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

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3447 Placed on Calendar Senate (PCS)]

<DOC>

                                                       Calendar No. 396
114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3447

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 16, 2016

            Received; read twice and placed on the calendar

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
     To extend the deadline for commencement of construction of a 
                         hydroelectric project.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding the time period specified in 
section 13 of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 806) that would 
otherwise apply to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission project 
numbered 12642, the Commission may, at the request of the licensee for 
the project, and after reasonable notice, in accordance with the good 
faith, due diligence, and public interest requirements of that section 
and the Commission's procedures under that section, extend the time 
period during which the licensee is required to commence the 
construction of the project for up to three consecutive 2-year periods 
from the date of the expiration of the extension originally issued by 
the Commission.
    (b) Reinstatement of Expired License.--If the period required for 
commencement of construction of the project described in subsection (a) 
has expired prior to the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
Commission shall reinstate the license effective as of the date of its 
expiration and the first extension authorized under subsection (a) 
shall take effect on the date of such expiration.

            Passed the House of Representatives March 15, 2016.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
                                                       Calendar No. 396

114th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 3447

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

     To extend the deadline for commencement of construction of a 
                         hydroelectric project.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             March 16, 2016

            Received; read twice and placed on the calendar
```
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14**  **- 1311** 

JUAN REYES LOZANO

- BOLANOS , Petitioner ,
v.
E RIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General , Respondent
.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals
.
Submitted : November 20, 2014 Decided: December 19, 2014

Before KING, DUNCAN, and FLOYD , Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by un published per curiam opinion
. Eileen P. Blessinger , Heather M. Cleary , BLESSINGER LEGAL, PLLC Falls Church, Virginia, for Petitioner. Stuart F. Delery, Assistant Attorney General , Terri J. Scadron, Assistant Director , Meadow W. Platt, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C. , for Respondent.
Unpublis hed opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Juan Reyes Lozano

- Bolanos, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing his appeal of the Immigration Ju dge’s decision finding that he was convicted of a particularly serious crime and pretermitting his request for withholding of removal. * We have thoroughly reviewed the record, including the relevant exhibits and the transcript of
Lozano

- Bolanos’ merits he aring, and conclude that the Board did not abuse its discretion in finding that Lozano

- Bolanos was convicted of a particularly serious crime and thus was ineligible for withholding of removal. See 8 U.S.C.
§ 1231(b)(3) (B) (ii) (2012). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. See In re:
Lozano

- Bolanos (B.I.A. Mar. 26, 2014). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argumen t would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED

* On appeal, Lozano

- Bolanos does not challenge the denial of his application s for asylum and for protection under the Convention Against Torture.
EXHIBIT
32.2




CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT
TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Highlands Acquisition Corp. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended  March 31, 2009 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
I, Philip A. Baratelli, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Report fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date: May 5,
      2009
                  By:
                  /s/ Philip A. BaratelliName:  Philip
      A. BaratelliTitle:
      Chief Financial Officer(Principal
      Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer)





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

July 6, 2018

No. 04

- 17

- 00833

- CV

Bradford COOPER

, Appellant

v.

M.N. GUMBERT CORPORATION d/b/a S.O.T. Abrasives & Equipment, Gumbert M.N.

Corporation, S.O.T. Abrasives, S.O.T. Abrasives, a Division of M.N. Gumbert Corporation, and

Sandpiper of Texas, Abrasives and Equipment, a Division of M.N. Gumbert Corporation,

Appellees

From the 285th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2017CI22048

Honorable Stephani A. Walsh, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

The appellee s ’ motion for leave to file supplement to brief is hereby GRANTED.

_________________________________ Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have he reunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 6th day of July, 2018

.

___________________________________ KEITH E. HOTTLE

, Clerk of Court
EXHIBIT 32.2

                           SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Lee Fine Arts, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Martha Lee,
Treasurer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my
knowledge:

     (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

     (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

Date: August 13, 2007

                                         By: /s/ Martha Lee
                                            ---------------------------
                                            Martha Lee
                                            Treasurer & CFO
