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

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1180 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1180

To amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to clarify when 
the time period for the issuance of citations under such Act begins and 
   to require a rule to clarify that an employer's duty to make and 
maintain accurate records of work-related injuries and illnesses is an 
                          ongoing obligation.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 18, 2021

    Mr. Takano (for himself, Mr. Scott of Virginia, Ms. Adams, Mr. 
   Courtney, and Mr. Jones) introduced the following bill; which was 
            referred to the Committee on Education and Labor

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to clarify when 
the time period for the issuance of citations under such Act begins and 
   to require a rule to clarify that an employer's duty to make and 
maintain accurate records of work-related injuries and illnesses is an 
                          ongoing obligation.

    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 ``Accurate Workplace Injury and 
Illness Records Restoration Act''.

SEC. 2. PERIOD FOR ISSUANCE OF A CITATION.

    Section 9(c) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 
U.S.C. 658(c)) is amended by adding at the end the following: ``For 
purposes of this subsection, a violation continues to occur for as long 
as an employer has not satisfied the requirements, rules, standards, 
orders, and regulations referenced in subsection (a).''.

SEC. 3. RULEMAKING.

    (a) Rule Required.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
enactment of this Act, the Occupational Safety and Health 
Administration shall issue a final rule amending its recordkeeping 
regulations under section 8(c) of the Occupational Safety and Health 
Act to clarify that--
            (1) the duty to make and maintain accurate records of work-
        related injuries and illnesses is an ongoing obligation;
            (2) the duty to make and maintain such records continues 
        for as long as the employer is required to keep records of the 
        recordable injury or illness; and
            (3) such duty does not expire solely because the employer 
        fails to create the necessary records when first required to do 
        so.
    (b) Authorization.--Subsection (a) shall be considered a specific 
authorization by Congress in accordance with section 801(b)(2) of title 
5, United States Code, with respect to the issuance of a new 
recordkeeping rule.
                                 <all>
```
D.T.W., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D16-3686

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed January 3, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
IA 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 102 

Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United 

States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Veterans 

Affairs relating to ‘‘Reproductive Health Services’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 13, 2022 

Mr. CLOUD (for himself, Mr. BOST, Mr. CLYDE, Mr. ELLZEY, Mr. LAMBORN, 

Mr. ROSENDALE, Mr. ROY, Mr. GOHMERT, Mr. MAST, Mr. BUCK, Mrs. 

MILLER of Illinois, Mr. HICE of Georgia, Mr. BABIN, Mr. WENSTRUP, 

Mr. NORMAN, Mr. LOUDERMILK, Mr. MANN, Mr. LATURNER, Mr. WEBSTER of Florida, Mr. RUTHERFORD, Mrs. HARTZLER, Mr. MASSIE, Mr. 

GOOD of Virginia, Mr. BERGMAN, Mr. ROUZER, Mr. TAYLOR, Mr. 

CRAWFORD, Mr. HARRIS, Mr. JACKSON, Mr. MOOLENAAR, Mr. HIGGINS

of Louisiana, Ms. CONWAY, Mr. WEBER of Texas, Mr. NEHLS, Mr. 

SMITH of New Jersey, Mr. GRIFFITH, Mr. MOONEY, Mr. BIGGS, Mr. 

HERN, Mr. BANKS, Mrs. BOEBERT, Ms. STEFANIK, Mr. FULCHER, Mr. 

ARRINGTON, Mr. PALMER, Mr. BRADY, Mrs. GREENE of Georgia, Mr. 

STEUBE, Mrs. CAMMACK, Mr. PALAZZO, Mr. DUNCAN, Mr. SESSIONS, 

Mr. GOODEN of Texas, Mr. BURGESS, Mrs. RODGERS of Washington, Mr. 

JOHNSON of Louisiana, Mr. CARL, Mr. HUDSON, Mr. CLINE, Mr. DUNN, 

Mr. POSEY, Mr. WILLIAMS of Texas, Mr. ADERHOLT, and Mr. 

FEENSTRA) submitted the following joint resolution; which was referred 

to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of 

title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by 

the Department of Veterans Affairs relating to ‘‘Reproductive Health Services’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HJ 102 IH 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 That Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the De4 partment of Veterans Affairs relating to ‘‘Reproductive 

