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

Calendar No. 6

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 45

To prohibit the executive branch of the Federal Government from establishing

an additional class of individuals that is protected against discrimination

in Federal employment, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 19, 1999

Mr. HELMS introduced the following bill; which was read the first time

JANUARY 20, 1999

Read the second time and placed on the calendar

A BILL

To prohibit the executive branch of the Federal Government

from establishing an additional class of individuals that

is protected against discrimination in Federal employment, and for other purposes.

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 ‘‘Freedom of Speech

5 Act’’.
2

•S 45 PCS

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION.

2 (a) IN GENERAL.—No agency, officer, or employee

3 of the executive branch of the Federal Government shall

4 issue, implement, or enforce any policy establishing an ad5 ditional class of individuals that is protected against dis6 crimination in Federal employment, other than a class of

7 individuals specifically identified in a provision of Federal

8 statutory law that prohibits employment discrimination

9 against the class, including—

10 (1) title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42

11 U.S.C. 2000e et seq.);

12 (2) the Age Discrimination in Employment Act

13 of 1967 (29 U.S.C. 621 et seq.); and

14 (3) title V of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29

15 U.S.C. 791 et seq.) or title I of the Americans with

16 Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12111 et seq.).

17 (b) PROHIBITION ON USE OF FEDERAL FUNDS.—No

18 agency, officer, or employee of the executive branch of the

19 Federal Government shall use Federal funds to issue, im20 plement, or enforce a policy described in subsection (a),

21 including implementing and enforcing Executive Order

22 13087, including any amendment made by such order.

Calendar No. 6

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 45

A BILL

To prohibit the executive branch of the Federal

poses.nation in Federal employment, and for other purof individuals that is protected against discrimiGovernment from establishing an additional class

JANUARY 20, 1999

Read the second time and placed on the calendar
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 98-10425

USDC No. 5:97-CV-414

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ERIC ANTHONY THOMAS,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

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

July 23, 1998

Before JOLLY, WIENER and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

BY THE COURT:

Eric Anthony Thomas requests the issuance of a certificate

of appealability (COA) from this court to appeal the district

court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion as time-barred. 

COA is GRANTED with regard to the issue whether Thomas’s § 2255

motion was time-barred. Thomas had until November 15, 1997, to

file for relief under § 2255. For limitations purposes, Thomas’s

motion was filed on the date he forwarded it to prison officials

for mailing to the district court. See Cooper v. Brookshire, 70

F.3d 377, 378 (5th Cir. 1995); Fed. R. App. P. 4(c). The
No. 98-10425

- 2 -

certificate of service attached to Thomas’s § 2255 motion, which

complies with 28 U.S.C. § 1746, shows that he delivered his

motion to prison authorities for mailing on October 31, 1997,

within the limitations period. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c) (timely

filing may be shown by a declaration (in compliance with 28

U.S.C. § 1746) setting forth the date of deposit and stating that

first-class postage has been prepaid). Accordingly, COA is

GRANTED, the judgment of the district court is VACATED, and the

case is REMANDED for further proceedings. See Clark v. Williams,

693 F.2d 381, 382 (5th Cir. 1982).
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 530 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 530

To amend the Act commonly known as the ``Export Apple and Pear Act'' to 
             limit the applicability of that Act to apples.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 4, 1999

   Mr. Gorton  (for himself and Mr. Smith of Oregon) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                  Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Act commonly known as the ``Export Apple and Pear Act'' to 
             limit the applicability of that Act to apples.

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

SECTION 1. SCOPE OF EXPORT APPLE AND PEAR ACT.

    (a) Short Title.--The Act of June 10, 1933 (commonly known as the 
``Export Apple and Pear Act'') (48 Stat. 123, chapter 59; 7 U.S.C. 581 
et seq.), is amended by adding at the end the following:

``SEC. 11. SHORT TITLE.

