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

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4503 

To provide for consultation by the Department of Justice with other relevant 

Government agencies before determining to prosecute certain terrorism 

offenses in United States district court, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 26, 2010 

Mr. SMITH of Texas (for himself, Mr. BOEHNER, Mr. MCKEON, Mr. KING of 

New York, Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky, Mr. CARTER, Mr. BLUNT, Mr. 

SENSENBRENNER, Mr. COBLE, Mr. GALLEGLY, Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona, Mr. GOHMERT, Mr. JORDAN

of Ohio, Mr. CHAFFETZ, Mr. ROONEY, Mr. MANZULLO, Ms. ROSLEHTINEN, and Mr. CANTOR) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To provide for consultation by the Department of Justice 

with other relevant Government agencies before determining to prosecute certain terrorism offenses in United 

States district court, 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 ‘‘Ensuring the Collec5 tion of Critical Intelligence Act of 2010’’. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4503 IH

1 SEC. 2. REQUIREMENT FOR CONSULTATION. 

2 (a) IN GENERAL.— 

3 (1) PROSECUTION.—Before any officer or em4 ployee of the Department of Justice institutes any 

5 prosecution of an alien in a United States district 

6 court for a terrorist offense, the Attorney General, 

7 Deputy Attorney General, or Assistant Attorney 

8 General for the Criminal Division, shall consult with 

9 the Director of National Intelligence and the Sec10 retary of Defense about whether the prosecution 

11 should take place in a United States district court 

12 or before a military commission under chapter 47A 

13 of title 10, United States Code. 

14 (2) INTERROGATION.—Before any officer or 

15 employee of the Department of Justice engages in 

16 any interrogation of an alien in a criminal investiga17 tion or prosecution of a terrorist offense, the Attor18 ney General, Deputy Attorney General, or Assistant 

19 Attorney General for the Criminal Division, shall 

20 consult with the Director of National Intelligence 

21 and the Secretary of Defense about how to proceed 

22 in that interrogation so as to enable each such offi23 cial to carry out that official’s responsibilities in a 

24 manner consistent with national security. 

25 (b) DEFINITIONS.—In this section— 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 4503 IH

1 (1) the term ‘‘terrorist offense’’ means any of2 fense for which the defendant could be tried by a 

3 military commission under chapter 47A of title 10, 

4 United States Code; and 

5 (2) the term ‘‘alien’’ means any person who is 

6 not a citizen of the United States. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
fs1a10510ex10xiv_chinabct.htm


 



Exhibit 10.14


 


Liquid Capital Loan Agreement


 


Borrower (Party A): Guangxi Hefeng Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.


Address: Donglan County, Third Development District


Legal Representative: Jin Hua Li


Address: Wuzhou, Guangxi


Creditor (Party B): Jin Hua Li







Due to its production and operation needs, Party A apply for a loan from Party B and Party B agrees to make a loan to Party A. To specify the parties’ rights and obligations and in accordance with Contract Law and other laws and regulations, Party A and Party B entered into this agreement after negotiation.







Article 1. The type of loan is Liquid Capital Loan.







Article 2. The usage of loan is to purchase raw materials.







Article 3. Loan amount is RMB 600,000 million. The term of the loan is 12 months, from 4/6/2006 to 4/6/2007.







Article 4. The loan interest is 0.68% per month. The interest shall be calculated daily from the date of withdrawal. The interest shall be paid monthly. The principle shall be paid on the expiry date of the loan.







Article 5. The source of the repayment fund shall be from the operation revenue.







Article 6. Rights and obligations of the parties:


 


1. Party A’s rights and obligations: (1) Withdraw and use the loan in accordance with this agreement. (2) Shall not repay the loan before the expiry date without Party B’s consent. (3) Voluntarily accept Party B’s investigation, study and monitor of the usage of the loan. (4) Repay the loan principle and interest in accordance with the terms in this agreement. (5) If Party A fails to repay the loan within the terms specified in this agreement, it shall be deemed Party A grants Party B an automatic loan extension.







2. Party B’s rights and obligations: (1) Party B has the right to demand Party A to repay the loan within any amount of time. (2) Party B has the right to demand Party A to provide any documents related to the loan. (3) Party B shall provide enough fund to Party A in accordance with the loan agreement.