Exhibit
31.2





Certification
of Principal Financial Officer


Pursuant
to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


and
Securities and Exchange Commission Release 34-46427





I, Ajay
Gupta, certify that:





1. I
have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Protech Global Holdings
Corp.;





2. Based
on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of
a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were
made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;





3. Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;





4. The
registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing
and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:





a) designed
such disclosure controls and procedures or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;





b) evaluated
the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluation;





c) disclosed
in this report any change in registrant's internal control over financial
reporting the occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter that
has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and





5. The
registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent functions):





a) all
deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal
control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect
the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; and





b) any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial
reporting.





Date:
      August 19, 2009
              /s/
      Ajay GuptaAjay
      Gupta.Chief
      Financial Officer
Exhibit
32.2





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 Point.360 (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31,
2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I,
Alan R. Steel, Chief Financial 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, to my knowledge:





(1)
            The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of  1934;
  and





(2)
            The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.





/s/  Alan R.
SteelAlan
      R. SteelChief
      Financial OfficerFebruary
      12, 2010
#### BARRERA v. DUVAL COUNTY RANCH CO.

Nos. 13558, 13562.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. San Antonio.

Feb. 21, 1939.

Whipple & Rabel, of San Antonio, and William R. Quilliam, of Hebbronville, for appellant.

Perkins & Floyd and Frank T. Morrill, all of Alice, for appellee.

MURRAY, Justice.

It appears that the transcript in this case was tendered to this Court for filing on January 27, 1939, within the enlarged time for such filing, but that same was not filed at that time as it was discovered that the clerk’s certificate was defective. The transcript was withdrawn by appellant for the purpose of having the certificate corrected, and out of an abundance of precaution a motion for a further extension of time was filed.

The transcript has been returned to this Court with a correct certificate and it is our opinion that it should be filed as of the date it was originally tendered to this Court. Under the circumstances and the conclusion we have reached, no further extension of time is necessary.

Appellee has filed a motion opposing appellant’s request for a further extension of time, and in the alternative asking that certain affidavits contained in the transcript be stricken and, further in the alternative, for leave to file affidavits in reply to affidavits filed by appellant.

The transcript shows that appellant filed a by-stander’s bill of exception, signed by A. G. Hinojosa, Manuel P. Corrales, and William Stansel on January 10, 1939. Thereafter, on January 25, 1939,' appellant filed with the district clerk three affidavits, one signed by Mateo de los Santos, one, by Ernest Tibblier, and the other, by Manuel Solis. These affidavits were filed in support of appellant’s by-stander’s bill of exception.

Section 9 of Art. 2237, Vernon’s Annotated Revised Civil Statutes, 1938, Volume 7, provides, in effect, that where a by-stander’s bill of exception is filed, the truth of the matter contained in the bill may be controverted and maintained by affidavits, not exceeding five in number on each side, to be filed with the papers of the cause, within ten days after the filing of the bill of exception. It is clear that the three affidavits above were not filed within the ten-day period, and. therefore should not have been tendered by the clerk of the trial court, nor included in the transcript by him.

Accordingly, these three affidavits will be stricken from the record.
### E L~TNDRNEU GENERAL OF-XAS Auwrrlv. TEXAS 78711 February28,1972
Honorable James U. Cross Executive Director, Texas Opinion No. M-1084 Parks and Wildlife Department John H.,Reagan Building Austin, Texas 78701 Re: Purchase of whitewinged dove habitat.
Dear Mr. Cross: You aek whether Article 87ga-6, Sec. 4(c),Vernon'E! Penal Code, and the current ffeneral AppropriationAct,* authorize@ your Department to expend any moniee for the acquisition of a white-wingeddove habitat. Our anewer is!

that the authority contained in thle Article of the Penal Code is sufficientpre-existing law under Article III, Section 44 of our Constitution to support an appropriation for this purpoee. However, neither your Department,nor our office, find any appropriationof monie& in the current General AppropriationAct for this purpose. Therefore your Department ie not authorized to expend any monies for this purpose. Tex.Con&t.,Art.VIII, Sec. 6.-SUMMARYNo appropriationof funds exists for acqui- &ition of a white-wingeddove habitat authorized by Article 87ga-6, Sec. 4(c), V.P.C.

*S.B. 11, Acts 62nd Leg., 1971, R.S., aL!amended by S.B. 7, Acts 62nd Leg., 1971, 1st C.S. -5300-Honorable James U. Crose,page 2 (M-1084)

Prepared by Dunklln Sullivan AssistantAttorney General APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE Kerna Taylor, Chairman Bill Allen, Co-Chairman John Reeves Llnward Shivers Bob Flowere Rex H. White, Jr. SAMUEL D. MCDANIEL Staff Legal Assistant. ALFRED WALKER ExecutiveAssistant NOLA WHITE First Aeelstant

-5301-
#### DOUGLASS et al. v. MERCER.

No. 13572.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. San Antonio.

March 22, 1939.

James D. O’Connor and Robert M. Vaughan, both of Dallas, for plaintiffs in error.

Dibrell, Mosheim & Campbell, of Seguin, for defendant in error.

SMITH, Chief Justice.

J. A. Mercer recovered judgment by agreement against M. M.'Douglass, James D. O’Connor and D. B. Kreiger, jointly and severally, and T. J. O’Connor and F. H. Glason, as sureties on a replevy bond. Petition and bond for writ of error were filed in the present attempted appeal by all the above named defendants, except T. J. O’Connor, and citation in error thereon was served upon Mercer on September 30, 1938. The said T. J. O’Connor timely filed and prosecuted separate appeal by writ of error in this Court, but that appeal was transferred, by order of the Supreme Court, to the Austin Court of Civil Appeals, where it is now pending.

On the other hand, a transcript in the present writ of error proceeding was tardily tendered in this Court by plaintiffs in error, together with a motion for leave to file the transcript. That motion was overruled, as was a motion for rehearing thereof. Douglass v. Mercer, Tex.Civ.App., 124 S.W.2d 401.

Plaintiffs in error having failed to prosecute writ of error, defendant in error now seeks affirmance on certificate, by statutory motion therefor. To this motion plaintiffs in error have replied, pointing out that the appeal timely prosecuted by T. J. O’Connor is now pending in the Court of Civil Appeals at Austin, and have moved to postpone submission of the motion to affirm on certificate until the proceeding in that Court has become final.

We conclude that the motion to affirm on certificate should be granted. This decision can in no way affect the appeal of T. J. O’Connor, pending in the *1001Austin District, to which plaintiffs in error herein are not parties. As the plaintiffs in error in the present proceeding did not prosecute their appeal the right to an affirmance is absolute in the defendant in error. 3 Tex.Jur. 744, § S33. The decision in the T. J. O’Connor appeal cannot affect these plaintiffs in error, any more than the present decision can affect the rights of the said T. J. O’Connor, not a party hereto.

In the case of Wandelohr v. Grayson County Nat. Bank, Tex.Civ.App., 90 S.W. 180, mandamus granted, Wandelohr v. Rainey, 100 Tex. 471, 100 S.W. 1155, a judgment was affirmed on certificate against certain losing parties, and, upon a transfer, the case was decided on the merits as to that party who had perfected its appeal. Wandelohr v. Grayson County Nat. Bank, Tex.Civ.App., 102 S.W. 746, writ refused. A later appeal by writ of error in the same case was also decided as to those who were not precluded by the certificate of affirmance. Wandelohr v. Grayson County Nat. Bank, Tex.Civ.App., 106 S.W. 413, affirmed, 102 Tex. 20, 108 S.W. 1154, on rehearing, 112 S.W. 1046.

The motion to postpone the submission of the motion to affirm on certificate will be overruled, and the motion to affirm on certificate granted, as against the named plaintiffs in error in this proceeding.
CERTIFICATION
 
 I, Christian Lown, certify that:
 
 1.  I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of SLM Student Loan Trust
        2012-6 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);
 
 2.  Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to
        make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
 
 3.  Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the
        Exchange Act periodic reports;
 
 4.  Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statements required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic
        reports, the servicer and administrator have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreement and administration agreement, as applicable, in all material respects; and
 
 5.  All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with
        servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise
        disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K. In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following
        unaffiliated party: Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as indenture trustee.
 
 [Signature Page Follows]
 
 
 Date:  March 29, 2019/s/ CHRISTIAN LOWNChristian LownPresident and Chief Financial Officer (Senior Securitization Officer)Navient Funding, LLC
EXHIBIT 32.2

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

      In connection with the Quarterly Report of World Mortgage Exchange Group,
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2010, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Brian James,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. SS. 1350,
as adopted pursuant to SS. 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 result of operations of the
Company.

August 12, 2010                         /s/ Brian James
                                        ---------------
                                        Brain James
                                        Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
has been provided to the company and will be retained by the company and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

July 30, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

133758 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

DAWN SCHMIDT,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 133758 

 COA: 276304 

Oakland CC: 2006-077141-NH 

ROB SHAFINIA, a/k/a BROB 

SHAFINIA, D.O., and CITY

MEDICAL, P.C.,

 Defendants-Appellants. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 23, 2007 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the questions presented should now be reviewed by this Court. 

l0723 

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. 

July 30, 2007 

 Clerk
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

WILLIAM SCHLUTH,

Respondent

v.

KRISHAVTAR, INC.,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 249 EAL 2020

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

WILLIAM SCHLUTH,

Respondent

v.

KRISHAVTAR, INC.,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 250 EAL 2020

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 16th day of December, 2020, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.