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

[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 2 (Wednesday, January 7, 2009)]
[House]
[Pages H40-H41]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                SELF DEFENSE AGAINST RELIGIOUS EXTREMISM

  (Mr. POE of Texas asked and was given permission to address the House 
for 1 minute.)
  Mr. POE of Texas. Madam Speaker, the radical hate group Hamas in Gaza 
has refused to renew a truce with Israel. It has begun once more firing 
thousands of Iranian-made rockets into Israel. Numerous Israelis have 
died in the last 11 days.
  Hamas wants to annihilate Israel because, well, they're Jews. Hamas 
kills people that aren't radical Muslims like themselves. That's why 
they're called terrorists.
  Hamas cowardly hides among civilians for cover, fires rockets, then 
is indignant if Israel defends itself. But Israel has moved into Gaza 
to find these bad guys.
  Some world leaders, rather than mounting pressure on Hamas to stop 
the rocket attacks, are calling for a ceasefire, even a unilateral 
withdrawal

[[Page H41]]

of Israeli forces from Gaza. In other words, peace at any price.
  Peace ought to be a goal, but not at all costs. Actually, some things 
are worth fighting for. Now is not the time for unrealistic, hopeful 
idealism. Lives are on the line.
  Men may cry peace, peace, but there can be no peace as long as Hamas 
kills in the name of religion.
  And that's just the way it is.

                          ____________________
```
#### Neyers, Respondent, vs. Seelow, Defendant: Sampson-O’Connell, Inc., Appellant.

*February 10*

March *9, 1937.*

For the appellant there was a brief by *Crawford & Crawford*of Superior, and oral argument by *Raymond A. Crawford.*

For the respondent there was a brief by *Cadigan & Cadi-gan, John C. Fritschler,*and *John H. Chisholm,*all of Superior, and oral argument by *Mr. Fritschler.*

Per Curiam.

The case is ruled by the decision in *Anderson v. Seelow, ante,*p. 230, 271 N. W. 844. The judgment of the superior court is reversed, and the cause is remanded for further proceedings in accordance with the opinion in that case.
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 report of Consolidated Water Co. Ltd. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, David W. Sasnett,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





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





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




Date:
      May 10, 2010
                  By:
                  /s/
      David W. SasnettDavid
      W. SasnettExecutive
      Vice President & Chief Financial Officer(Principal
      Financial and Accounting Officer)
Exhibit 32.3 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF
ACCOUNTING OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In
connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2008, (the Report) of Allied Capital Corporation (the Registrant),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof; I, John C. Wellons, the Chief Accounting Officer of the Registrant, certify, to the best of my knowledge, that:  (1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant. /s/ John C. WellonsName:
    John C. WellonsDate: March 2, 2009
EX-4.2





 Exhibit 4.2 
  





 












 The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this certificate,
shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations: 
  

									
	TEN COM	 	—	 	as tenants in common	  	UNIF GIFT MIN ACT—	 	                        Custodian           
             
	TEN ENT	 	—	 	as tenants by the entireties	  		 	        (Cust)                        (Minor)
	JT TEN	 	—	 	as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants in common	  		 	 under Uniform Gifts to Minors
Act                                        
           

		 		 		  		 	                         (State)

 Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list. 

For value
received,                                       
                                         
 hereby sell, assign and transfer unto 
 PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER 

IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE 

			
	     
	 	 

  

	
	  

	PLEASE PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS INCLUDING ZIP CODE OF ASSIGNEE
	
	  

	
	  

	
	
                          
                                         
                                         
                                         
                                         
      Shares of the common stock represented by the within Certificate, and do hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint
                                         
               
  

 

	                                      
                                         
                                         
                                         
                                    Attorney to transfer the said stock
on the books of the within-named Corporation with full power of substitution in the premises.

  

	
	
Dated,                  
                                       



  

			
		 	  

	NOTICE:	 	THE SIGNATURE TO THIS ASSIGNMENT MUST CORRESPOND WITH THE NAME AS WRITTEN UPON THE FACE OF THE CERTIFICATE IN EVERY PARTICULAR, WITHOUT ALTERATION OR ENLARGEMENT OR ANY CHANGE WHATEVER.

  

					
	Signature(s) Guaranteed:	 		 	
			
	  
	 		 	
	THE SIGNATURE(S) MUST BE GUARANTEED BY AN ELIGIBLE GUARANTOR INSTITUTION (BANKS, STOCKBROKERS, SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS AND CREDIT UNIONS WITH MEMBERSHIP IN AN APPROVED SIGNATURE GUARANTEE MEDALLION PROGRAM), PURSUANT TO S.E.C.
RULE 17Ad-15.
EXHIBIT 32.1
                             ------------
                            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 accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (the
"Report") of AMCON Distributing Company (the "Company") for the fiscal
quarter ended June 30, 2005, I, William F. Wright, Chairman and Principal
Executive 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, to my knowledge, 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.

Date: August 19, 2005           /s/ William F. Wright
                                -------------------------
                                Title: Chairman and Principal
                                        Executive Officer
**Certification**

                      Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, theundersigned officer of Alcan Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certifies, to suchofficer's knowledge, that the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 (the "Report") fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

 

| Date: 14 March 2005 | /s/Travis Engen                           |
|---------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                | Travis Engen                                                                                                                                                                |
|                | President and Chief ExecutiveOfficer                                                                                                                                        |
* Pursuant to 5 T H 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-60688

GLYNN RHODES, Petitioner-Cross-Respondent

versus

TIDELAND WELDING SERVICE, INC; LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY; Respondents-Cross-Petitioners

DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKER’S COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Respondent.

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Benefits Review Board (94-1955)

August 8, 1997

Before REYNALDO G. GARZA, HIGGINBOTHAM, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

AFFIRMED. See Local Rule 47.6.
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NO. WR-92,328-01

EX P ARTE CODY MOORE, Appli cant

ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. W19-59388-K (A) IN THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 4 F ROM DALLAS COUNTY

Per curiam . O R D E R Applicant was convicted of attempted possession of a controlled substance and sentenc ed to 12 months’ imprisonment. Applicant filed this application for a writ of habea s corpus in the county of conviction, and t h e district cler k forwa rded it to this Court. See T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 11.07. On J anuar

y 11, 2021, the State filed a response to the application and rec ommended g ranting relief

. Howeve r, the trial court did not enter finding s of fac t and conclusions of law or make any

rec ommendation. The rec o rd befor e us sug g ests that Applicant may be entitled to relief , either beca use he is still detained or beca use he is on parole rele ase from this sentenc e, but we are unable to confirm Applica

nt’s status from this recor d.The district cler k proper ly forwa

rded this application to this C o u rt under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedur e 73.4(b)( 5). Howeve r, the application was forwa rded befor e the trial court made finding s of fac t and conclusions of law. We rema nd this ap p l i ca tion to the trial court to make finding s of fa ct and c onclusions of law. The trial court shall make findings of fac t and conclusions of l aw within ninet y d ay s from the date of this order

. The district cler k shall then immediately forwa rd to this Court the trial court’s finding s and conclusions and the rec ord develope d on rema nd, including, among other things, aff idavits, motions, objections, proposed finding s and conclusions, order s, and transcr ipts from hear ings and depositions. See T E X . R. A P P . P. 73.4(b)( 4). Any extensions of time must be reque sted by the trial cour

t and obtained f

rom this Court.

Filed: Apr il 14, 2021 Do not publish
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTINGFIRM**

Weconsent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements (Nos. 33-75308,33-45811, 333-105087, 333-81154, 333-34077 and 333-115271)on Forms S-8 of our report on the financial statements dated December 29,2005 (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatoryparagraph relating to the restatement of the financial statements for the yearsended June 30, 2004 and 2003), and of our report on internal controlover financial reporting (which report expresses an adverse opinion on theeffectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reportingbecause of material weaknesses) appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-Kof Alliance Gaming Corporation for the year ended June 30, 2005.
| DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP |
|--------------------------------|
| Las Vegas, Nevada              |
| December 29, 2005         |

 

----
Exhibit 32
CERTIFICATIONS
In connection with the annual report on Form 10-K of AIG SunAmerica Life Assurance Company for theyear ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (“the Report”), each of, Jay S. Wintrob, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and N.Scott Gillis, Senior Vice President and 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 of2002, that:
 (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and  (2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.                                                                /s/  JAY S. WINTROB   Jay S. Wintrob   Chief Executive Officer                                                                  /s/  N. SCOTT GILLIS   N. Scott Gillis   Senior Vice President and
#### Uihlein (William B.), Appellant, vs. City of Milwaukee and others, Respondents.

*February 10*

March *7, 1933.*

For the appellant there were briefs by *Walter J. Matti-son,*attorney, and *Gold & McCann, Walter D. Corrigan, Sr.,*and *August C. Backus*of counsel, and oral argument by *Mr. Mattison, Mr. J. E. Porter, Mr. Corrigan, Mr. Walter L. Gold,*and *Mr. Backus,*all of Milwaukee.

For the respondents there was a brief by *Max Raskin,*city attorney, *William F. Quick,*first assistant city attorney, *Herbert C. Hirschboeck*and *H. A. Kovenock,*assistant city attorneys, and oral argument by *Mr. Quick, Mr. Hirsch-boeck,*and *Mr. Kovenock.*

Fowler, J.

This case was argued and submitted with the case of *Schlitz Realty Corporation v. City of Milwaukee, ante,*p. 62, 247 N. W. 459, and is ruled by the decision therein.

*By the Court.*— The judgment and orders of the circuit court are affirmed.
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1051 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the increase in 

the income threshold used in determining the deduction for medical care. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 14, 2017 

Ms. MCSALLY (for herself, Mr. WITTMAN, Mr. OLSON, Mr. MACARTHUR, Mr. 

TIBERI, Ms. JENKINS of Kansas, Mr. BISHOP of Michigan, Ms. SINEMA, 

and Mr. WEBSTER of Florida) introduced the following bill; which was 

referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal 

the increase in the income threshold used in determining 

the deduction for medical care. 

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 ‘‘Halt Tax Increases 

5 on the Middle Class and Seniors Act’’. 

mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with BILLS

2 

•HR 1051 IH

1 SEC. 2. REPEAL OF INCREASE IN INCOME THRESHOLD FOR 

2 DETERMINING MEDICAL CARE DEDUCTION. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 213(a) of the Internal 

4 Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ‘‘10 per5 cent’’ and inserting ‘‘7.5 percent’’. 

6 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.— 

7 (1) Section 213 of such Code is amended by 

8 striking subsection (f). 

9 (2) Section 56(b)(1)(B) of such Code is amend10 ed by striking ‘‘without regard to subsection (f) of 

11 such section’’ and inserting ‘‘by substituting ‘10 per12 cent’ for ‘7.5 percent’ ’’. 

13 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

14 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

15 December 31, 2016. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with BILLS
**Exhibit 23(e)1**

 

 

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-108156 on Form S-3 of our reports dated February 26, 2007 (which report on the financial statements expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph concerning the change in method of accounting for the funded status of defined benefit pension and other postretirement plans), relating to the financial statements and financial statement schedule of Mississippi Power Company, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Mississippi Power Company for the year ended December 31, 2006.

 

/s/Deloitte & Touche LLP

 

Atlanta, Georgia

February 26, 2007
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7579

In Re: MARVIN R. ANDERSON,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CR-99-239) Submitted: January 28, 2004 Decided: February 12, 2004 Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marvin R. Anderson, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Marvin R. Anderson petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. Our review of the docket sheet reveals that the district court recently denied his motion. See United States v. Anderson , No. CR-99-239 (S.D.W. Va. Dec. 2, 2003). Accordingly, because the district court has recently decided Anderson’s case, we deny the mandamus petition as moot. 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.
PETITION DENIED
Exhibit 32.1


                    CERTIFICATION OF CEO AND CFO 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 on Form 10-Q of Building
Materials Corporation of America (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended
April 4, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), William W. Collins, as Chief Executive Officer and
President of the Company, and John F. Rebele, as Senior Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, each 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 the best of his knowledge and belief:


     (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/ William W. Collins
-----------------------------------------------
Name:  William W. Collins
Title: Chief Executive Officer and President

Date:  May 18, 2004



/s/ John F. Rebele
-----------------------------------------------
Name:  John F. Rebele
Title: Senior Vice President and
       Chief Financial Officer

Date:  May 18, 2004



           This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-6963

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JEFFREY DWAYNE JONES,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Glen M. Williams, Senior

District Judge. (1:03-cr-00123; 7:05-cv-00299)

Submitted: May 30, 2008 Decided: June 11, 2008

Before WILKINSON and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jeffrey Dwayne Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Jean Barrett Hudson,

Assistant United States Attorney, Charlottesville, Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Jeffrey Dwayne Jones seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A

certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial

showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any

assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is

debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by

the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell,

537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Jones has not

made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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
## Review Commission Seeks Comments for Changing Rules of Procedure

**REVIEW COMMISSION SEEKS COMMENTS FOR CHANGING RULES OF PROCEDURE**

The Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission seeks written comments from the public recommending changes to the Commission’s Rules of Procedure, Chairman W. Scott Railton announced recently. The rules may be found at 29 C.F.R. Part 2200 and on the agency website, https://www.oshrc.gov. The request for input will be published in the Federal Register on June 17, 2004.

Issues of particular interest for changes include the adoption of rules to implement electronic filing, service of documents, whether electronic filing should be mandatory, and if practice before the Review Commission should be restricted to lawyers, in-house company and union representatives. 

Also under consideration are cases eligible for E-Z Trial. This is a streamlined case resolution method designed to make contesting a citation simpler, and less costly, for small employers and those appearing without attorneys. E-Z trial eliminates pleadings, discourages discovery, and requires the disclosure to employers of certain useful information concerning the inspection and citation.

Those proposing changes should provide a brief discussion of the reasons for the suggestions, why changes would facilitate improved practice before the Review Commission, and when necessary, a reference to authority.
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 23

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
33-54998 and 333-113995 on Form S-3 and Nos. 2-80776, 33-2139, 33-7901,
33-15062, 33-43635, 33-62799, 33-59803, 333-82157, 333-82161, 333-87773 and
333-73194 on Form S-8 of our reports dated March 31, 2005, relating to the
consolidated financial statements of Albertson's, Inc. and subsidiaries (which
report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph
relating to changes in methods of accounting for goodwill, closed stores and
vendor funds), and management's report on the effectiveness of internal control
over financial reporting appearing in this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report
on Form 10-K/A of Albertson's, Inc. and subsidiaries for the year ended February
3, 2005.

Deloitte & Touche LLP
Boise, Idaho
April 13, 2005