Article 7 The agreement has two copies, each party holds one copy with equal legal effect.







Party A: Guangxi Hefeng Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.


Legal Representative (Signature): /s/ Jin Hua Li







Party B: /s/ Jin Hua Li







Date: 4/6/2006
NOT RECOMMENDED F OR F ULL-TEXT PUBLICATION F ile Nam e: 11a0291n.06 Nos. 08-3942, 08-3987, 09- 3205 UNITED STAT ES COURT OF AP P EALS F OR THE S IXTH CIRCUIT
UNI TED STATES OF AMERI CA, P laintif f-App ellee,

v. RI CHARD B. WHI TE; MI CHAEL

A. SUHADOL

NI K, Defendan ts-Appellants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ON AP P EAL FROM THE UNI TED STATES DI STRI CT C O U R T F O R T H E NOR THERN DI STRI CT OF OHI O
O P I N I O N

BEFORE: NORR IS, COLE , and KETHL EDGE, Circ uit Jud ges.
P ER CURIAM . Def

endants Richard B. Whit e and Michae l A. Suhadolnik appea l from the denial of their motion for a new trial or, alterna tively , for an evidentiar y hear ing. I n 2003, defe ndants and three other individuals wer e char g ed in a fourtee n-count indictment with crimes rela ted to Medica re f raud. Whit e was found g uilty on all counts; Suhadolnik was convicted of a sing le wire fra ud count. This co u rt af

fi rm ed those convictions on direc t appea l. United States v. W hite , 492 F.3d 380 (6th Cir. 2007). Although we aff irmed the convictions, we vaca ted an order of the district court de ny ing de fenda

nts’ motion for a new trial and re manded the ma tter to ena ble the trial c ourt to conduct an evidentiar

y hear ing to deter

mine whether the g overnme nt withheld materia l evidenc e favor able to def

endants. On r emand, the district c ourt conduc ted a he aring but denied re lief.Nos. 08-3942, 08-3987, 09-3205

United States v. W

hite Our previous opinion contained an extensive discussion of the even t s t h at trig g ere d the underlying pr osecution, the e vidence produce d at trial, and our rea sons f or af firming the ver dicts. By contra st, this appea l is much narr ower in scope and prese nts a single question: Did the documents
uncover ed by defe ndants afte r rema nd, coupled with the testimony prese nted during the evidentiar y hear ing, entitle defe ndants t o a n ew trial? Having had the benef it of extensive briefing and oral

ar gu m en t , t h e panel conclude s, as did the district court, that the new evidenc e does not call t h e validity of the verdic ts into question. We have independe ntly assessed that evidenc e and now aff irm the judgme nt of the district c ourt based upon the rea soning set forth in its opinion filed on J uly 16, 2008. The judg ment of the district cour t is aff irm ed
.

- 2 -
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk February 4, 2009

s0122 

# Order

February 4, 2009

137508

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 137508 COA: 286638 Iosco CC: 07-003537-FH DANIEL JOHN COX, JR., Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the applicati on for leave to appeal the August 25, 2008 order of the Court of Appeals is considered an d, it appearing to this Court that the case of People v Jackson (Docket No. 135888) is pending on appeal before this Court and that the decision in that case may re solve an issue raised in the pr esent application for leave to appeal, we ORDER that the application be held in ABEYANCE pending the decision in
that case.
EXHIBIT 24.1

                               POWERS OF ATTORNEY

      KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS that each individual whose signatures
appear below hereby severally and individually constitutes and appoints Shant S.
Hovnanian as the true and lawful attorney-in-fact for the undersigned, in any
and all capacities, with full power of substitution, to sign Amendment No. 2 to
the Annual Report of SPEEDUS.COM, Inc. on Form 10-K/A for the year ended
December 31, 1999 and any and all additional amendments to the Annual Report,
and to file the same with exhibits thereto and other documents in connection
therewith, with the Securities and Exchange Commission, granting unto said
attorney-in-fact full power and authority to do and perform each and every act
and thing requisite and necessary to be done in and about the premises, as fully
to all intents and purposes as he or she might or could do in person, hereby
ratifying and confirming all that said attorney-in-fact may lawfully do or cause
to be done by virtue hereof.

      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each undersigned has hereunto set his or her hand on
the 24rd day of January, 2001.


                                       s/s Angela M. Vaccaro
                                   -------------------------------
                                           Angela M. Vaccaro


                                       s/s Vahak S. Hovnanian
                                   -------------------------------
                                           Vahak S. Hovnanian


                                       s/s William F. Leimkuhler
                                   -------------------------------
                                           William F. Leimkuhler


                                       s/s Jeffrey Najarian
                                   --------------------------------
                                           Jeffrey Najarian
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JOE SHERMAN,

 Petitioner - Appellant,

 v.

YOLO COUNTY CHIEF PROBATION

OFFICER; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF

THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA,

 Respondents - Appellees.

No. 08-17776

D.C. No. 2:07-cv-01645-MCE

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Morrison C. England, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted April, 5 2010** 

Before: RYMER, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Joe Sherman appeals pro se from the district court’s

judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm. 

FILED

APR 19 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
The district court properly dismissed Sherman’s petition as successive

because it was his second petition challenging the same condition of his probation,

and Sherman had not obtained an order from this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2244(b)(3)(A). See Cooper v. Calderon, 274 F.3d 1270, 1274 (9th Cir. 2001)

(per curiam). Accordingly, we affirm the district court.

We construe Sherman’s additional arguments as a motion to expand the

certificate of appealability. So construed, the motion is denied. See 9th Cir. R. 

22-1(e); see also Hiivala v. Wood, 195 F.3d 1098, 1104-05 (9th Cir. 1999) (per

curiam).

AFFIRMED.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

:

Plaintiff, Case No. 3:16MJ00326

:

-vs- : Chief Magistrate Judge Sharon L. Ovington

ROBERT PHELPS, :

Defendant. :

BINDOVER ORDER

This matter was set for preliminary examination on November 22, 2016. 

Defendant appeared with counsel and waived his right to a preliminary examination. The

Court found the waiver to be knowing and voluntary and therefore orders that Defendant

be bound over to the grand jury to answer the charge.

November 23, 2016 s/ Sharon L. Ovington 

 Sharon L. Ovington

 Chief United States Magistrate Judge

Case: 3:17-cr-00037-WHR Doc #: 15 Filed: 11/23/16 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: 47
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 9 (Thursday, January 13, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 2187]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-00506]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD


Civil Monetary Penalty Inflation Adjustment

AGENCY: Railroad Retirement Board.

ACTION: Notice announcing updated penalty inflation adjustments for 
civil monetary penalties for 2022.

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

SUMMARY: As required by Section 701 of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 
2015, entitled the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act 
Improvements Act of 2015, the Railroad Retirement Board (Board) hereby 
publishes its 2022 annual adjustment of civil penalties for inflation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marguerite P. Dadabo, Assistant 
General Counsel, Railroad Retirement Board, 844 North Rush Street, 
Chicago, IL 60611-1275, (312) 751-4945, TTD (312) 751-4701.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 701 of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 
2015, Public Law 114-74 (Nov. 2, 2015), entitled the Federal Civil 
Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015 (the 2015 
Act), amended the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 
1990 (28 U.S.C. 2461 note) (Inflation Adjustment Act) to require 
agencies to publish regulations adjusting the amount of civil monetary 
penalties provided by law within the jurisdiction of the agency not 
later than January 15th of every year.
    For the 2022 annual adjustment for inflation of the maximum civil 
penalty under the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986, the Board 
applies the formula provided by the 2015 Act and the Board's 
regulations at Title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 356. In 
accordance with the 2015 Act, the amount of the adjustment is based on 
the percent increase between the Consumer Price Index (CPI-U) for the 
month of October preceding the date of the adjustment and the CPI-U for 
the October one year prior to the October immediately preceding the 
date of the adjustment. If there is no increase, there is no adjustment 
of civil penalties. The percent increase between the CPI-U for October 
2021 and October 2020, as provided by Office of Management and Budget 
Memorandum M-22-07 (December 15, 2021) is 1.06222 percent. Therefore, 
the new maximum penalty under the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act is 
$12,537 (the 2021 maximum penalty of $11,803 multiplied by 1.06222, 
rounded to the nearest dollar). The new minimum penalty under the False 
Claims Act is $12,537 (the 2021 minimum penalty of $11,803 multiplied 
by 1.06222, rounded to the nearest dollar), and the new maximum penalty 
is $25,076 (the 2021 maximum penalty of $23,607 multiplied by 1.06222, 
rounded to the nearest dollar). The adjustments in penalties will be 
effective January 13, 2022.

