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

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4387 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 29, 2010 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 

Public Works 

AN ACT 

To designate the Federal building located at 100 North 

Palafox Street in Pensacola, Florida, as the ‘‘Winston 

E. Arnow Federal Building’’. 

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


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 4387 RFS

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

2 The Federal building located at 100 North Palafox 

3 Street in Pensacola, Florida, shall be known and des4 ignated as the ‘‘Winston E. Arnow Federal Building’’. 

5 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

6 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

7 paper, or other record of the United States to the Federal 

8 building referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be 

9 a reference to the ‘‘Winston E. Arnow Federal Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 28, 

2010. 

Attest: LORRAINE C. MILLER, 

Clerk. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-60516

Summary Calendar

ALEX NOE VERGARA-MALDONADO,

Petitioner

v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

BIA No. A072 672 029

Before DAVIS, SOUTHWICK, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Alex Noe Vergara-Maldonado, a native and citizen of Honduras, 

petitions this court for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals 

(BIA) summarily affirming the denial of his application for withholding of 

removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). The 

immigration judge (IJ) determined that Vergara-Maldonado was subject to 

removal based upon convictions for a controlled substance offense and an 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 12, 2014

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 13-60516 Document: 00512662139 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/12/2014
No. 13-60516

aggravated felony offense. The IJ further determined that the testimonial and 

documentary evidence presented by Vergara-Maldonado was insufficient to 

establish his eligibility for withholding of removal and CAT relief.

In his petition for review, Vergara-Maldonado does not challenge the 

basis for the underlying removal order. Rather, he argues that the IJ’s decision 

denying him relief was erroneous and that the BIA erroneously applied the 

summary affirmance procedures set forth in 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(e)(4).

An alien’s eligibility for withholding of removal and CAT relief is a 

factual conclusion that is ordinarily reviewed for substantial evidence. Zhang 

v. Gonzales, 432 F.3d 339, 344 (5th Cir. 2005). Because Vergara-Maldonado is 

removable due to convictions for an aggravated felony and a controlled 

substance offense, this court lacks jurisdiction to consider whether substantial 

evidence supported his withholding of removal and CAT claims. See

8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C); Escudero-Arciniega v. Holder, 702 F.3d 781, 785 (5th 

Cir. 2012). With respect to Vergara-Maldonado’s argument that his case 

should not have been summarily affirmed because it did not meet the 

regulatory requirements set forth in § 1003.1(e)(4), we decline review pursuant 

to Garcia-Melendez v. Ashcroft, 351 F.3d 657, 662 (5th Cir. 2003).

Accordingly, the petition for review is DISMISSED in part for lack of 

jurisdiction and DENIED in part.

2

 Case: 13-60516 Document: 00512662139 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/12/2014
EXHIBIT 32.1


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



         Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Clifford Postelnik, the Chief Executive Officer
of Muller Media, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the "Company"), hereby certifies
that the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended
June 30, 2003 (the "Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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:  August 19, 2003                       /s/ Clifford Postelnik
                                             ----------------------
                                             Name:    Clifford Postelnik
                                             Title:   Chief Executive Officer
#### Michele A. Mooney, Plaintiff, v James A. Van Vechten, Defendant.

Supreme Court, Oneida County,

January 19, 1988

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Calvin J. Domenico, Jr.,*for plaintiff. *Philip F. Wolff*for defendant.

OPINION OF THE COURT

John R. Tenney, J.

The parties were divorced in April 1986. In the decree, defendant was ordered to assume exclusive responsibility for the marital debt, of approximately $3,600, to the Griffith Oneida Credit Union. Both spouses were signatories to the note. Defendant subsequently filed bankruptcy, and the debt was discharged.

*954The Credit Union sought collection of the debt from plaintiff, and she is making periodic payments. This proceeding is to enforce the terms of the decree, directing that the defendant reimburse her for the payments she has made, and that he assume responsibility for the remainder of the debt.

