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

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 84 

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

States Code, of a rule submitted by the National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration relating to civil penalties. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 28, 2022 

Mr. PERRY submitted the following joint resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of 

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

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration relating 

to civil penalties. 

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 Na4 tional Highway Traffic Safety Administration relating to 

5 civil penalties published on April 1, 2022 (87 Fed. Reg. 

6 18994), and such rule shall have no force or effect. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
Arthur SIMON, Jr. v. Sophia Loren SIMON

2160152

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

March 7, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
<PAGE>





                                                                      Exhibit 18

                    Letter on Change in Accounting Principles




April 30, 2002

Metretek Technologies, Inc.
Denver, Colorado

Dear Sirs/Madams:

At your request, we have read the description included in your Quarterly Report
on Form 10-QSB to the Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended
March 31, 2002, of the facts relating to your change in accounting principle
from the completed-contract method of accounting for revenue related to
PowerSecure's contracts to the percentage-completion method of accounting. We
believe, on the basis of the facts so set forth and other information furnished
to us by appropriate officials of the Company, that the accounting change
described in your Form 10-QSB is to an alternative accounting principle that is
preferable under the circumstances.

We have not audited any consolidated financial statements of Metretek
Technologies, Inc. and its consolidated subsidiaries as of any date or for any
period subsequent to December 31, 2001. Therefore, we are unable to express, and
we do not express, an opinion on the facts set forth in the above-mentioned Form
10-QSB, on the related information furnished to us by officials of the Company,
or on the financial position, results of operations, or cash flows of Metretek
Technologies, Inc. and its consolidated subsidiaries as of any date or for any
period subsequent to December 31, 2001.

Yours truly,


/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
Johnny DRAWDY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-3988

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 7, 2018

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. *See**Hubbard v. State*, 773 So. 2d 87 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) ; *Miffin v. State*, 615 So. 2d 745 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993) ; *Harris v. State*, 789 So. 2d 1114 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001).

NORTHCUTT, LUCAS, and SALARIO, JJ., Concur.
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1104 

To prohibit the Secretary of Homeland Security from granting a work authorization to an alien found to have been unlawfully present in the United 

States. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 18, 2021 

Mr. BURGESS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To prohibit the Secretary of Homeland Security from granting a work authorization to an alien found to have been 

unlawfully present in the United States. 

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 ‘‘Equal Protection for 

5 American Workers Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON CERTAIN WORK AUTHORIZA7 TIONS. 

8 Effective beginning on the date of the enactment of 

9 this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security is prohibited 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1104 IH

1 from granting a work authorization to an alien who has 

2 been finally determined, in a valid immigration proceeding 

3 during which due process was afforded, to have been at 

4 any time unlawfully present in the United States. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
Angela STATHOPOULOS, as Trustee, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. UNIVERSAL UNDERWRITERS INSURANCE CO., et al., Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-1819

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

February 26, 2018

BY ORDER OF THE COURT:

The parties' agreed motion for voluntary dismissal of appeal filed February 23, 2018, is granted. This appeal is dismissed.
FOIA Requested Record #2012-01046-F 

Released by National Guard Bureau 

Page 1 of 5

 

Record Posted to NGB Reading Room 

13 June 14
FOIA Requested Record #2012-01046-F 

Released by National Guard Bureau 

Page 2 of 5

Record Posted to NGB Reading Room 

13 June 14
FOIA Requested Record #2012-01046-F 

Released by National Guard Bureau 

Page 3 of 5

Record Posted to NGB Reading Room 

13 June 14
FOIA Requested Record #2012-01046-F 

Released by National Guard Bureau 

Page 4 of 5

Record Posted to NGB Reading Room 

13 June 14
FOIA Requested Record #2012-01046-F 

Released by National Guard Bureau 

Page 5 of 5

 

Record Posted to NGB Reading Room 

13 June 14
The full content of this file cannot be displayed with your current PDF viewer. Please update to the latest 

possible version to view this document.

ACCEPTED

06-15-00014-CV

SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS

TEXARKANA, TEXAS

2/20/2015 4:54:16 PM

DEBBIE AUTREY

CLERK

 FILED IN 6th COURT OF APPEALS TEXARKANA, TEXAS 2/23/2015 10:53:00 AM DEBBIE AUTREY Clerk
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-7355

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

LUICITO NERVIL,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. James A. Beaty, Jr., District Judge. (CR-89-112-G, CA-97-627-2)

Submitted: November 19, 1998 Decided: December 3, 1998

Before HAMILTON and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Luicito Nervil, Appellant Pro Se. Benjamin H. White, Jr., Assistant

United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying

his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998).

We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court.

United States v. Nervil, No. CR-89-112-G; CA-97-627-2 (M.D.N.C. May

12, 1998). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before

the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION
Joseph A. Hofer,
Plaintiff(s),
Case Number: 1:18cev122
VS.
Judge Susan J. Dlott
Brett M. Spencer, et al.,
Defendant(s)
ORDER
The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate
Judge Karen L. Litkovitz filed on May 14, 2018 (Doc. 14), to whom this case was referred
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b), and noting that no objections have been filed thereto and that the
time for filing such objections under Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) expired May 29, 2018, hereby
ADOPTS said Report and Recommendation.
Accordingly, this matter is DISMISSED for lack of prosecution. Motions to
amend/correct complaint (Doc. 11) and to correct a clerical error (Doc. 15) are DENIED as

MOOT. This case is hereby TERMINATED from the docket of this Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Auta 9 Siete

Judge Susan J. Digtt
United States District Court
#### Thompson *vs.*Thompson.

Where, in a suit on a noto, judgment is rendered for $24, and the exact amount of interest is ascertained by this Court, by calculation, to be $22 66 cents, the judgment will be reversed, notwithstanding the maxim *de minimis non curat les.*

This was an action of debt, brought by Joseph Thompson against Davis Thompson, and determined in November, 1841, in the Phillips Circuit Court, before the Hon. Isaac Baker, one of the circuit judges. No statement of the case is necessary. It was argued here by *W.*& *E. Cummins,*for the plaintiff in error.

*By the Court,*

Paschal, J.

The only point which it becomes necessary for the Court to decide, is as to the question of interest. The note declared on fell due 25th December, 1839. Judgment was rendered November 15th, 1841. The exact amount of interest is *$22*66 cents. The amount of damages, by way of interest, rendered in the judgment, is twenty-four dollars. *De minimis non curat lex*is a mixim of the law, but as the defendant had a right to appear in this Court, and amend-the record, by entering a remititur as to the excess of interest, and as he has failed to appear here and make any such motion, or to take any steps whatever, we are bound to regard the error as one by which the rights of the plaintiff in error have been prejudiced, and to direct the reversal of the judgment below.

Judgment reversed.
B.J., mother of L.J., minor child, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, Appellee.

No. 1D17-4585

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

January 31, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Exhibit 32.1

                                  Certification
                       pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
                             as adopted pursuant to
                  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 on Form 10-Q of Immtech International, Inc. (the
"Company") for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2005, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, T.
Stephen Thompson, President and 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, as amended; and

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

                             /s/ T. Stephen Thompson
                             --------------------------------------------
                             T. Stephen Thompson
                             President & Chief Executive Officer
                             November 9, 2005
1004 West Euless Blvd.  Euless, Texas 76040 Tel: (817) 540

- 0108  Fax: (817) 540

- 2077 

### Association of Professional Flight Attendants

Proudly Representing the Flight Attendants of American Airlines

Office of the President

April 2 , 2014

The Honorable Anthony Foxx Secretary US Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Ave SE Washington, DC 20590

Dear Secretary Foxx:

I write to you on behalf of the hard

- working Flight Attendants of American Airlines, of which

there will be over 24,000 following the completion of our company’s merger with US Airways. After years of turmoil in our industry, my colleagues and I are looking forward to our company’s new and enhanced ability to compete globally. Unfortunately though, we ar e barely out of the starting gate and already an unscrupulous foreign carrier is trying to undercut us. The Association of Professional Flight Attendants urges you, in the strongest possible terms, to deny Norwegian Air International Limited’s (NAI) applic ation for a n exemption and foreign air carrier permit.

NAI’s parent company is engaged in an obvious ploy to circumvent the long

- established agreements between the United States and the European Union. In particular, Article 17 bis of the Open Skies Agreement states that “the opportunities created by the Agreement are not

intended to undermine labour

- related rights and principles contained in the Parties’ respective laws.” It is clear that by operating as an Irish airline, despite h aving no intention to fly any routes to or from Ireland, NAI is attempting to skirt the labor laws of its home country. By contracting with Southeast Asian staffing companies, NAI is further attempting to undercut the wages and working conditions of its fl ight crews. As such, NAI’s business strategy violates both the letter and the spirit of the US

- EU Open Skies Agreement.

There is a pressing public interest in NAI’s application for an exemption and foreign air carrier permit. US air carriers, and the hun dreds of thousands of Americans they employ, continue toThe Honorable Anthony Foxx

April 2, 2014 Page 2

struggle to compete with foreign carriers that are propped up by their home governments. Adding a transatlantic airline that refuses to fairly compensate its employees to the market will

further weak en all American carriers. For the Flight Attendants of American Airlines, the NAI model is offensive and unacceptable. Please consider our membership when making a determination on NAI’s application. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Laura Glading

President

Associ ation of Professional Flight Attendants
---

Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT T0SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)





In connection with the Annual Report of ERHC Energy Inc., a Colorado corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), Peter Ntephe , Chief Operating Officer and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, does hereby
certify, pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350), that to his 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 result of operations of the Company.








/s/   Peter Ntephe


Peter Ntephe


Chief  Operating Officer and Chief Executive Officer


July 31, 2009
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack

, Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

September 18, 2019

p0911 

# Order

Clerk September 18, 2019

159284

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 159284

COA: 346736

Kalamazoo CC: 15

- 001304

- FC

DALE EDWARD BUSH,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 25, 2019

order of the Court of Appeals is co nsidered, and it is DENIED, because we are not

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

EASTERN DIVISION 

STEVE SNYDER-HILL, et al., ) Case No. 2:18-cv-00736-MHW-EPD 

) 

Plaintiffs, ) Judge Michael H. Watson 

) 

v. ) Chief Magistrate Judge Elizabeth P. 

) Deavers 

THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY, ) 

) 

Defendant. ) 

 ) 

NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL AS CO-COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFFS 

 Now comes undersigned counsel, pursuant to Local Civil Rule 83.4(d), hereby gives notice to 

all parties and the Court that Michael L. Dillard, Jr. is withdrawing as co-counsel for Plaintiffs. All other 

attorneys of record for Plaintiffs will remain as attorneys of record for Plaintiffs. 

 Respectfully submitted, 

 February 3, 2022 

By: /s/ Michael L. Dillard, Jr. and Scott E. Smith, 

Trial Attorney 

SCOTT ELLIOTT SMITH, LPA 

Scott E. Smith (0003749) 

Trial Attorney 

Michael L. Dillard, Jr. (0083907) 

5003 Horizons Drive, Suite 100 

Columbus, Ohio 43220 

Phone: (614) 846-1700 

Fax: (614) 486-4987 

E-Mail:ses@sestraillaw.com 

E-Mail: mld@sestriallaw.com 

EMERY CELLI BRINCKERHOFF ABADY 

WARD & MAAZEL LLP 

Ilann M. Maazel (admitted pro hac vice) 

Debra L. Greenberger (admitted pro hac vice) 

Marissa R. Benavides (admitted pro hac vice) 

600 Fifth Avenue, 10th Floor 

New York, New York 10020 

Case: 2:18-cv-00736-MHW-EPD Doc #: 168 Filed: 02/03/22 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: 2802
2 

Phone: (212) 763-5000 

Fax: (212) 763-5001 

E-Mail: imaazel@ecbawm.com 

E-Mail: dgreenberger@ecbawm.com 

E-Mail: mbenavides@ecbawm.com 

PUBLIC JUSTICE, P.C. 

Adele P. Kimmel (admitted pro hac vice) 

Alexandra Brodsky (admitted pro hac vice) 

1620 L Street, NW, Suite 630 

Washington, DC 20036 

Phone: (202) 797-8600 

Fax: (202) 232-7203 

E-mail: akimmel@publicjustice.net 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I certify that a copy of the foregoing was filed electronically on February 3, 2022. Notice 

was sent by operation of the Court’s electronic filing system to all other counsel who have entered 

an appearance and any parties who have entered an appearance through counsel. The parties 

may access this filing through the Court’s ECF system. 

 /s/ Scott E. Smith 

 Scott E. Smith, Trial Attorney 

Case: 2:18-cv-00736-MHW-EPD Doc #: 168 Filed: 02/03/22 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: 2803
George MALDONADO, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-1620

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 7, 2018

Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Julius J. Aulisio, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

KELLY, KHOUZAM, and CRENSHAW, JJ., Concur.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

DISABILITY RIGHTS OHIO,

 Plaintiff,

 v. 

THE BUCKEYE RANCH, INC.,

 Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civil Action No. 2:18-cv-894

Civil Action No. 2:18-cv-906

Chief Judge Edmund A. Sargus, Jr.

Magistrate Judge Chelsey M. Vascura

ORDER

This matter is before the Court for consideration of Plaintiff’s Motion to Redact Portions 

of the Transcript of the Hearing Testimony of Robert Peters. (“Motion,” ECF No. 65.) In its 

Motion, Plaintiff seeks to redact “medical and mental health information concerning children 

residing at Buckeye Ranch, and information such as client and report numbers and the names of 

referring agencies that may identify children.” (Motion at 3, ECF No. 65.)

Based on Plaintiff’s representations, the Court concludes that the transcript of Robert 

Peters’ testimony contains confidential information that should be shielded from public access. 

The sealing of documents, however, must be no broader than necessary. See Shane Group, Inc. v. 

Blue Cross Blue Shield of Mich., 825 F.3d 299, 305 (6th Cir. 2016) (“‘The public has an interest 

in ascertaining what evidence and records the District Court and this Court have relied upon in 

reaching our decisions’” (quoting Brown, 710 F.2d at 1181)). Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion is 

GRANTED (ECF No. 65). The transcript shall remain under seal. If either party intends to rely 

upon the transcript of Mr. Peters’ testimony, they may file a redacted version on the public docket 

that redacts only the information protected as confidential.

Case: 2:18-cv-00906-EAS-CMV Doc #: 36 Filed: 06/25/19 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: 289
2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/ Chelsey M. Vascura

CHELSEY M. VASCURA

UNITED STATE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case: 2:18-cv-00906-EAS-CMV Doc #: 36 Filed: 06/25/19 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: 290
EXHIBIT 32.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL 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 Annual Report of New World Brands, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-KSB for the year ended May 31, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date therein specified (the "Report"),
the undersigned, Mark Weber, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certifies
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes- Oxley Act of 2002 that to the best of our 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 New World Brands,
Inc.


Date:    August 29, 2005                /s/ Mark Weber
                                        --------------
                                        Mark Weber
                                        Chief Financial Officer
                                        (principal accounting officer)
CERTIFICATION
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of PowerSecure International, Inc.;
 2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this report;
 3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;
 4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
     5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
   Date:  May 5, 2011
    /s/ Christopher T. HutterChristopher T. HutterExecutive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Assistant
Secretary
Jonathan Mikeal RAYNES v. STATE

CR-15-0767

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

March 17, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Case: 1:18-cv-00036-TSB-KLL Doc #: 7 Filed: 01/24/18 Page: 1 of 5 PAGEID #: 445
Case: 1:18-cv-00036-TSB-KLL Doc #: 7 Filed: 01/24/18 Page: 2 of 5 PAGEID #: 446
Case: 1:18-cv-00036-TSB-KLL Doc #: 7 Filed: 01/24/18 Page: 3 of 5 PAGEID #: 447
Case: 1:18-cv-00036-TSB-KLL Doc #: 7 Filed: 01/24/18 Page: 4 of 5 PAGEID #: 448
Case: 1:18-cv-00036-TSB-KLL Doc #: 7 Filed: 01/24/18 Page: 5 of 5 PAGEID #: 449