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

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1412 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1412

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to qualify homeless youth 
and veterans who are full-time students for purposes of the low income 
                          housing tax credit.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 21, 2015

 Mr. Franken (for himself, Mr. Portman, Mrs. Murray, Ms. Collins, and 
   Mr. King) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to qualify homeless youth 
and veterans who are full-time students for purposes of the low income 
                          housing tax credit.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Housing for Homeless Students Act of 
2015''.

SEC. 2. HOMELESS YOUTH AND VETERANS WHO ARE FULL-TIME STUDENTS 
              QUALIFIED FOR PURPOSES OF THE LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX 
              CREDIT.

    (a) In General.--Clause (i) of section 42(i)(3)(D) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by redesignating subclauses (II) and 
(III) as subclauses (IV) and (V), respectively, and by inserting after 
subclause (I) the following new subclauses:
                                    ``(II) a full-time student who, 
                                during any portion of the 7-year period 
                                ending with the commencement of such 
                                individual's continuous occupation of 
                                any low-income unit or units, was an 
                                individual described in section 725(2) 
                                of the McKinney-Vento Homeless 
                                Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11434a),
                                    ``(III) a full-time student who, 
                                during any portion of the 5-year period 
                                ending with the commencement of such 
                                individual's continuous occupation of 
                                any low-income unit or units, was an 
                                individual described in section 2002(1) 
                                of title 38, United States Code,''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) shall 
apply to determinations made before, on, or after the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
# United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604

Argued April 10, 2018 Decided April 26, 2018

Before

DIANE P. WOOD, Chief Judge

J OEL M. FLAUM, Circuit Judge

MICHAEL S. KANNE
, Circuit Judge

No. 17-2868

ERIC D. WANGER,
Petitioner

,

v

.

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Respondent

. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Securities & Exchange Commission.

No. 3-14676

O R D E R
In 2012, Eric Wanger consented to the entr y of an order by the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commissi on”) that barred him from the securities industry. The order afforded him the right to apply fo r reentry to the industry after one year. In 2016, Wanger filed an application for consent to reenter the industry. The Commission denied his application on July 10, 2017. Wange r now petitions for review of the order denying his application, but his petition is untimely.

A party must petition for review of a Co mmission order “within sixty days after the entry of [the] order.” 15 U.S.C. § 80b-13(a); see id . § 78y(a)(1). “The date of entry of a NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION To be cited onl y in accordance with Fed. R. A pp . P. 32.1No. 17-2868 Page 2

Commission order shall be the date the order is signed” by the Secretary or by another person authorized by the Commission. 17 C.F. R. §§ 201.140(a) & (c). That date “shall be reflected in the caption of the order.” Id . § 201.140(c).

The caption date on the Commission’s order was July 10, 2017. This gave Wanger sixty days—until September 8, 2017—to file his pe tition. He ultimately filed the petition on September 11, three days after the statutory window closed.

Wanger nonetheless insists that his petiti on is timely. He first argues that the statutory window could not have begun on July 10 because the Assistant Secretary did not sign the order until July 12. This argument finds no support in th e record. In fact, a sworn declaration by Assistant Secretary J ill Peterson and internal Commission records confirm that Peterson digitally signed the order on July 10, 2017.

Wanger then contends that Peterson’s “d igital signature”—a digital image of a handwritten signature or a type signature in an electronic document—cannot serve as a signature. This argument is also meritless. Pe terson’s digital signature is her signature. Such signatures are now commonplace and Wange r fails to direct this court to a statute or regulation that prohibits their use by the Commission.

Finally, Wanger argues that it would be too harsh to dismiss the petition as untimely. Even if we agreed, we would be comp elled to dismiss. It is likely that this limitations period is jurisdictional. Bowles v. Russell , 551 U.S. 205, 209–210 (2007). At minimum, however, the time bar is mandatory and binding. See

, e.g. , Clean Water Action Council of Ne. Wis., Inc. v. EPA , 765 F.3d 749, 753 (7th Cir. 2014).