5 Health Services’’ (87 Fed. Reg. 55287; published Sep6 tember 9, 2022), and such rule shall have no force or ef7 fect. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
III 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 528 

Recognizing the importance of the blueberry industry to the United States 

and designating July 2020 as ‘‘National Blueberry Month’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 4, 2020 

Ms. STABENOW submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing the importance of the blueberry industry to the 

United States and designating July 2020 as ‘‘National 

Blueberry Month’’. 

Whereas the blueberry is a fruit native to North America that 

was first used fresh and dried in food and medicines by 

Native Americans, who introduced blueberries to early 

colonists, which led to new uses and forms of blueberries, 

including frozen, establishing traditions still observed in 

2020; 

Whereas the pioneering work conducted in New Jersey in the 

early 1900s by Elizabeth White and Dr. Frederick 

Coville, a botanist at the Department of Agriculture, to 

domesticate wild lowbush blueberries resulted in the development of the hybrid for cultivated highbush blueberries; 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 528 IS 

Whereas, because of those early efforts, highbush blueberries 

are large, sweet, juicy berries that can be commercially 

produced and shipped, allowing the highbush blueberry 

industry to become an important agricultural industry in 

the United States; 

Whereas highbush blueberries— 

(1) have a harvested area estimated at more than 

97,000 acres; and 

(2) are produced in 48 States by more than 14,000 

growers and their families; 

Whereas highbush blueberry production in the United States 

has continually increased, with particular growth during 

the first 2 decades of the 21st century, reaching a harvest of 551,100,000 pounds in 2018; 

Whereas blueberries are— 

(1) low in fat; and 

(2) a source of fiber, vitamins, and minerals; 

Whereas blueberries are being studied to examine the role 

that the berries may play in promoting good health in 

areas such as cardiovascular health, brain health, exercise, insulin response, and gut health; and 

Whereas highbush blueberries are harvested in the United 

States from April through early September, with the 

peak of the harvest occurring in July: Now, therefore, be 

it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) designates July 2020 as ‘‘National Blue3 berry Month’’; 

4 (2) recognizes the contributions of blueberry 

5 growers in the United States and their families; and 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•SRES 528 IS 

1 (3) recognizes that purchasing blueberries 

2 grown in the United States supports farmers, jobs, 

3 and the economy of the United States. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
#### McDonald v Citizens Insurance Company of America,

No. 90799.

In lieu of granting leave to appeal, the case is remanded to the Court of Appeals for consideration as on leave granted. MCR 7.302(F)(1). Court of Appeals No. 133543.
Attachment 1 

H.B. Robinson Water Balance Diagram 


Attachment 2 

H.B. Robinson Semi-Annual Groudwater Monitoring Report – February 2009 














Attachment 3 

H.B. Robinson Semi-Annual Groudwater Monitoring Report – August 2009
1

The Honorable Richard H. Kyle, United States District Judge for the District

of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Franklin

L. Noel, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota. 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 02-3030

___________

Mack R. Gibson, *

*

Appellant, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

v. * District of Minnesota.

*

Constance C. Reese, Sued as * [UNPUBLISHED]

Constance Reese, Warden, *

*

Appellee. *

___________

 Submitted: February 6, 2003

 Filed: February 10, 2003

___________

Before BYE, FAGG and RILEY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Federal inmate Mack R. Gibson appeals the district court’s1

 dismissal of his 28

U.S.C. § 2241 petition. We affirm.

In February 1994, Gibson was arrested for selling cocaine. His parole was

revoked, and he was imprisoned from the date of his arrest until February 20, 1996,
-2-

his mandatory release date. Meanwhile, in November 1995, the government indicted

him on two counts of drug trafficking for selling the cocaine; after a jury trial, Gibson

was sentenced on October 2, 1996, to 120 months imprisonment. The judgment

stated this sentence was concurrent with any remaining parole-violation time, and