Plaintiff’s motion is granted. Defendant’s bankruptcy does not discharge him from his obligations to plaintiff under the decree. In the first instance, plaintiff was not listed in the schedule of creditors in the bankruptcy petition (11 USC § 521 [1]). There are no circumstances alleged which would discharge under normal circumstances an unscheduled creditor (11 USC § 523 [a] [3]).

However, even if plaintiff was given full notice of the bankruptcy proceeding, there could be no discharge here. Under 11 USC § 727 (b), only debts due or claimed on the date of filing can be discharged. While the obligation to pay the Credit Union existed on that date, and was properly extinguished, the obligation to reimburse plaintiff under the present circumstances arises out of the order but is only effective as a result of the equity proceeding.

Obligations to a former spouse for alimony, maintenance, and/or support do not appear to be dischargeable. Certainly, some weight should be given to the equities established by the court order. Many decisions seem to support the proposition that an order which provides for payment of marital debts, or an agreement to assume joint debts, may be nondischargeable. There is a trend which treats such obligations as alimony or support. (Compare, *In re Spong,*661 F2d 6; *In re Calhoun,*715 F2d 1103; *but see, In re Lewis,*39 Bankr 842.) This trend is consistent with the legislative philosophy in treating marital obligations. The only effective means of discharge is to join both spouses in the proceeding.

Plaintiff’s motion is granted.
|Exhibit
10.26


Amendment to
2000 Long Term Incentive Plan


Sections
6(c)(i)(A) and (B) of the IMPATH Inc. 2000 Long Term Incentive Plan are hereby
amended to read as follows:
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | (A)
Except as may be provided by the specific terms of an Award or an amendment of an Award,
no Award (other than Released Securities), and no right under any such Award, may be
assigned, alienated, pledged, attached, sold or otherwise transferred or encumbered by a
Participant otherwise than by will or by the laws of descent and distribution (or, in the
case of Restricted Securities, to the Company) and any such purported assignment,
alienation, pledge, attachment, sale or other transfer or encumbrance shall be void and
unenforceable against the Company or any Affiliate.
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | (B)
Except as may be provided by the specific terms of an Award or an amendment of an Award,
each Award, and each right under any Award, shall be exercisable during the Participants
lifetime only by the Participant or, if permissible under applicable law, by the
Participants guardian or legal representative.
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EXHIBIT 10.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT



Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer
of Telecomunicações Brasileiras S.A. - Telebrás (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that:



The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2003 of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                    |  |                                   
|------------------- |  | ----------------------------------
|Date: June 30, 2004 |  | /s/ Minoru Oda                    
|                    |  | Minoru Oda Chief Executive 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.



---

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer
of Telecomunicações Brasileiras S.A. - Telebrás (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that:



The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2003 of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                    |  |                                                 
|------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------
|                    |  | /s/ Vera Lúcia Garcia Caulit                    
|Date: June 30, 2004 |  | Vera Lúcia Garcia Caulit Chief Financial 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.
Order entered May 8 , 2015

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 14

- 01591

- CR
CHARLES LEE GALLAMOR E, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1

Collin County, Texas Trial Court C ause No. 001

- 85499

- 2013



### O RDER The clerk’s record has been filed in this appeal, but the reporter’s record has not been filed. The court reporter filed a letter stating that appellant, who was represented by retained counsel at trial, but is pursuing the appeal pro se, did not request or pay for the reporter’s record. Appellant filed a pro se brief that does not comply with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.1. At the beginning of the brief, appellant states that he cannot afford the reporter’s record

. In light of this information, we ORDER the trial court to make findings of fact regarding whether appellant has been deprived of the reporter’s record because of indigence or for any
other reason.

 The trial court shall first determine whether appellant is indigent and entitled to proceed without payment of costs for the reporter’s record. If appellant is entitled to proceed without payment of costs, the trial court shall make a finding to that effect. Moreover, ifappellant is indigent, the trial cour t is ORDERED to take such measures as may be

necessary to assure effective representation, which may include appointment of new counsel. If the trial court finds appellant is not indigent, it shall determine whether retained counsel has abandoned the appe al.

