alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 88 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 

2 concurring), 

3 SECTION 1. USE OF CAPITOL GROUNDS FOR SOAP BOX 

4 DERBY RACES. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Greater Washington Soap 

6 Box Derby Association (in this resolution referred to as 

7 the ‘‘sponsor’’) shall be permitted to sponsor a public 
2 

•HCON 88 EH 

1 event, soap box derby races (in this resolution referred to 

2 as the ‘‘event’’), on the Capitol Grounds. 

3 (b) DATE OF EVENT.—The event shall be held on 

4 June 18, 2022, or on such other date as the Speaker of 

5 the House of Representatives and the Committee on Rules 

6 and Administration of the Senate jointly designate. 

7 SEC. 2. TERMS AND CONDITIONS. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Under conditions to be prescribed 

9 by the Architect of the Capitol and the Capitol Police 

10 Board, the event shall be— 

11 (1) free of admission charge and open to the 

12 public; and 

13 (2) arranged not to interfere with the needs of 

14 Congress. 

15 (b) EXPENSES AND LIABILITIES.—The sponsor shall 

16 assume full responsibility for all expenses and liabilities 

17 incident to all activities associated with the event. 

18 SEC. 3. EVENT PREPARATIONS. 

19 Subject to the approval of the Architect of the Cap20 itol, the sponsor is authorized to erect upon the Capitol 

21 Grounds such stage, sound amplification devices, and 

22 other related structures and equipment as may be required 

23 for the event. 
3 

•HCON 88 EH 

1 SEC. 4. ADDITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS. 

2 The Architect of the Capitol and the Capitol Police 

3 Board are authorized to make such additional arrange4 ments as may be required to carry out the event. 

5 SEC. 5. ENFORCEMENT OF RESTRICTIONS. 

6 The Capitol Police Board shall provide for enforce7 ment of the restrictions contained in section 5104(c) of 

8 title 40, United States Code, concerning sales, advertise9 ments, displays, and solicitations on the Capitol Grounds, 

10 as well as other restrictions applicable to the Capitol 

11 Grounds, with respect to the event. 

Passed the House of Representatives June 7, 2022. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 
117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 88 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Authorizing the use of the Capitol Grounds for the 

Greater Washington Soap Box Derby.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JOSE RODRIGUEZ

- GARCIA, AKA Jose Garcia Rodriguez,

Petitioner,

v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 15

- 73106

Agency No. A088

- 241

- 860

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted April 11, 2017 **

Before: GOULD, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges

. Jose Rodriguez

- Garcia, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review
of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying cancellation of removal, asylum,

withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

APR 18 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 15

- 73106

(“CAT”) . We have jurisdic tion under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial
evidence the agency’s determination of continuous physical presence , Ibarra

Flores v. Gonzales , 439 F.3d 614, 618 (9th Cir. 2006)

. We deny the petition for

review.

S ubstantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Rodriguez

Garcia was outside of the United States for a period of more than 90 days during

the statutory period and thus failed to establish the requisite continuous physical

presence. See 8 U.S .C. § 1229b(b)(1)(A), (d)(2) (a departure in excess of 90 days

breaks continuous physical presence). Even assuming equitable estoppel could

apply, he has not shown affirmative misconduct by United States immigration

officials

. See Salgado

- Diaz v. Gonzale s , 395 F.3d 1158, 1165 (9th Cir. 2005)
(“The government in immigration cases may be subject to equitable estoppel if it
has engaged in affirmative misconduct.”).

S ubstantial evidence supports the agency ’s determination that Rodriguez

Garcia failed to establish that he could not re asonably relocate within Mexico. S ee

8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(b) (2)

- (3).

Rodriguez

- Garcia has waived any challenge t o the ag ency’ s denial of CAT

relief. See Rizk v. Holder , 629 F.3d 1083, 1091 n.3 (9th Cir. 2011) (issue s not
raised in an opening brief are waived).

In light of this disposition, we do not reach Rodriguez

- Garcia’s contentions3 15

- 73106

regarding membership in a particular social group.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED

.
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1161 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude the portion of 

a lump-sum social security benefit payment that relates to periods prior 

to the taxable year from the determination of household income. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 18, 2021 

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

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude 

the portion of a lump-sum social security benefit payment that relates to periods prior to the taxable year 

from the determination of household income. 