    ``This Act may be cited as the `Export Apple Act'.''.
    (b) Definition of Apple.--Section 9 of the Export Apple Act (7 
U.S.C. 589) is amended by striking paragraph (4) and inserting the 
following:
            ``(4) Apple.--The term `apple' means a fresh whole apple, 
        whether or not the apple has been in storage.''.
    (c) Elimination of References to Pears.--The Export Apple Act is 
amended--
            (1) in the first section and sections 5 and 6 (7 U.S.C. 
        581, 585, 586), by striking ``and/or pears'' each place it 
        appears; and
            (2) in the first section and sections 2, 3, and 4 (7 U.S.C. 
        581, 582, 583, 584), by striking ``or pears'' each place it 
        appears.
                                 <all>
```
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

_____________

No. 15

- 1172

_____________

LAURENCE KAPLAN, on behalf of himself,

individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated

v.

SAINT PETER’S HEALTHCARE SYSTEM;

RONALD C. RAK; SUSA N BALLESTERO, an individual;

GARRICK STOLDT, an individual;

JOHN and JANE DOES 1

– 20

Saint Peter’s Healthcare System, Ronald C.

Rak, Susan Ballestero, Garrick Stoldt,

Appellants

________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of New Jersey

(D.C. Civil Action No. 3

- 13

- cv

- 02941)

District Judge: Honorable Michael A. Shipp

________________

On Remand from the Supreme Court of the United States

on July 7, 2017

Submitted on Remand July 7, 2017

P resent : McKEE, AMBRO, and HARDIMAN, Circuit Judges

______________________ ____ ___ ORDER

_________________ ________ _________

By opinion and judgment dated June 5, 2017, the Supreme Court of the United States

o rdered the judgment of this Court entered December 29, 2015 be reversed. Advocate

Health Care Network, et al. v. Stapleton, et al

., __ U.S. __, 137 S.Ct. 1652 (2017).

In accordance with the decision of the Supreme Court, the opinion and judgment of this

Court are hereby vacated. It is further A D JUDGED AND ORDERED that the judgmentof the D istrict C ourt dated March 31, 2014 is hereby reversed . Costs are taxed in favor of

the Appellants.

By the Court,

s/ Thomas L. Ambro, Circuit Judge

ATTEST:

s/Marcia M. Waldron

, Clerk

Dated: July 13, 2017
No. 852, Misc.

Petitioner *pro se. William I. Siegel*for respondent.

#### Hyde *v.*New York.

Court of Appeals of New York. Certiorari denied.
II

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 349

To allow depository institutions to offer negotiable order of withdrawal accounts to all businesses, to repeal the prohibition on the payment of

interest on demand deposits, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

FEBRUARY 3, 1999

Mr. HAGEL (for himself and Mr. REED) introduced the following bill; which

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and

Urban Affairs

A BILL

To allow depository institutions to offer negotiable order

of withdrawal accounts to all businesses, to repeal the

prohibition on the payment of interest on demand deposits, and for other purposes.

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 ‘‘Small Business Bank5 ing Act of 1999’’.
2

•S 349 IS

1 SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS RELATING TO SAVINGS AND DEMAND

2 DEPOSIT ACCOUNTS AT DEPOSITORY INSTI3 TUTIONS.

4 (a) NOW ACCOUNTS AUTHORIZED FOR ALL BUSI5 NESSES.—Section 2 of Public Law 93–100 (12 U.S.C.

6 1832) is amended to read as follows:

7 ‘‘SEC. 2. WITHDRAWALS BY NEGOTIABLE OR TRANSFER8 ABLE INSTRUMENTS FOR TRANSFERS TO

9 THIRD PARTIES.

10 ‘‘Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any de11 pository institution (as defined in section 3 of the Federal

12 Deposit Insurance Act) may permit the owner of any de13 posit or account at that institution on which interest or

14 dividends are paid to make withdrawals from such deposit

15 or account by negotiable or transferable instruments for

16 the purpose of making payments to third parties.’’.

17 (b) REPEAL OF PROHIBITIONS ON PAYMENT OF IN18 TEREST ON DEMAND DEPOSITS.—

19 (1) FEDERAL RESERVE ACT.—Section 19(i) of

20 the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 371a) is amend21 ed to read as follows:

22 ‘‘(i) [Reserved].’’.

23 (2) HOME OWNERS’ LOAN ACT.—Section

24 5(b)(1)(B) of the Home Owners’ Loan Act (12

25 U.S.C. 1464(b)(1)(B)) is amended—
3

•S 349 IS

1 (A) in the first sentence, by striking ‘‘sav2 ings association may not—’’ and all that follows

3 through ‘‘(ii) permit any’’ and inserting ‘‘sav4 ings association may not permit any’’;

5 (B) by inserting ‘‘(i)’’ after ‘‘(B)’’; and

6 (C) by striking ‘‘All savings’’ and inserting

7 the following:

8 ‘‘(ii) All savings’’.

9 (3) FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE ACT.—Sec10 tion 18(g) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12

11 U.S.C. 1828(g)) is amended to read as follows:

12 ‘‘(g) [Reserved].’’.

Æ
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 211 (Thursday, October 31, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 86850]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-25249]


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

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service<SUP>TM</SUP>.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: October 31, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
October 18, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request To Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 496 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-113, K2025-111.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-25249 Filed 10-30-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
Corrections to “Transcript of ECI/NTSB/FAA Meeting” dated February 14, 2013, Job No. 15494

Page # Line # Change From Change To

2 4b Byron Bryon

2 11b *****ADDITION***** Tubbs, James...DAS/ECI/AEC

3 25 Bryonn Bryon

5 15 Air Parts Airparts

12 14 ACE AEC

15 19 ADEs ADs

15 25 ADEs ADs

26 17 straight shrink

29 16 removal from service. removal of the cylinders from 

service.

30 17 in at prior to that time frame. in at produced prior to that time 

frame.

30 20 fillets in early 2006. fillets again in early 2006.

34 13 fit bit

45 10 CHD CHT

47 19 Rimasen Rumizen

50 17 bed band

54 4 fine find

55 4 Farenheit Fahrenheit

55 4 and it’s M-Bond 610. and the adhesive is it’s M-Bond 

610.

59 5 22 2.2

59 7 22 2.2

59 17 the cylinders the failed cylinders

66 20 scope scoped

74 2 start building cylinders. start building engine cylinders.

82 17 you’ve got shear strength you’ve got shear deformation 

strength

95 5 8,000 8 thousandths

103 16 operates operators

112 14 Alcar Alcor

112 15 ETT EGT

112 25 Hunt there Hundere

114 25 TO TBO

122 16 timing, timing problems,
EXHIBIT 31.1