Accordingly, we DISMISS Wanger’s petition as untimely.
ever y D. Melontree



## Beverly D. Melontree Attorney at Law 213 S. Fenton Avenue Tyler, Texas 75702 Telephone: 713.480.2674

903-372-6193 Facsimile: 903.747.3760 Bmelontree@icloud.com

August 16, 2015 Ms. Katrina McClenny Chief Deputy Clerk 12 th Court of Appeals 1517 West Front Street Tyler, Texas 75702

Re: Cause No.: 12-15-00128-CR; Robert Lafayette Walker v. The State of Texas; In the 12 th Court of Appeals; Smith County, Texas.

Dear Ms. McClenny: Please find enclosed Appellant's Brief in the above-referenced case number. If you have any questions regarding the contents of this correspondence, then feel free to contact me at 713-480-2674. I look forward to hearing from you.

cc: Mr. Robert Walker 3109 Rolling Hill Drive Tyler, Texas 75702

Mr. Michael J. West ACCEPTED 12-15-00128-CR TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS

TYLER, TEXAS 8/17/2015 12:00:00 AM

CATHY LUSK CLERK
98-2044.

#### State v. Snowder.

Licking App. No. 98CA22. By *sua sponte*orders, this court consolidated Supreme Court case Nos. 98-1779, *State v. Conyers;*98-1929, *State v. Schultz;*and 98-2044, *State v. Snowder.*These cases have been set for oral argument on September 14, 1999, and pursuant to the court’s orders of August 30, 1999, time for oral argument was extended to twenty minutes per side. Upon consideration of the joint motion to sever case No. 98-2044, *State v. Snowder,*from the remaining two cases,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion to sever case No. 98-2044, *State v. Snowder,*from the remaining two cases be, and hereby is, granted, and that the court’s orders of August 30,1999, are vacated.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that oral argument time for case No. 98-2044, *State v. Snowder,*will be fifteen minutes per side and oral argument time for case Nos. 98-1779, *State v. Conyers,*and 98-1929, *State v. Schultz,*will be fifteen minutes per side.
# C_2005143EN.01002502.xml

| 11.6.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 143/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.6.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 143/25

---

Action brought on 1 April 2005 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Kingdom of the Netherlands

(Case C-147/05)

(2005/C 143/37)

Language of the case: Dutch

An action against the Kingdom of the Netherlands was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 1 April 2005 by the Commission of the European Communities, represented by M. van Beek and S.P. Quintillan, of its Legal Service.

The Commission claims that the Court should:

| 1. | declare that by not taking all necessary legal and administrative measures to comply with Directive 2000/60/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy, or by not notifying the Commission of such measures, the Kingdom of the Netherlands has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive; |
| --- | --- |

1.

declare that by not taking all necessary legal and administrative measures to comply with Directive 2000/60/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy, or by not notifying the Commission of such measures, the Kingdom of the Netherlands has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

1

| 2. | order the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

order the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period for implementing the directive in national law expired on 22 December 2003.

---

(1)  OJ 2000 L 327, p. 1

1

---
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

     CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Al A. Gonsoulin, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Petroleum
Helicopters, Inc. (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

         1.       the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June
                  30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
                  on the date hereof (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 for the period covered by such
                  Report.

Dated: October 25, 2004 and effective as of August 9, 2004



                                       By:  /s/ Al A. Gonsoulin
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Al A. Gonsoulin
                                            Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE>   1
                            FIRST M & F CORPORATION


Exhibit 11 - Computation of Earnings Per Share


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                               Three Months Ended            Nine Months Ended
                                  September 30,                September 30,      
                           ---------------------------    --------------------------
                               1996           1995           1996           1995
                               ----           ----           ----           ----
<S>                        <C>            <C>           <C>             <C>
Net income                 $ 1,914,426    $ 1,561,102     $ 5,623,361    $ 4,602,613
                           ============   ===========     ===========    ===========


Weighted average
  shares outstanding          3,394,656     3,390,900       3,392,723      3,261,812
                           ============   ===========     ===========    ===========


Earnings per share         $        .56   $       .46     $      1.66    $      1.41
                           ============   ===========     ===========    ===========
</TABLE>
#### Estate of Weihert: Weihert, Respondent, vs. Opel, Appellant.

For the appellant: *Herman Brill*of Columbus and *Bagley, Spohn, Ross & Stevens*of Madison.