recommended that Gibson receive credit for time served since December 13, 1995.

The Bureau of Prisons (BOP), however, gave Gibson credit only from February 20,

1996. Gibson filed his section 2241 petition, seeking credit for time he served before

that date, and asserting various challenges to the validity of his sentence. 

Under 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b), the BOP could give Gibson credit on his instant

sentence only for time not credited towards a prior sentence, and the time he spent in

custody before February 20, 1996, had been credited to his parole-violation sentence.

Further, the BOP had authority to determine the amount of credit Gibson was to

receive, and was not bound by the sentencing recommendation. See United States v.

Wilson, 503 U.S. 329, 335 (1992). Gibson’s challenges to the validity of his

sentence--as opposed to its execution--must be brought in a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion.

See Matheny v. Morrison, 307 F.3d 709, 711 (8th Cir. 2002). 

Accordingly, we affirm. 

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

In re: WILLIAM P. BENDER,

 Debtor.

WILLIAM P. BENDER,

 Appellant,

 v.

DIANE M. MANN, Chapter 7 Trustee;

THE WARREN AND ROSALIE

GUMMOW TRUST,

 Appellees.

No. 11-60006

BAP No. 10-1121

MEMORANDUM*

In re: WILLIAM P. BENDER,

 Debtor.

CONGREJO INVESTMENTS, LLC,

 Appellant,

No. 11-60007

BAP No. 10-1122

FILED

MAY 08 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
The panel unanimously concludes that this case is suitable for **

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

2

 v.

DIANE M. MANN, Chapter 7 Trustee,

 Appellee.

Appeals from the Ninth Circuit

Bankruptcy Appellate Panel

Pappas, Jury, and Bauer, Bankruptcy Judges, Presiding

Submitted April 16, 2012** 

San Francisco, California

Before: SCHROEDER, O’SCANNLAIN, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.

I

In No. 11-60007, Congrejo Investments, LLC challenges the bankruptcy

court’s order avoiding the transfer of property from William P. Bender, Debtor, to

Congrejo. The Trustee filed a motion to dismiss this appeal as moot because the

property at issue has now been sold to a purchaser in good faith. 

We deny the motion to dismiss. Though the sale of the property cannot be

undone because no stay order was sought, see 11 U.S.C. § 363(m), relief could still

be awarded in the form of damages, see, e.g., In re Berg, 45 B.R. 899, 902 (B.A.P.
3

9th Cir. 1984), assuming that the estate contains additional property, see In re

Filtercorp, Inc., 163 F.3d 570, 577–78 (9th Cir. 1998).

On the merits, the bankruptcy court properly applied equitable tolling to the

Trustee’s avoidance action. The court found that Bender actively concealed his

interest in and conveyance of the property, that the Trustee did not discover the

conveyance until five months after the deed was executed, and that the Trustee

diligently investigated the estate’s possible claim to the property. These findings

are supported by the record and are not clearly erroneous. Applying equitable

tolling in these circumstances is proper. See, e.g., In re Olsen, 36 F.3d 71, 73 (9th

Cir. 1994). Tolling rescues the Trustee’s otherwise time-barred claim, see SocopGonzalez v. INS, 272 F.3d 1176, 1193–95 (9th Cir. 2001) (en banc), and the

avoidance order must be affirmed.

II

In No. 11-60006, Bender appeals the bankruptcy court’s order overruling his

objection to the William and Rosalie Gummow Trust’s proof of claim. Because

Bender presents this appeal as contingent on the reversal of the avoidance order,

which we instead affirm, we grant the motion to dismiss this appeal as moot. See

Church of Scientology v. United States, 506 U.S. 9, 12 (1992). 

No. 11-60007 is AFFIRMED and No. 11-60006 is DISMISSED.
#### Boyett *v.*State.

Crim. 3825

Opinion delivered January 16, 1933.

*R. E. Peace, J. 8. McKnight*and *G. L. Poole,*for appellant.

*Hal L. Norwood,*Attorney General and *Robert F. Smith,*Assistant, for appellee.

Btttt.ee, J.

From a conviction of the crime of assault with intent to rape this appeal is prosecuted. The only question presented is that of the sufficiency of the evidence to warrant the conviction of the crime charged. The evidence adduced by the State, briefly stated, is as follows:

