alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7494

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus EMMETT ALVIN MONSON, a/k/a Timothy Lee Barr, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Winston-Salem. Frank W. Bullock, Chief District Judge. (CR-93-42-WS, CA-97-610-6) Submitted: March 11, 1999 Decided: March 17, 1999 Before WIDENER and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Emmett Alvin Monson, Appellant Pro Se. Lisa Blue Boggs, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Emmett Alvin Monson seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny Monson’s motion for appointment of counsel, and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Monson , Nos. CR-93-42-WS; CA-97-610-6 (M.D.N.C. Aug. 25, 1998). 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.

DISMISSED
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 139 

To prohibit a Federal agency from accepting a form of individual identification issued by a foreign government, except a passport that is accepted 

on the date of enactment. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 6, 2009 

Mr. GALLEGLY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and in addition to the 

Committees on the Judiciary, House Administration, and Armed Services, 

for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case 

for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the 

committee concerned 

A BILL 

To prohibit a Federal agency from accepting a form of 

individual identification issued by a foreign government, 

except a passport that is accepted on the date of enactment. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Identification Integrity 

5 Act of 2009’’. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
2 

•HR 139 IH

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON ACCEPTANCE OF IDENTIFICATION 

2 ISSUED BY FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—A Federal agency may not accept, 

4 for any official purpose, an identification document for an 

5 individual if the identification document is issued by a for6 eign government. 

7 (b) EXCEPTION.—If a passport issued by a foreign 

8 government is authorized by Federal law to be accepted 

9 for a specific official purpose on the date of the enactment 

10 of this Act, subsection (a) shall not be construed to affect 

11 such authorization. 

12 (c) DEFINITION.—For purposes of this section, the 

13 term ‘‘Federal agency’’ means— 

14 (1) an Executive agency (as defined in section 

15 105 of title 5, United States Code); 

16 (2) a military department (as defined in section 

17 102 of title 5, United States Code); 

18 (3) an office, agency, or other establishment in 

19 the legislative branch of the Government of the 

20 United States; 

21 (4) an office, agency, or other establishment in 

22 the judicial branch of the Government of the United 

23 States; and 

24 (5) the government of the District of Columbia. 

Æ 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-40244 c/w No. 10-40291 Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee
v. DARLIN ISOU MUNOZ-OYUELA, Defendant-Appellant Cons. w/ No. 10-40291 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee
v. DARLIN ESAU OYUELA-MUNOS, also known as Darlin Isou Munoz-Oyuela, Defendant-Appellant Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 1:09-CR-1471-1 USDC No. 1:08-CR-1396-1 United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D April 19, 2011 Lyle W. Cayce ClerkNo. 10-40244 c/w No. 10-40291

* Pursuant to 5

TH C IR
. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR
. R. 47.5.4. 2 Before JOLLY, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Darlin Isou Munoz-Oyuela has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with A nders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Munoz-Oyuela has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’sassessment that the appeals present no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR
. R. 42.2.
Exhibit 13.1



CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO

18
U.S.C. Section 1350



In
connection with the filing of the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the period ended December 31, 2015 (the “Report”)
by Nano Dimension Ltd. (the "Company"), the undersigned, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies
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 Section 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/
                                         Amit Dror
| | ------------------------------------------------------
| | Amit
    Dror                                         
| | Chief
    Executive Officer                           
| | March
    8, 2016
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 32.2


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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Source-Interlink Companies,
Incorporated (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended July 31, 2003, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Marc Fierman, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 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/ Marc Fierman

Marc Fierman
Chief Financial Officer
September 15, 2003

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

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

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1155 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1155

   To amend title 5, United States Code, to restore the 3-year basis 
  recovery rule with respect to annuities under chapters 83 and 84 of 
              such title for Federal income tax purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 1, 1993

  Mr. Frank of Massachusetts introduced the following bill; which was 
referred jointly to the Committees on Post Office and Civil Service and 
                             Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend title 5, United States Code, to restore the 3-year basis 
  recovery rule with respect to annuities under chapters 83 and 84 of 
              such title for Federal income tax purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
    (a)(1) Subchapter III of chapter 83 of title 5, United States Code, 
is amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 8352. Three-year basis recovery rule
    ``Notwithstanding any provision of the Tax Reform Act of 1986 and 
any amendment made by such Act, the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall 
be applied and administered with respect to any amount paid under this 
subchapter for any period beginning after the date of the enactment of 
this section as if section 72(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 
(as in effect on October 21, 1986) had never been repealed.''.
    (2) The analysis for chapter 83 of title 5, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end the following:

``8352. Three-year basis recovery rule.''.
    (b)(1) Subchapter VI of chapter 84 of title 5, United States Code, 
is amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 8470a. Three-year basis recovery rule
    ``Notwithstanding any provision of the Tax Reform Act of 1986 and 
any amendment made by such Act, the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall 
be applied and administered with respect to any amount paid under this 
chapter for any period beginning after the date of the enactment of 
this section as if section 72(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 
(as in effect on October 21, 1986) had never been repealed.''.
    (2) The analysis for chapter 83 of title 5, United States Code, is 
amended by adding after the item relating to section 8470 the 
following:

``8470a. Three-year basis recovery rule.''.