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 ‘‘Fairness in Social Se5 curity Act of 2021’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1161 IH

1 SEC. 2. TREATMENT OF LUMP-SUM SOCIAL SECURITY BEN2 EFITS IN DETERMINING HOUSEHOLD IN3 COME. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 36B(d)(2) of the Internal 

5 Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end 

6 the following new subparagraph: 

7 ‘‘(C) EXCLUSION OF PORTION OF LUMP8 SUM SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS.— 

9 ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘modi10 fied adjusted gross income’ shall not in11 clude so much of any lump-sum social se12 curity benefit payment as is attributable to 

13 months ending before the beginning of the 

14 taxable year. 

15 ‘‘(ii) LUMP-SUM SOCIAL SECURITY

16 BENEFIT PAYMENT.—For purposes of this 

17 subparagraph, the term ‘lump-sum social 

18 security benefit payment’ means any pay19 ment of social security benefits (as defined 

20 in section 86(d)(1)) which constitutes more 

21 than 1 month of such benefits. 

22 ‘‘(iii) ELECTION TO INCLUDE EX23 CLUDABLE AMOUNT.—A taxpayer may 

24 elect (at such time and in such manner as 

25 the Secretary may provide) to have this 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1161 IH

1 subparagraph not apply for any taxable 

2 year.’’. 

3 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

4 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

5 December 31, 2013. 

6 (c) WAIVER OF STATUTE OF LIMITATION ON CREDIT

7 OR REFUND.—If the period of limitation on a credit or 

8 refund resulting from the amendment made by subsection 

9 (a) expires before the end of the 1-year period beginning 

10 on the date of the enactment of this Act, refund or credit 

11 of such overpayment (to the extent attributable to such 

12 amendment) may, nevertheless, be made or allowed if 

13 claim therefor is filed before the close of such 1-year pe14 riod. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
#### A. C. JACKSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Eric D. WILSON, Warden, FCC Petersburg, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 17-6900

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: October 17, 2017

Decided: October 20, 2017

A. C. Jackson, Appellant Pro Se.

Before FLOYD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

A. C. Jackson, a federal inmate, seeks to appeal the district court’s order treating his 28 p'.S.C, § 2241 (2012) petition as a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion, and dismissing the motion for lack of juris*215diction. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certifí-cate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certifícate of ap-pealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Jackson has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Jackson’s motion for a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000882160
<NAME> CHILDRENS BROADCASTING CORP
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         885,525
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,241,642
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (54,894)
<INVENTORY>                                     78,885
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,723,780
<PP&E>                                       5,697,293
<DEPRECIATION>                             (1,449,534)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              26,178,415
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,815,633
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        2,367,587
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       115,515
<OTHER-SE>                                  41,963,086
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                26,178,415
<SALES>                                      1,385,021
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,385,021
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,037,753
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               929,179
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           (103,598)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,437,117)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,437,117)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,437,117)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.33)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
##### 



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
  
    
    the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 25,
2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) and 15(b) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and
    
    the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.
 Date: February 8, 2006/s/ Jack H. BrownJack H. BrownChairman, President, andChief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)February 8, 2006/s/ Phillip J. SmithPhillip J. SmithSenior Vice President, andChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)February 8, 2006
Nathaniel STEWART, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-4035

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

February 9, 2018 Rehearing Denied March 22, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Jeffrey EDMOND, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D17-2154

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

March 8, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                5


<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                  JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                    JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                          0
<SECURITIES>                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                   0
<ALLOWANCES>                    0
<INVENTORY>                     0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                0
<PP&E>                          0
<DEPRECIATION>                  0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           14,928
<BONDS>                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>           0
<PREFERRED>                     0
<COMMON>                        52
<OTHER-SE>                      (14,980)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    0
<SALES>                         0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                0
<CGS>                           0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   12,080
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 (12,080)
<INCOME-TAX>                    0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             (12,080)
<DISCONTINUED>                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                 0
<CHANGES>                       0
<NET-INCOME>                    (12,080)
<EPS-BASIC>                   (.20)
<EPS-DILUTED>                   (.20)



</TABLE>
Learn more at www.nationalguard.mil

Current as of August 2022 Point of Contact: NGB Public Affairs at (703) 607-2612

Highlights

• Eight MAFFS in three

Air National Guard units and one 

Air Reserve unit

• Air National Guard Units:

 - 146th Airlift Wing Channe

 Islands, California

 - 152nd Airlift Wing Reno 

 Nevada

 - 153rd Airlift Wing Cheyenne, 

 Wyoming

• Aircraft can be rapidly refilled 

with retardant or water, allowing 

operators to spend more time 

fighting fires in the air

• Each dispersal unit is a self-contained unit that discharges from 

the left side of the aircraft

• Self-pressurizing system that 

provides greater flexibility for the 

Forest Service to respond in a 

more effective and efficient way 

to the nation’s wildland firefighting 

needs

• Carrying capacity of 3,200 gallons of retardant or water

• Ability to respond within

24 to 48 hours

• MAFFS aircrew receive specialized certification by the U.S. Forest Service and annual refresher 

certification

Lessening the risk to firefighters and civilians while

protecting critical infrastructure and personal property

Mission: 

Provides the U.S. Forest Service with additional surge capability in

aerial fire-fighting assets to assist after the capabilities of commercial and

contract air tankers have been exhausted.

Overview: 

In the 1970s Congress established the MAFFS to assist in the wildfire

suppression program.

Air National Guard (ANG) aircraft and crews to release retardant or water 

from special tanks in less than five seconds through a single dispensing tube 

from the left side of the aircraft. Today a total of eight MAFFS units are operated by the Air National Guard and the Air Force Reserve.

The MAFFS aircraft, loaded with retardants, are guided to fire-ravaged areas

by U.S. Forestry Service piloted aircraft. These units do not require any aircraft modifications and can be loaded or unloaded using specially designed 

trailers located at each MAFFS operational unit.

MAFFS II:

A new system implemented in 2011, MAFFS II has several improvements, 

including less reliance on ground equipment and personnel. Now a self-contained system, its onboard compressor decreases ground time and allows for 

multiple drops on each mission. This system provides better coverage

and is cleaner and more environmentally friendly. Air National Guard MAFFS 

crews have fought wildfires in the United States, Europe, Africa and Indonesia.

2020: The Year of the Guard Modular Airborne Fighting System
#### People v Price,

No. 90968;

Court of Appeals No. 118461.
**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 December 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities
        and Exchange Commission on the date therein specified (the “Report”), the
        undersigned, Shehryar Wahid, 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:
 
 (1)           The
        Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
        applicable, 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:  April
                    17, 2007
                /s/
                    Shehryar WahidShehryar
                    WahidChief
                    Financial Officer(principal
                    financial and principal  accounting
                    officer)
EX PARTE TTR CONSTRUCTION, LLC, et al.

(In re: TTR Construction, LLC, et al. v. Judge Bentley H. Patrick, Jefferson Circuit Court)

2160230

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

January 24, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. dismissed.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

## Filings in Existing Proceedings

*Docket Numbers:*                     PR22-18-000.                

*Applicants:*                     Southern California Gas Company.                

*Description:*                     Submits tariff filing per 284.123(b), (e)+: Offshore_Delivery_Service_Rate_Revision_January_2022 to be effective 1/19/2022.                

*Filed Date:*                     1/19/2022.                

*Accession Number:*                     20220119-5106.                

*Comments Due:*                     5 p.m. ET 2/9/22.                

*284.123(g) Protests Due:*                     5 p.m. ET 3/21/22.                

*Docket Numbers:*                     RP22-492-000.                

*Applicants:*                     Southern LNG Company, L.L.C.                

*Description:*                     § 4(d) Rate Filing: Dredging Surcharge Cost Adjustment—2022 to be effective 3/1/2022.                

*Filed Date:*                     1/20/22.                

*Accession Number:*                     20220120-5024.                

*Comment Date:*                     5 p.m. ET 2/1/22.                

Any person desiring to protest in any the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date.

The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.

                    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at:                     *http://www.ferc.gov/​docs-filing/​efiling/​filing-req.pdf.*                     For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.                

Debbie-Anne A. Reese,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2022-01515 Filed 1-25-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
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, 2006 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 28, 2006 |  | /s/ Mark Weber                
|                      |  | Mark Weber                    
|                      |  | Chief Financial Officer       
|                      |  | (principal accounting officer)
Farron Alexander TAYLOR v. STATE

CR-15-1430

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

March 17, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Mario LaShawn WHITE v. STATE

CR-15-0452

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

February 3, 2017 Reh. denied March 17, 2017

**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 Annual Report of Kevcorp Services, Inc. (the ACompany@) on Form 10-KSB for the period ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Kevin Kirch, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that 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 result of operations of the Company.



Date: September 23, 2004                                        By: /s/ Kevin Kirch

Kevin Kirch

Chief Executive Officer

Chief Financial Officer