For the respondent: *Skinner & Thauer*of Watertown and *Richmond, Jackman, Wilkie & Toebaas*of Madison.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.
Order entered April 21 , 2014

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**
No. 05
- 13
- 01610
- CV
IN THE MATTER OF THE MARRIAGE OF OMID ROH ANI AND SUMMER ROHAN I On Appeal from the 199th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Cou rt Cause No. 199
- 51617
- 2012 

### O RDER
We GRANT appellee’s April 17, 2014 second agreed motion for an extension of time to file a brief. Appellee shall file his brief on or before May 27, 2014. We caution appellee that no further extension of time will be granted absent extraordinary circumstances.

/s/ ADA BROWN JUSTICE
<PAGE>
Exhibit 99.1

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 Quarterly Report of Thoratec Corporation (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 29, 2003 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, D. Keith Grossman,
Chief Executive 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:

      (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.


  By:        /s/   D. Keith Grossman          Date: May 13, 2003
             ----------------------------
  Name:      D. Keith Grossman
  Title:     Chief Executive Officer

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Thoratec Corporation (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 29, 2003 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, M. Wayne Boylston,
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:

      (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.


  By:        /s/   M. Wayne Boylston           Date: May 13, 2003
             ----------------------------
  Name:      M. Wayne Boylston
  Title:     Chief Financial Officer
114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 1402 

AN ACT 

To allow acceleration certificates awarded under the Patents 

for Humanity Program to be transferable. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

†S 1402 ES

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Patents for Humanity 

3 Program Improvement Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. TRANSFERABILITY OF ACCELERATION CERTIFI5 CATES. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—A holder of an acceleration certifi7 cate issued pursuant to the Patents for Humanity Pro8 gram (established in the notice entitled ‘‘Humanitarian 

9 Awards Pilot Program’’, published at 77 Fed. Reg. 6544 

10 (February 8, 2012)), or any successor thereto, of the 

11 United States Patent and Trademark Office, may transfer 

12 (including by sale) the entitlement to such acceleration 

13 certificate to another person. 

14 (b) REQUIREMENT.—An acceleration certificate 

15 transferred under subsection (a) shall be subject to any 

16 other applicable limitations under the notice entitled ‘‘Hu17 manitarian Awards Pilot Program’’, published at 77 Fed. 

18 Reg. 6544 (February 8, 2012), or any successor thereto. 

Passed the Senate May 26, 2016. 

Attest: 

Secretary. 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 1402 

AN ACT 

Patents for Humanity Program to be transferable. 

To allow acceleration certificates awarded under the
EXHIBIT 13.1

ASIA SATELLITE TELECOMMUNICATIONS HOLDINGS LIMITED

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 Asia Satellite Telecommunications Holdings Limited (the Company) Annual Report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Peter Jackson, 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.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

May 27, 2008



/s/ Peter JacksonPeter JacksonChief Executive Officer
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.4

                                 AMENDMENT TO

                              JOHN W. ROSENTHAL

                             EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


Pursuant to Section 9(b) of the Employment Agreement entered into between St.
Joseph Capital Corporation and John W. Rosenthal dated March 18, 1996 (the
"Agreement"), the parties hereby amend the Agreement as follows:

Section 2 of the Agreement is amended by adding a new paragraph (j) to the end
thereof, which new paragraph shall read as follows:

      "(j) Life Insurance.  The Executive shall have purchased on his behalf at
      the expense of the Employer life insurance on the Executive's life in an
      amount equal to Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000).  The Executive
      shall be allowed to name, and change at his election, the beneficiary or
      beneficiaries of such life insurance."

The remaining provisions of the Agreement shall remains in full force and
effect.

This amendment to the Agreement is hereby agreed to and accepted by the parties
thereto this 8th day of January, 1998.


ST. JOSEPH CAPITAL CORPORATION                JOHN W. ROSENTHAL

By:
   ------------------------------             ---------------------------------
Its: Chairman Human Resources
#### Pearle v. Folsom.

A.discharge under the insolvent debtor’s act, ordered by the proper officers, will be presumed to have been regularly done, until the contrary be shown. Under tiie first insolvent act, the Defendant was discharged only as to those who had commenced suits against him, •and had notice given them of the debtor’s petition.

Covenant, for certificates which Defendant borrowed, and agreed to return or pay for in money at the rate of 4 shillings in the. pound. Amongst other [ileus, the Defendant pleaded, that lie had been discharged of the action under the insolvent debtor’s act He- produced a petition selling forth his imprisonmonr al the suit of anoi'tw creditor, and praying the benefit of tbrt act, *1773, e„*4. He also produced the return of the goaier, by which ii; appears he was in also at the. suit of the present Idain-tiff. He also produced the subsequent proceedings, shewing his having taken the oath preucrib-'d is» tiuu act, and bis.having been discharged, it was argu.-d mi the other side, that he ought also to produce the notice served on the present Plaintiff, of his being about to take, the benefit of the. aci — the evidence offered did not amount to a proof of notice, it was answered, that the giving of notice, is a circumstance incident to the business of his discharge.., and must have been proved to the Justices of the Peace before they proceeded — since they have discharged him, the court here will presume, that all things preparatory to his discharge, were rightly and. legally transacted.) and they cited *Bull. Nisi*Fri. 173.

*For curiam*

Since there is a-discharge ordered by the proper officers of justice, we will presumí: all circumstances required by law to precede the discharge,.to have been regularly observed j otherwise,, we mum presume, tiiat the Justices have acted illegally : which, is a presumption neyer entertained against the proceedings oí officers of justice. If in fact they have proceeded to discharge- without notice, and the creditor will shew that, it will vi'iate the proceedings. The presumption of omnia., *rente ada,.*I asís only until proof of the contrary appear¿, but we will not require the Defendant to prove notice to *478have been given, the Plaintiff not being able to shew any irregularity in the proceedings. There was a verdict for the Defendant.

One other point was moved in this cause, namely, whether the Defendant by a discharge under the first branch of the act, was discharged as to all creditors, or as to such only who had instituted suits against him at the time of his imprisonment.

*Etper curiam*— Clearly, before the late act which lias made some alteration, he was discharged only as to such creditors who had commenced their suits, and had notice given them of the debtor’s petition.

*Note*— Vide *Burton*v. *Dickens,*3 *Murph.*103, *Howard*v, *Pasteur*& *Price, Ibid, 270, Jordan*v. *James & Marshall,*3 *Hawks*110.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.05

                                SECOND AMENDMENT
                                     TO THE
                             COMSHARE, INCORPORATED
                             BENEFIT ADJUSTMENT PLAN
              (AS AMENDED AND RESTATED EFFECTIVE NOVEMBER 6, 1997)


         Pursuant to Resolutions adopted by the Board of Directors of Comshare,
Incorporated ("Corporation") on February 16, 2001, the Plan is amended, as set
forth below.


1.       Section 7.01 is amended by adding a new paragraph (e) which reads as
         follows:

                    (E) SPECIAL VALUATION DATE. In accordance with the
               Distribution Election Form signed on February 9, 2001 by Mr.
               Norman Neuman, Mr. Neuman shall be entitled to a lump sum
               distribution of his vested Deferred and Company Contribution
               Accounts valued as of January 5, 2002.

2.       Article VIII is amended by adding a new Section 8.03 which reads as
         follows:

                    SECTION 8.03 SPECIAL VALUATION DATE. In accordance with the
               Distribution Election Form signed on February 9, 2001 by Mr.
               Norman Neuman, Mr. Neuman's Supplemental Compensation Account
               shall be valued as of January 5, 2002, and distributions shall
               commence to him as soon as reasonably practicable thereafter.

         THIS SECOND AMENDMENT to the Benefit Adjustment Plan of Comshare,
Incorporated is executed as of February 16, 2001.


                                      COMSHARE, INCORPORATED




                                  By: /s/ Brian Jarzynski
                                      Brian Jarzynski
                                      Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
eate 27 Feb 1960
Inpex: 8408
WK AFABF and APDIP 73993

10: Buc

From: © * ARDC

. ; OSD approval of essential R&D program for FY 60 as included in ;
summary Development plans as presehted by AFEMD. Program fund amounts for

¥¥ 60 by weapon system: .
Discoverer
Samos
Midas

Procurement authorization being issued to Hq ARDC

FILED: DISCOVERER . '

INDEXER:

REMARKS:

DD iit» 334 CROSS-REFERENCE SHEET © ttm

US. COvERNENT PRAETING OPFICE : 1980-0-se0876,