                                 <all>
```
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

FORT WORTH DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA § 

 § 

VS. § CRIMINAL NO. 4:22-CR-254-Y 

 § 

MARTIMIANO RODRIGUEZ (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 March 2, 2023. 

 

 _________________________________ 

 TERRY R. MEANS 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:22-cr-00254-Y Document 64 Filed 03/02/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 160
Document Headings

                    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.                  

###### Department of Justice

###### Antitrust Division

                    Notice is hereby given that, on October 4, 2000, pursuant to section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301*et seq.*                     (“the Act”), the 42 Volt Working Group has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing (1) the identities of the parties and (2) the nature and objectives of the venture. The notifications were filed for the purpose of invoking the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act, the identities of the parties are General Motors Corporation, Detroit, MI; DaimlerChrysler Corporation, Auburn Hills, MI; and Ford Motor Company, Dearborn, MI. The nature and objectives of the venture are to research ways to address the challenges associated with the conversion of motor vehicles to 42 volt electrical systems. The higher voltage system is expected to mitigate the negative impacts of inceasing vehicle power demands by allowing significantly smaller wires and electronics devices. The research is expected to include investigation into areas such as voltage regulation, electrical arcing, corrosion, and other topics as they relate to the conversion to 42 volt systems. To accomplish this objective, the parties are working together and with various potential suppliers to fund studies on this technology and to investigate common interfaces and performance. The parties expect to share the information generated with other suppliers and vehicle manufacturers in the future and to explore standards with industry standard-setting groups.                

Constance K. Robinson,

Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 00-30186  Filed 11-27-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
Agenda -- August 2006 Refunding 

Treasury Dealer Meetings July 27-28, 2006 

Dealer ___________________ 

To allow more time for discussion, please e-mail your responses prior to 5:00 p.m. on 

Wednesday, July 26 to Debt.Management@do.treas.gov and kameke.sweeney@ny.frb.org. Even 

if you are not scheduled to meet with Treasury officials this quarter, your responses are still 

appreciated. 

I. Borrowing Estimates Central 

Estimate

Range that would 

not surprise you 

 July-September 

 Ending Cash Balance 

 October-December 

 Ending Cash Balance 

 

II. Budget Deficit Estimates 

 FY 2006 

 FY 2007 

 

III. Quarterly Coupon Issuance 

 3-year note 

 10-year note 

 30-year bond reopening 

 10-year note reopening 

 2-year note Aug/Sep/Oct / / / / - / / 

 5-year note Aug/Sep/Oct / / / / - / / 

 10-year TIPS reopening 

 5-year TIPS reopening 

Discussion Topics 

1. Given the latest Mid-Session Review budget outlook, do you believe the current financing 

schedule is well-suited to meet Treasury’s financing needs going forward? If not, please 

elaborate on changes that you believe are needed. 

2. Please comment on liquidity conditions in long-dated nominal Treasury securities. Discuss 

your views of supply and demand dynamics at the long end of the yield curve since the 

reintroduction of the bond. 

3. Please comment on conditions in the short-end of the Treasury market, characterizing 

liquidity, flows into and out of T-bills and the overall supply of T-bills relative to other issuance. 

Note: The comment period on the proposed Securities Lender of Last Resort Facility closes on August 11, 

2006. The paper can be found at http://www.treas.gov/offices/domestic-finance/debtmanagement/securities-lending-facility_04262006.pdf and comments should be sent to 

debt.management@do.treas.gov.
#### Anna Slutsky, as Administratrix of the Estate of Isidore Slutsky, Deceased, Plaintiff, *v.*Hospital for Joint Diseases et al., Defendants.

Supreme Court, Special Term, Bronx County,

December 11, 1957.

*Martin, Clearwarer & Bell*for Benjamin S. Golub, defendant.

*Aaron J. Broder*for plaintiff.

George Tilzer, J.

By this motion one of the defendants seeks to dismiss the complaint as to said defendant upon the ground that the cause or causes of action stated by the plaintiff did not accrue within the time limited by law for the commencement of such actions.

The administratrix has pleaded two causes of action against the defendants. The first seeks damages for the pain and suffering and for the moneys expended by the deceased for *854medical care resulting from the ‘' negligence and malpractice of the defendants.” The second cause of action is for wrongful death. However, there is realleged therein the paragraphs of the first cause of action, so that this second cause of action also claims damages for pain and suffering.

The moving defendant physician attacks the first cause of action, asserting that the two-year period within which a plaintiff must bring an action based on malpractice has expired. The second cause of action, it is urged, cannot be a wrongful death action, since it claims damages for pain and suffering.