 The trial court shall next determine: (1) the name and address of each court reporter who recorded the proceedings in this cause; and ( 2 ) the earliest date by which the reporter’s record can be filed.
We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record, containing the written findings of fact, any supporting documentation, and any orders, to this Court within THIRTY DAYS of the date
of this order. The Court will defer any issues related to appellant’s pro se brief pending receipt of the trial court’s find ings. The appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with this order. The appeal shall be reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the findings are received,
whichever is earlier.

/s/ ADA BROWN JUSTICE
<PAGE>
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                               .

                                                                   Exhibit 21.1

                              LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES*

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Name in Corporate Articles                 Doing Business As                          Jurisdiction
--------------------------                 -----------------                          ------------
<S>                                        <C>                                        <C>
Reflections Interactive Limited            Reflections Interactive Limited            United Kingdom

GT Interactive Software France SARL        GT Interactive Software France SARL        France

GT Interactive Europe Holdings BV          GT Interactive Europe Holdings BV          Holland

ATARI Asia Pacific Pty Ltd.                ATARI Asia Pacific Pty Ltd.                Australia
(in dissolution process)

GT Interactive Software GmbH**             GT Interactive Software GmbH               Germany

GT Interactive Software Europe Ltd.**      GT Interactive Software Europe Ltd.        United Kingdom
</TABLE>

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

*    All entities, except for Reflections Interactive Limited, do not conduct
     business operations.

**   Denotes a direct subsidiary that itself has non-operating subsidiaries.
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 DutchFork Bancshares,  Inc. (the
"Company")  on Form 10-Q for the period  ending  June 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"),  I, J. Thomas Johnson,  Chief
Executive 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 to the best
of 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 as of and for the period covered by the Report.





                                                       /s/ J. Thomas Johnson
                                                       -------------------------
                                                       J. Thomas Johnson
                                                       Chief Executive Officer
                                                       August 14, 2002
### Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations § 11.81 What information must I include in my petition for an exemption? You must include the following information in your petit ion for an exemption and submit it to FAA as soon as you know you need an exemption. (a) Your name and mailing address and, if you wish, other contact information such as a fax number, telephone number, or e-mail address; (b) The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek an exemption; (c) The extent of relief you seek, and the reason you seek the relief; (d) The reasons why granting your request would be in t he public interest; that is, how it would benefit the public as a whole; (e) The reasons why granting the exem ption would not adversely affect safety, or how the exemption would provide a level of safety at least equal to that prov ided by the rule from which you seek the exemption; (f) A summary we can publish in the Federal Register, stating: (1) The rule from which you seek the exemption; and (2) A brief description of the nature of the exemption you seek; (g) Any additional information, views or arguments available to support your request; and (h) If you want to exercise the privileges of your exemption outside the United States, the reason why you need to do so.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

Elgin Piner and Jerry Dingus, 

Individually and on behalf of other 

members of the general public similarly 

situated,

Plaintiffs,

v.

FreedomRoads, LLC, Camping World, 

Inc., and Sirpilla RV Centers, LLC,

Defendants.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Case No. 2:17-cv-902-EAS-KAJ

Judge Edmund A. Sargus

Magistrate Judge Kimberly A. Jolson

STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

Based on the agreement of the parties, it is hereby stipulated that the above-captioned 

matter is dismissed in its entirety, with prejudice and on the merits, and without costs to either 

party unless otherwise agreed.

LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.

Date: August 27, 2019 Respectfully submitted,

s/ John H. Lassetter

Andrew J. Voss (admitted pro hac vice)

John H. Lassetter (admitted pro hac vice)

LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.

80 South 8th Street, Suite 1300

Minneapolis, MN 55402

Telephone: 612.630.1000
2

Michael T. Short (0069409)

LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.

21 East State Street

16th Floor

Columbus, OH 43215

Telephone: 614.463.4201

Facsimile: 614.221.3301

Attorneys for Defendants

FREEDOMROADS, LLC, CAMPING 

WORLD, INC., AND SIRPILLA RV 

CENTERS, LLC

Date: August 27, 2019

s/ Matthew J.P. Coffman

Matthew J.P. Coffman (Ohio Bar No. 0085586)

COFFMAN LEGAL, LLC

1550 Old Henderson Road, Suite 126

Columbus, OH 43220

Telephone: (614) 949-1181

Facsimile: (614) 386-9964

Date: August 27, 2019

s/ Daniell Bryant

Daniell. Bryant (Ohio Bar No. 0090859)

BRYANT LEGAL, LLC

1550 Old Henderson Road, Suite 126

Columbus, Ohio 43220

Telephone: (614) 704-0546

Facsimile: (614) 573-9826

Date: August 27, 2019

s/ Robert E. DeRose

Robert E. DeRose (Ohio Bar No. 0055214)

BARKAN MEIZLISH HANDELMAN

GOODIN DEROSE WENTZ, LLP

250 East Broad Street

10th Floor

Columbus, OH 43215

Telephone: (614) 221-4221

Facsimile: (614) 744-2300

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

FIRMWIDE:166250026.1 064774.1138
No. 1937.

#### Rollins *v.*Clement.

April Term, 1886.

Judgment of the Circuit Court of Spartanburg (Hudson, J.)

affirmed.

September 15, 1886.

*Bobo $ Carlisle, J. S. B. Thomson,*for appellants.

*Stanyarne Wilson,*contra.

Plaintiff sued to recover a reward offered for information sufficient to convict the persons who burned defendant’s mill. It was competent to prove by a witness the fact that he had previously given to defendant information received from another as to the guilty parties.

2. A witness could testify as to a message carried by him from defendant to plaintiff, upon which the plaintiff acted.

Opinion by

Mr. Justice MoGowan,
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 Quintek  Technologies,  Inc.
on Form  10-QSB  for the  period  ending  September  30,  2003 as filed with the
Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof,  I, William  Jacobson,
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 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:  November 19, 2003

/S/  Andrew Haag
------------------------------
     Andrew Haag
     Chief Financial Officer
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 06 OF THE SABANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
        (SUBSECTION (a) AND (b) OF SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18,
                              UNITED STATES CODE)


Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, subsections (a) and
(b) of Section 1350 , chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of the
undersigned officers of Subjex Corporation, a Minnesota corporation (the
"Company"), does certify with respect to the Quarterly Report of the Company on
Form 10-QSB for the three months ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "10-QSB Report") that: (1) the 10-QSB
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) and 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) the information contained in the 10-QSB
Report fairly presents in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of the Company.


                                        By  /s/ Andrew Hyder

                                        Andrew Hyder, CEO (acting CFO)
                                        May 22, 2006
Case: 1:17-cr-00108-SJD Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/21/17 Page: 1 of 11 PAGEID #: 1
Case: 1:17-cr-00108-SJD Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/21/17 Page: 2 of 11 PAGEID #: 2
Case: 1:17-cr-00108-SJD Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/21/17 Page: 3 of 11 PAGEID #: 3
Case: 1:17-cr-00108-SJD Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/21/17 Page: 4 of 11 PAGEID #: 4
Case: 1:17-cr-00108-SJD Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/21/17 Page: 5 of 11 PAGEID #: 5
Case: 1:17-cr-00108-SJD Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/21/17 Page: 6 of 11 PAGEID #: 6
Case: 1:17-cr-00108-SJD Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/21/17 Page: 7 of 11 PAGEID #: 7
Case: 1:17-cr-00108-SJD Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/21/17 Page: 8 of 11 PAGEID #: 8
Case: 1:17-cr-00108-SJD Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/21/17 Page: 9 of 11 PAGEID #: 9
Case: 1:17-cr-00108-SJD Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/21/17 Page: 10 of 11 PAGEID #: 10
Case: 1:17-cr-00108-SJD Doc #: 1 Filed: 08/21/17 Page: 11 of 11 PAGEID #: 11