    Dated: January 7, 2022.

    By Authority of the Board
Stephanie Hillyard,
Secretary to the Board.
[FR Doc. 2022-00506 Filed 1-12-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

:

Plaintiff, Case No. 3:17MJ0079

:

-vs- : Magistrate Judge Sharon L. Ovington

JESUS ABREGO-CERNA, :

:

Defendant.

BINDOVER ORDER

This matter was set for preliminary examination on March 22, 2017. Defendant

appeared with counsel and waived his right to a preliminary examination. The Court

found the waiver to be knowing and voluntary and therefore orders that Defendant be

bound over to the grand jury to answer the charge.

March 23, 2017 s/ Sharon L. Ovington 

Sharon L. Ovington

 United States Magistrate Judge

Case: 3:17-mj-00079-SLO Doc #: 6 Filed: 03/23/17 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: 17
EXHIBIT 32.1
 CERTIFICATION BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
 PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (a)
    
    the Companys periodic report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31,
2011 (the Form 10-Q), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section
15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and related
interpretations; and
 (b)
    
    the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
  By:
    
    /s/ Robert M. Friedland

Robert M. FriedlandChief Executive OfficerDate:
    
    May 10, 2011
<PAGE>

                                  Exhibit 13.2

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

     In connection with the annual report on Form 20-F of BE Semiconductor
Industries N.V. (the "Company") for the period ended December 31, 2005, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
the undersigned, Cor te Hennepe, Director of Finance of the Company, hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 USC. Section 1350, that, to my knowledge:

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

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


                                        /s/ Cor te Hennepe
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Cor te Hennepe
Dated: April 3, 2006                    Director of Finance
**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**

Inconnection with the yearly report of Pharmaceutical Product Development, Inc. (“PPD”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the“Report”), I, Fredric N. Eshelman, Chief Executive Officer of PPD, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge: 

1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities 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 PPD as of, andfor, the periods presented in the Report. 

Date: February 26, 2008
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**




**CERTIFICATION
      OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO**


**RULE
      13a-14(b)/15d-14(b) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
      AND**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350**




In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Eugene Science, Inc. (the “Company”) on
      Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
      Christopher Craney, certify, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) or
      Rule 15d-14(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C.
      1350, 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.




Date:
                May 20, 2008
            By:
            /s/
                Christopher CraneyChristopher
                CraneyChief
                Executive Officer(Principal
                Executive Officer)




This
      certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) or
      15d-14(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C.
      Section 1350 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
      Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
**EXHIBIT
        32.1**
 
 **CERTIFICATION
        BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**
 **PURSUANT
        TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**
 **AS
        ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**
 SECTION
        906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 In
        connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Syndication, Inc.
        (the
        "Company") for the period ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities
        and
        Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Brian
        Sorrentino, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby
        certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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.
  *Dated:*May
                  21*,
                  2007**/s/
                Brian Sorrentino**Brian
                  Sorrentino*
                *Chief
                  Executive Officer*
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7517

TRYGVE LEE BLAIR, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BISHOP ROBINSON, Superintendent of Public Safety and Corrections; MICHAEL FLANIGAN, Commissioner of the Division of Corrections; WILLIAM JEDNORSKI, Warden of Baltimore CityDetention Center; FERLENE BAILEY, Administrator; DOCTOR BRYD, PHP Medical Services; PHP HEALTHCARE CORPORATION, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, District Judge. (CA-97-1639-WMN) Submitted: July 2, 1998 Decided: July 20, 1998 Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Trygve Lee Blair, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Blair v. Robinson , No. CA-97-1639-WMN (D. Md. Sept. 25 & Oct. 10, 1997). 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.

AFFIRMED