Although the court may be warranted in dismissing portions of causes of action on a motion addressed to the complaint, the allegations of the pleaded first cause of action as to negligence and malpractice are not readily separable. The allegations of the second cause of action improperly incorporate allegations of the first repugnant to section 130 of the Decedent Estate Law, which permits recovery for the pecuniary injuries resulting from the decedent’s death, but nothing else. An administratrix in a proper case may recover for the damages suffered by the decedent and for the damages sustained by others as a consequence of death. The separate and distinct wrongs, however, should be separately stated and numbered.

The complaint is dismissed, with the right to plaintiff to serve a further amended complaint separately stating and numbering the several causes of action for personal injuries and separately stating and numbering the cause of action for wrongful death as to each defendant.

Further amended complaint shall be served within 20 days following service of the order to be entered hereon, with notice of entry.
# AGENCY:

Food and Drug Administration, HHS. 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

This notice announces a forthcoming meeting of a public advisory committee of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The meeting will be open to the public.

*Name of Committee:*                         Nonclinical Studies Subcommittee of the Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Science (formerly the Generic Drugs Advisory Committee).                     

*General Function of the Committee:*                         To provide advice and recommendations to the agency on FDA regulatory issues.                     

*Date and Time:*                         The meeting will be held on March 9, 2000, 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.                     

*Location:*                         Center for Drug Evaluation and Research conference room 1066, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD.                     

*Contact Person:*                         Kimberly L. Topper, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (HFD-21), Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane Rockville, MD 20857, 301-827-7001, e-mail: TOPPERK@cder.fda.gov, or FDA Advisory Committee Information Line, 1-800-741-8138 (301-443-0572 in the Washington, DC area), code 12539. Please call the Information Line for up-to-date information on this meeting.                     

*Agenda:*                         The subcommittee meeting will discuss collaborative approaches to scientific research issues of common interest to the pharmaceutical industry, universities, the public, and FDA. Specific areas of focus will be in the nonclinical studies areas of: (1) Interspecies biomarkers of toxicity and (2) noninvasive imaging.                     

*Procedure:*                         Interested persons may present data, information, or views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committee. Written submissions may be made to the contact person by February 25, 2000. Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled between approximately 1 p.m. to 2 p.m. Time allotted for each presentation may be limited. Those desiring to make formal oral presentations should notify the contact person before February 25, 2000, and                         Start Printed Page 6614                        submit a brief statement of the general nature of the evidence or arguments they wish to present, the names and addresses of proposed participants, and an indication of the approximate time requested to make their presentation.                     

Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2).

Dated: February 2, 2000. 

Linda A. Suydam, 

Senior Associate Commissioner for Policy. 

[FR Doc. 00-3014 Filed 2-9-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4160-01-F
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

               Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Auditors

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on:
(a) Form S-8, No. 33-80168 pertaining to the Company's 1984 Incentive Stock
Option Plan, 1988 Non-qualified Stock Option Plan, Directors' Stock Option Plan,
and other Employee Benefit Plans; (b) Form S-8, No. 333-07545 pertaining to the
Company's 1993 Stock Option Plan, as amended; (c) Form S-8, No. 333-07331
pertaining to the Company's 1996 Stock Purchase Plan; (d) Form S-8, No.
333-30451 pertaining to the Company's 401(k) Plan; (e) Form S-8, No. 333-21739
and 333-58101 pertaining to the Company's 1996 Stock Option Plan, as amended,
(f) Form S-8, No. 333-58103 pertaining to the Company's 1998 Stock Option Plan
and 1997 Director Stock Option Plan; (g) Form S-8, No. 333-84059 pertaining to
the Company's 1997 Director's Stock Option Plan, as amended, and (h) Form S-8,
No. 333-87401 pertaining to the Company's 1996 Stock Purchase Plan, of our
report dated May 11, 2000 (except for Note 15, as for which the date is June 29,
2000) with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of
Active Voice Corporation included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year
ended March 31, 2000 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.


                                         /s/  ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Seattle, Washington
June 29, 2000