The prosecuting witness, a young girl about fifteen years of age, was walking alone on a road leading from a place where she had been attending a singing school to her home. She was met by the defendant, a man about twenty-eight years old, to whom she spoke. After he had passed her, he returned in a short time, overtaking her, *816and, over her protests and despite her resistance, forced her to go with him some distance from the road into the forest. He placed his hand over her month to prevent any outcry, and,, after he had reached a spot in the woods, and after some struggle, he threw her upon the ground and exposed her person by pulling down her underclothing. He got down on his knees over her, hut for some reason proceeded no further in the attempt to ravish her. During the time that he was taking her from the road to the forest, and while she was on the ground, he indulged in conversation, which the prosecuting witness repeated on the witness stand, and which the appellant urges negatives the contention of the State that it was. the defendant’s intention to ravish the girl. We do not think that this interpretation can be placed on the language used, and do not deem it necessary to state it here.

It is well settled that an assault with intent to rape is an effort to obtain sexual intercourse by force and against the will of the person assaulted, and the intent is to be ascertained from the commission of some act or acts at the time or during the progress of the assault. The force actually used need be of no specific degree or character, but comes within the meaning of the law if it is reasonably calculated to subdue and overcome; nor need it be persisted in until the assailant’s design is accomplished; if the assault is actually begun and the intent can be inferred from the acts committed, the offense is complete, notwithstanding the fact that the assailant may, for some reason, relent and forbear from the consummation of his purpose. *Anderson*v. *State,*77 Ark. 37, 90 S. W. 846; *Tyra*v. *State,*120 Ark. 179, 179 S. W. 167; *Loekett*v. *State,*136 Ark. 473, 207 S. W. 55; *Snetser*v. *State,*170 Ark. 175, 279 S. W. 9; *Begley*v. *State,*180 Ark. 267, 21 S. W. (2d) 172.

Drom the evidence we have related, it will be seen that it was of a substantive nature and brings the case within the rule announced, and warrants the jury in the verdict reached.

Judgment affirmed.
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


Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, in his capacity as an officer of Apria
Healthcare Group Inc. (the "Company"),  for purposes of 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

        -  the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period ended
           June 30, 2002 fully complies with the  requirements  of Section 13(a)
           of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

        -  the  information  contained in such report  fairly  presents,  in all
           material respects,  the financial  condition and results of operation
           of the Company.

Dated:  August 14, 2002



/s/ LAWRENCE M. HIGBY
---------------------------------
Chief Executive Officer



/s/ JAMES E. BAKER
---------------------------------
Chief Financial Officer
CERTIFICATION
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                    AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


      The undersigned 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 the
undersigned's best knowledge and belief, the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
Geodyne Energy Income Limited Partnership I-F ("Issuer") for the period ending
December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"):

      (a)   fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
            the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

      Dated this  28th day of March, 2003.

                                   GEODYNE ENERGY INCOME LIMITED
                                   PARTNERSHIP I-F
                                   ("Issuer")

                                    //s// Dennis R. Neill
                                    -----------------------------------
                                    Dennis R. Neill
                                    President (Chief Executive Officer)

                                    //s// Craig D. Loseke
                                    -----------------------------------
                                    Craig D. Loseke
                                    Chief Accounting Officer
                                    (Chief Financial Officer)
#### A. J. BUTLER *v.*STATE of Arkansas

CR 73-146

504 S.W. 2d 747

Opinion delivered February 4, 1974

*Robert A. Newcomb,*for appellant.

*Jim Guy Tucker,*Atty. Gen., by: *Richard Mattison,*Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Frank Holt, Justice.