****RULE 13a-14(a) CERTIFICATIONS****

I, William L. Stephens, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of First Niles Financial, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this 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 circumstancesunder which statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

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

4. The registrant's other certifying officer 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 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 theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this 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 proceduresas of the end of the period covered by this report based on our evaluation; and

c) disclosed in this report any changes in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that 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.

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

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant'sability 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: March 31, 2005

----
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

                               CERTIFICATE OF THE
                           CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF
                             TOWER AUTOMOTIVE, INC.

         Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.
1350):

         I, Kathleen Ligocki, Chief Executive Officer of Tower Automotive, Inc.,
certify, to the best of my knowledge and belief, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350) that:

         (1)      The quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period
ended September 30, 2003, which this statement accompanies, fully complies with
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and;

         (2)      The information contained in this quarterly report on Form
10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2003, fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Tower
Automotive, Inc.

                                TOWER AUTOMOTIVE, INC.

Date: November 12, 2003         By: /s/ Kathleen Ligocki
                                    -------------------------------
                                    Kathleen Ligocki
                                Its:  President and Chief Executive Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Tower Automotive, Inc. and will be retained by Tower Automotive,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
#### W. H. HUGHES, Executor of W. T. STEPHENSON, v. S. P. BOONE.

*Dismissing Appeal*— Rule 2, § 8.

Judgment was rendered in the lower Court January 28th, 1888. Defendant appealed, but did not docket his appeal in this Court, until February 15th, 1888, too late for argument at this term. On February 20th, 1888, appellee moved to dismiss the appeal under-Buie 2, § 8. The motion was refused, because not made until, after the appeal was docketed and the call of the district concluded, and no notice of the motion given appellant.

MotioN to dismiss appeal, heard by the Court at this-Term.

The facts are stated in the opinion.

No counsel for the plaintiff.

*Mr. R. B. Peebles,*for the defendant.

MerbimoN, J.

It appears that S. P. Boone obtained a judgment against W. H. Hughes, executor, &c., in the Supe*348rior Court of the County of Northampton, on the 28th day of January, 1888, from which the latter appealed to this Court; •but he did not docket his appeal here until the 15th of February next thereafter, so that, in the order of the call of the ■docket, it could not stand for argument at the present term.

On the 20th of February the appellee moved to docket .•and dismiss the appeal, as allowed by Rule 2, § 8, suggesting that the appellant, on purpose, failed to bring up his appeal ■as promptly as he might and ought regularly to have done, the object being to delay the disposition of the appeal until .the next term of the Court.

The motion cannot be allowed, because the appellant had ■docketed his appeal before the motion was made, *Barbee*v. *Green,*91 N. C., 158. Moreover, the motion was not made until after the week of the term assigned to the argument of ¡appeals from the district from which the appeal in question came, and there was no notice of the motion to the appellant or his counsel.

Motion denied.
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.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         October 31, 2024.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on October 25, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 540 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-163, K2025-161.                

Sean C. Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2024-25312 Filed 10-30-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
Director Fee Arrangements

          Each director of First Niles Financial, Inc. (the "Company") is also a director of Home Federal Savings and Loan Association of Niles (the "Bank")are identical. Directors of the Company are notcompensated for service on the Company's Board of Directors. Directors of the Bank, however, are compensated for service on the Bank Board of Directors. For 2005, as for 2004, each director of theBank receives a fee of $500 for each meeting of the Board of Directors attended. 

          Stock options and restricted stock may be granted at the discretion of the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors. Any such grants are strictly discretionary and are not based on anyformula or performance measures.
Page 1 of 3

Disposition Comments

Docket No: FAA-2011-1285 These comments are in

Directorate ID: 2010-SW-073-AD response to an SNPRM

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

Next Step: FRAN SNPRM

 No Comments/Only Supportive Comments Received – If this box is checked, no signatures are 

required.

No Has the referenced service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? If yes, 

list latest revision and attach a copy. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously 

published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance.

Instructions: Summarize all comments by issue (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of 

each issue. All comments relating to the same issue should be discussed together. Do not list all of the issues 

from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and 

describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA-IR-M-8040.1C Chapter 9.

ISSUE 1: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD: 

If NO, we don’t agree because 

ISSUE 2: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD:
Page 2 of 3

If NO, we don’t agree because 

For additional issues, double-click here
Page 3 of 3

Signature Section

Signature indicates concurrence with this action.

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

ASE Printed Name: Date

Branch Manager Date