
        with the success of the Allied landings in Normandy providing the 
        foothold for the liberation of France and the eventual Allied 
        breakthrough into Germany and leading ultimately to the Allied victory 
        in Europe; and
Whereas June 6, 1944, is one of the most significant dates in the history of the 
        United States: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That June 6, 1994, is 
designated as ``D-Day National Remembrance Day'', and the President is 
authorized and requested to issue a proclamation calling upon the 
people of the United States to observe such day with appropriate 
programs, ceremonies, and activities.

            Passed the House of Representatives May 3, 1994.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
|                                                  |   |                                            |
|-------------------------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------------|
|                                                  |   |                                            |   |
| Date:       May 15, 2009     | By:    | /s/ Jay      H. Schecter                   |   |
|                                                  |   | Name:       Jay H. Schecter           |   |
|                                                  |   | Title:       Chief Executive Officer  |   |
|                                                  |   |                                            |   |

|                          |   |                                                 |   |
|-------------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Date:       May 15, 2009 | By:    | /s/ Stephen      DelVecchia                     |   |
|                          |   | Name:       Stephen DelVecchia             |   |
|                          |   | Title:       Chief Financial Officer  |   |
|                          |   |                                                 |   |
STEAM ELECTRIC CBI REPLACEMENT PAGE EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0819

DCN: SE0289 6
THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN REMOVED BECAUSE IT CONTAINS CONFIDEN TIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION (CBI) PER 40 CFR PART 2, SUBPART B.
#### MITCHELL v. STATE.

No. 24159.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 10, 1948.

No appearance for appellant.

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

GRAVES, Judge.

Appellant was convicted in the County Court of Taylor County of driving a motor vehicle while intoxicated, and by the jury assessed a fine of $100.00, and he appeals.

There are two bills of exception in the record. Bill No. 1 complains of the fact that upon the call of this case, there were but ten jurors present in the panel. Thereupon the trial court ordered the sheriff to go out and pick up talesmen in order to fill the jury panel to twelve men. Appellant objected to such a procedure on the ground that Taylor County was under the jury wheel system, and he requested the court to draw such additional jurors from the jury wheel. This the trial court refused to do. The tria-l court should have taken the names of the additional jurors from the wheel. See Steadman v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 206 S.W.2d 597. However, appellant’s bill is defective in that it is not shown that any of the jurors brought in as *633talesmen were selected on the jury which tried the appellant. In the absence of such a showing, no injury is apparent in such bill.

 Again, in Bill No. 2 complaint is made because it is claimed that at the time the sheriff was ordered by the court to bring in the extra jurors, he was not sworn by the court as provided by Article 2119, Vernon’s Ann.Tex.Civil Statutes. The same defect appears in this bill as is present in Bill No. 1, in that it is not shown that any of such extra jurors were taken on the jury trying the appellant. Furthermore, this bill merely shows that the sheriff was not sworn at the time he was ordered to obtain these two extra jurors. This is not a sufficient showing that he was not sworn at some other time during the present term of court. Such should have been shown, if true.

In the case of Knight v. State, 87 Tex. Cr.R. 134, 220 S.W. 333, 334, it was held:

> “If the officers were sworn in the beginning of the term, it would not be necessary to repeat the oath each time talesmen were summoned. To make a sufficient showing, this bill would have to go further, and make it appear that the officers, had not been sworn during the term, and anterior to this trial.”

See Habel v. State, 28 Tex.App. 588, 13 S.W. 1001; Deon v. State, 37 Tex.Cr.R. 506, 40 S.W. 266.

No error being shown, the judgment will be affirmed.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATE OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

This Certificate is being delivered pursuant to the
requirements of Section 1350 of Chapter 63 (Mail Fraud) of Title 18 (Crimes and Criminal Procedures) of the United States Code and shall not be relied on by any person for any other purpose.

The undersigned, who is the President and Chief Executive Officer of CCF Holding Company (the  issuer), hereby certifies as follows:

The Quarterly Report on Form 10Q of the issuer (the Report), which accompanies this Certificate, fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and all information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the issuer.

Dated this 13th day of November, 2006.



/s/ David B. TurnerDavid B. Turner, President and Chief Executive Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
has been provided to the issuer and will be retained by the issuer and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



16
Case 4:22-mj-00265-BJ Document 1 Filed 04/12/22 Page 1 of 3 PageID 1
Case 4:22-mj-00265-BJ Document 1 Filed 04/12/22 Page 2 of 3 PageID 2
Case 4:22-mj-00265-BJ Document 1 Filed 04/12/22 Page 3 of 3 PageID 3
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 99.1



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


         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Valrico Bancorp, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, J. E.
McLean, III, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as enacted 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/ J. E. McLean, III



J. E. McLean, III
Chief Executive Officer
August 12th , 2002
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 225 (Tuesday, November 21, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 69940]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-29826]



[[Page 69940]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION


Sunshine Act Meeting; Notice of Agency Meeting

    Pursuant to the provisions of the ``Government in the Sunshine 
Act'' (5 U.S.C. 552b), notice is hereby given that at 10:30 a.m. on 
Tuesday, November 21, 2000, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation's 
Board of Directors will meet in closed session, pursuant to sections 
552b(c)(2), (c)(4), (c)(6), (c)(8), (c)(9)(A)(ii), (c)(9)(B), and 
(c)(10) of Title 5, United States Code, to consider supervisory, 
resolution, corporate, and personnel matters.
    The meeting will be held in the Board Room on the sixth floor of 
the FDIC Building located at 550 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC.
    Requests for further information concerning the meeting may be 
directed to Mr. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary of the 
Corporation, at (202) 898-6757.

    Dated: November 16, 2000.
    Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Robert E. Feldman,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-29826 Filed 11-16-00; 4:58 pm]
BILLING CODE 6714-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 27 (Wednesday, February 9, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 6388]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-2981]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration


Center for Substance Abuse Prevention; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to Pub. L. 92-463, notice is hereby given of the meeting 
of the Drug Testing Advisory Board of the Center for Substance Abuse 
Prevention in March 2000.
    The Drug Testing Advisory Board meeting will be open from 8:30 a.m. 
until 10:15 a.m. on March 13, 2000. The open session will include a 
roll call, an HHS update, a DOT update, and a brief review of 
alternative specimen testing. A public comment period will be scheduled 
during the open session. If anyone needs special accommodations for 
persons with disabilities please notify the Contact listed below.
    The Drug Testing Advisory Board meeting will be closed from 10:15 
a.m. on March 13, 2000, until 3:30 p.m. on March 14, 2000, because it 
involves the review of sensitive National Laboratory Certification 
Program (NLCP) internal operating procedures and program development 
issues. Therefore, this portion of the meeting will be closed to the 
public as determined by the Administrator, SAMHSA, in accordance with 5 
U.S.C. 552b(c)(2), (4), and (6) and 5 U.S.C. App.2, Sec. 10(d).
    An agenda for the open session of this meeting and a roster of 
board members may be obtained from: Mrs. Giselle Hersh, Division of 
Workplace Programs, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockwall II, Suite 815, 
Rockville, MD 20857, Telephone: (301) 443-6014.
    Substantive program information may be obtained from the contact 
whose name and telephone number is listed below.
    Committee Name: Drug Testing Advisory Board
    Meeting Date: March 13-14, 2000
    Place: Holiday Inn, 5520 Wisconsin Avenue, Chevy Chase, Maryland 
20815
    Open: March 13, 2000; 8:30 a.m.-10:15 a.m.
    Closed: March 13, 2000; 10:15 a.m.-4:30 p.m.
    Closed: March 14, 2000; 8:30 a.m.-3:30 p.m.
    Contact: Donna M. Bush, PhD., Executive Secretary, Telephone: (301) 
443-6014 and FAX: (301) 443-3031.

    Dated: February 2, 2000.
Toian Vaughn,
Committee Management Officer, Substance Abuse and Mental Health 
Services Administration.
[FR Doc. 00-2981 Filed 2-8-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4162-20-P
IB

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 Founda-
2

HJ 420 IH

tion 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

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That the location of a Thomas Paine Memorial, authorized

4 by Public Law 102–407 and within Area I as described

5 in Public Law 99–652, is approved.

Æ
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDG MENT

No. 04

- 16

- 00474

- CR

Miranda HERRERA

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 437th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014CR6337

Honorable Lori I. Valenzuela, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARION

, JUSTICE CHAPA , AND JUSTICE PULLIAM

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED

.

SIGNED September 21, 2016.

_________________________________ Luz Elena D. Chapa , Justice
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.2

                           FIRST AMENDMENT TO WARRANT



                  THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO WARRANT ("Amendment") is deemed to
have been made and entered into on and as of December __, 1998, by and between
ADRENALIN INTERACTIVE, INC., a Delaware corporation formerly known as Wanderlust
Interactive, Inc. (the "Company"), and ___________________________ (the
"Holder").


                                    RECITALS

                  A. The Company is the issuer and the Holder is the current
record and beneficial owner of a Warrant (No. _____) to purchase up to an
aggregate of ______ shares of the Company's Common Stock at an exercise price of
$____ per share exercisable at any time until 5:00 p.m., Pacific Standard Time,
on December 31, 2004 (the "Warrant").

                  B. The Company and the Holder have agreed to amend certain of
the provisions of the Warrant on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth.


                              TERMS AND CONDITIONS

                  NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows:

                  1. Reduction of Exercise Price. For valuable consideration,
the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Company hereby
agrees that the Exercise Price (as defined in the Warrant) shall be reduced to
$0.05 per share of Common Stock covered thereby from and after the date of this
Amendment.

                  2. Amendment of Expiration Date. In consideration of the
reduction in the Exercise Price set forth in Section 1 hereof, the Holder hereby
agrees that the Expiration Date (as defined in the Warrant) shall be amended
such that the Warrant, as herein amended, may not be exercised after 5:00 p.m.,
Pacific Standard Time, on December 31, 2000.

                  3. No Other Amendments. Except as amended hereby, the terms
and provisions of the Warrant shall remain in full force and effect.

                  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed and delivered
this Amendment as of the date first above written.

         "Company"                                    "Holder"

ADRENALIN INTERACTIVE, INC.


By: _____________________________         ______________________________________
    Jay Smith, III, President and
    Chief Executive Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1101 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1101

 To prohibit the award of costs (including attorney's fees) against a 
    judicial officer for acts or omissions occurring in a judicial 
                               capacity.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 24, 1993

  Mr. Hughes (for himself and Mr. Moorhead) introduced the following 
       bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To prohibit the award of costs (including attorney's fees) against a 
    judicial officer for acts or omissions occurring in a judicial 
                               capacity.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That section 722(b) of 
the Revised Statutes of the United States (42 U.S.C. 1988(b)) is 
amended by inserting before the period at the end the following: ``, 
except that costs, including attorney's fees, shall not be awarded 
against a judge or judicial officer who would be immune from actions 
for damages arising out of the same act or omission about which the 
complaint is made in the action or proceeding''.

                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 71 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 71

    Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States 
limiting the terms of offices of Members of Congress and increasing the 
                 term of Representatives to four years.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 26, 1993

Mr. Coble introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
    Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States 
limiting the terms of offices of Members of Congress and increasing the 
                 term of Representatives to four years.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House 
concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an 
amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be 
valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 
ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States 
within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:

                              ``Article--

    ``Section 1. The term of office of Representatives shall be four 
years.
    ``No person shall be elected to the office of Representative more 
than three times, excluding any election of a person to fill a vacancy 
of an office of a Representative if such person has held such office 
for less than two years.
    ``The second clause of this section shall not apply to any person 
who is a Representative on the date of ratification of this Article so 
long as such person continues thereafter to be a Representative without 
an interruption in service.
    ``Section 2. No person shall be elected to the office of Senator 
more than twice, excluding any election of a person to fill a vacancy 
of an office of a Senator if such person has held such office for less 
than three years.
    ``This section shall not apply to any person who is a Senator on 
the date of ratification of this Article so long as such person 
continues thereafter to be a Senator without an interruption in 
service.''.

                                 <all>
```
AdvancED 

wyomlns 

Monday, July 2, 2012 

Michael Martin 

Transportation Industry Analyst 

Office of Aviation Analysis 

US Department of Transportation 

400 Seventh Street, S.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

RE: US DOT Essential Air Service Bids for Laramie, Wyoming 

Dear Mr. Martin, 

1002 Sl'll$ridart Street · Lnmle,WY $2070 

I am writing to support Skywest as the approved carrier for the Laramie Regional Airport. 

J> 

I have been a frequent business traveler in and out of the Laramie Airport for the last 14 years. I fly weekly. 

In the last year I made a decision to drive to Denver to catch my connecting flight or use a rental car for the 

same purpose. This decision was made because of the poor service afforded to business travelers like me 

from Great Lakes Airlines. Great Lakes is unreliable and lacks capacity to provide air service to Laramie. 

They have had numerous flights cancelled due to mechanical problems and any other reason they can think 

up to tell passengers like myself. This has caused me to miss very important meetings or drive to Denver to 

fly half the night to arrive at my fmal destination feeling exhausted and less efficient. This has happened so 

frequently that I had to make a business decision to drive so that I can do my job successfully and effectively. 

It has become such a joke to try to fly in and out of Laramie that many other business colleagues have also 

decided to drive to Denver because they can't count on Great Lakes to meet expectations. 

I would gladly fly in and out of Laramie ifwe had a provider that is reliable, has capacity, and manages a 

business with integrity. I fly on Skywest frequently all over the US, and I know they can meet expectations. 

I hope you will consider my support for Skywest when making your decision. 

Sincerely,
#### Jake CAMPOS, appellant, v. STATE, appellee.

No. 24269.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 10, 1948.

No appearance for appellant.

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

HAWKINS, Presiding Judge.

Conviction is for aggravated assault punishment, a fine of $25.

Appellant has filed with this court his affidavit asking that his appeal be dismissed, and upon said request a dismissal of the: appeal is ordered.