Appellant was convicted of first degree murder by a jury and sentenced to life imprisonment in the Arkansas Department of Correction. Appellant’s only contention for reversal is that the trial court erred in not granting a requested mistrial after the appellant, on cross-examination, was asked:

> Q. A. J., are you guilty of shooting a man in Pine Bluff on December the 22nd, 1970?

> A. Was I guilty?

> Q. Did you shoot him?

> A. Yes, sir, I shot him.

On re-direct appellant stated the shooting was in self-defense which resulted in no prosecution.

Appellant’s counsel forcefully presents the argument that the word “guilty” implies an accusation of a crimi*1029nal wrongdoing or of having committed a crime. Even so, we cannot agree with appellant that the question was not proper. We have long approved the format of this question, on cross-examination, when asked in good faith, as being permissible to test the credibility of a witness, the state being bound by the answer. *Polk*v. *State,*252 Ark. 320, 478 S.W. 2d 738 (1972), *Harrington*v. *State,*251 Ark. 587, 473 S.W. 2d 911 (1972), *Black*v. *State,*250 Ark. 604, 466 S.W. 2d 463 (1971), *Hughes & Bridges*v. *State,*249 Ark. 805, 461 S.W. 2d 940 (1971), and *McAlister*v. *State,*99 Ark. 604, 139 S.W. 684 (1911). In *Polli,*the defendant was asked if he was guilty of robbing a filling station; in *Harrington,*if he was guilty of interstate transportation of stolen property; in *Black,*if he was guilty of raping a woman at a certain time and place; in *Hughes & Bridges,*“Did you take some money off Bobby Horne;” and in *McAlister,*if the witness had “assassinated” another person. In each of these cases we held it was proper cross-examination of the witness.

We think the question was particularly appropriate, in the case at bar, inasmuch as the state adduced evidence that the victim, lying unarmed on the floor, was shot five times by the appellant. The appellant insisted that he shot in defense of his brother and that the deceased was armed. Certainly the credibility of the appellant was a crucial issue.

Affirmed.

Harris, C.J., not participating.
III 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 795 

Relating to the death of the Honorable Roger William Jepsen, former United 

States Senator for the State of Iowa. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 7, 2020 

Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself and Ms. ERNST) submitted the following 

resolution; which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Relating to the death of the Honorable Roger William 

Jepsen, former United States Senator for the State of Iowa. 

Whereas Roger William Jepsen was born in Cedar Falls, 

Iowa, and grew up on a nearby family farm; 

Whereas Roger William Jepsen attended Iowa State Teachers 

College, which is known today as the University of Northern Iowa, and later attended Arizona State University, 

where he earned a bachelor’s degree in psychology in 

1950 and a master’s degree in guidance counseling in 

1953; 

Whereas Roger William Jepsen served his country in the 

United States Army for 14 years as a paratrooper in the 

82nd Airborne Division and later in the Army Reserve; 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 795 ATS 

Whereas Roger William Jepsen was elected to the Board of 

Supervisors of Scott County, Iowa, as an Iowa State Senator, and as the Lieutenant Governor of Iowa; 

Whereas Roger William Jepsen was elected to the Senate in 

1978 and served the people of Iowa in the Senate with 

honor and distinction for 1 term; 

Whereas Roger William Jepsen was appointed by President 

Reagan as Special Representative of the President to 

Madagascar in 1985 and to the State of Israel on the occasion of the funeral of Moshe Dayan; and 

Whereas Roger William Jepsen was known for his dedication 

to the State of Iowa, his fiscal responsibility, and his 

work on farm policy: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That— 

2 (1) the Senate has heard with profound sorrow 

3 and deep regret the announcement of the death of 

4 the Honorable Roger William Jepsen, former mem5 ber of the United States Senate from the State of 

6 Iowa; 

7 (2) the Senate respectfully requests that the 

8 Secretary of the Senate— 

9 (A) communicate this resolution to the 

10 House of Representatives; and 

11 (B) transmit an enrolled copy of this reso12 lution to the family of the Honorable Roger 

13 William Jepsen; and 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
3 

•SRES 795 ATS 

1 (3) when the Senate adjourns today, it stand 

2 adjourned as a further mark of respect to the mem3 ory of the Honorable Roger William Jepsen. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS