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

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 89 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. J. RES. 89

    Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States 
  relating to contributions and expenditures with respect to Federal 
                               elections.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 23, 2022

    Mr. Yarmuth submitted the following joint resolution; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
    Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States 
  relating to contributions and expenditures with respect to Federal 
                               elections.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled   (two-thirds of each House 
concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an 
amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be 
valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 
ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States 
within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:

                              ``Article--

    ``Section 1. Financial expenditures, or in-kind equivalents, with 
respect to a candidate for Federal office, without regard to whether or 
not a communication expressly advocates the election or defeat of a 
specified candidate in the election, shall not constitute protected 
speech, as guaranteed by this Constitution or any amendment to this 
Constitution.
    ``Section 2. Congress shall have the power to enact a mandatory 
public financing system to provide funds to qualified candidates in 
elections for Federal office, which shall be the sole source of funds 
raised or spent with respect to Federal elections.
    ``Section 3. Congress shall have power to enforce the provisions of 
this article by appropriate legislation.''.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

THOMAS SLOANE, individually and on 

behalf of all persons similarly situated, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

GULF INTERSTATE FIELD SERVICES, 

INC., 

Defendant.

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

Civil Action No.: 2:15-cv-1208-NBF 

Judge Nora Barry Fischer 

ELECTRONICALLY FILED 

MOTION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE OF JAMES A. JONES 

James A. Jones, undersigned counsel for Plaintiff Thomas Sloane, hereby moves that he 

be admitted to appear and practice in this Court in the above-captioned matter as counsel pro hac 

vice for Plaintiff Thomas Sloane in the above-captioned matter pursuant to LCvR 83.2 and LCvR 

83.3 and this Court’s Standing Order Regarding Pro Hac Vice Admissions dated May 31, 2006 

(Misc. No. 01-151). 

In support of this motion, undersigned counsel attaches the Affidavit for Admission Pro 

Hac Vice of James A. Jones filed herewith, which, it is averred, satisfies the requirements of the 

foregoing Local Rules and Standing Order. 

Dated: November 25, 2015 Respectfully submitted,

s/_James A. Jones____________________ 

James A. Jones 

BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC

8 Greenway Plaza, Ste 1500 

Houston, TX 77046 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

Case: 2:18-cv-00583-EAS-EPD Doc #: 16 Filed: 11/25/15 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: 243
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

 I hereby certify that on this 25th day of November, 2015 a copy of the foregoing was 

served electronically through the Court’s ECF System to all parties of record. 

/s_James A. Jones______ 

James A. Jones 

Case: 2:18-cv-00583-EAS-EPD Doc #: 16 Filed: 11/25/15 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: 244
##### 



EXHIBIT 99.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002


(18 U.S.C. §§1350)


Pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. §§1350),
the undersigned, Mathew McNeally, Chief Executive Officer and
President of Capital Group One, Inc., a Florida corporation (the
Company), does hereby certify, to his knowledge,
that:

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the
quarter ended November 30, 2002 of the Company (the
Report) fully complies with the requirements of
section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, and the information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.

|                       |  |                                                                              
|---------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: February 4, 2003 |  | By: /s/ Mathew McNeallyMathew McNeally
    President, Chief Executive Officer
Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record

Plant ID 09420

Removed 

from Public 

(Non-CBI) 

Docket1

Copyright 

Flag2

File Name Description

x 09420\09420_Checklist.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

09420\09420_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist

09420\09420_HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted

x 09420\09420_PartA.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 09420\09420_PartB.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 09420\09420_PartC.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 09420\09420_PartD.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 09420\09420_PartH.xls Plant submitted survey file

09420\Certification Statement Plant ID 09420.pdf Plant certification statement

09420\Supplemental Documents\09420_A5-2.PDF Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 09420\Supplemental Documents\09420_A5-3 and D3-1.PDF Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x x 09420\Supplemental Documents\09420_C3-23.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 09420\Supplemental Documents\09420_C3-31 F.pdf Plant submitted survey file

x 09420\Supplemental Documents\09420_C3-36.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

1

 Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database . 

2

 Copyright documents are available from the docket.
Victor L. LEWIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-519

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed January 3, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
**EXHIBIT 31.2**
**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 (a) OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT**
I, Phillip J. Smith, certify that:
1.  I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Stater Bros. Holdings Inc.; 2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4.  The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  b)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  c)  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and
5.  The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
 a)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and  b)  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
Date: February 9, 2005
/s/ Phillip J. Smith
Thomas Joseph CHRISTENSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D17-3002

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[April 5, 2018]

Rachael E. Bushey of O'Brien Hatfield, P.A., Tampa, for appellant.

No appearance required for appellee.

Per Curiam.

*Affirmed.*

Damoorgian, Levine and Conner, JJ., concur.
Willie ROGERS, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D17-1972

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

SEPTEMBER 20, 2017

Following review of the petition for writ of mandamus and the response thereto, it is ordered that said petition is hereby denied without prejudice.

LAGOA, EMAS and SCALES, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF CARMIKE CINEMAS, INC. FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          17,771
<SECURITIES>                                       801
<RECEIVABLES>                                      522
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      3,851
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                28,831
<PP&E>                                         733,934
<DEPRECIATION>                                 160,322
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 697,543
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           84,665
<BONDS>                                         81,883
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        550
<COMMON>                                           341
<OTHER-SE>                                     225,418
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   697,543
<SALES>                                        151,034
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               481,568
<CGS>                                           19,911
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  458,534<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                37,502
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              27,230
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (48,813)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (18,166)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (30,647)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (30,647)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (2.73)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (2.73)
<FN>
<F1>TOTAL COSTS INCLUDES IMPAIRMENT OF LONG LIVED ASSETS CHARGE OF $38.3 MILLION
AND A RESTRUCTURING CHARGE OF $34.7 MILLION.
</FN>


</TABLE>
# United States Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604
Submitted March 10, 2016 Decided May 20 , 2016

Before

DIANE P. WOOD , Chief Judge

RICHARD A. POSNER , Circuit Judge

ILANA DIAMOND ROVNER , Circuit Judge

No. 15

- 3090

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v
.
ADAM B RENT HILL , Defendant

- Appellant

. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois

.
No. 14

- CR

- 30207

- NJR

- 1 Nancy J. Rosenstengel , Judge

.

O R D E R
The defendant pleaded guilty to receiving child pornography, see 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(2)(B), and was sentenced to 10 years in prison plus a fine and restitution and 5 years of supervised release. He filed a notice of appeal, but his lawyer asserts that the appeal is frivolous and seeks to withdraw. See Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 , 744 (1967). We remanded the case to the district court for the limited purpose of determining whether the defendant knowingly and voluntarily waived any challenge to the conditions of his supervised release. See United States v. Hill , No. 15

- 3090, 2016 WL 138 1248 (7th Cir. 2016). Counsel informs us that the district court subsequently held a hearing and found the waiver to be knowing and voluntary. Finding no other potentially NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1No. 15

- 3090 Page 2
meritorious issues, we conclude that the appeal is frivolous. Thus, we GRANT counsel ’s motion to withdraw and DISMISS the appeal.
exv10w8







	 	 	 	 	 



Exhibit 10.8




2008 AMENDMENT TO

THE FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK OF DALLAS

SPECIAL NON-QUALIFIED DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN





     Pursuant to the authority granted to the Board of Directors of Federal Home Loan Bank of
Dallas, under Section 9.2 of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Dallas Special Non-Qualified Deferred
Compensation Plan (the “Plan”), the Plan is hereby amended as follows:



     Section 7.1 of the Plan is hereby amended to add a new Paragraph 7.1(d) that provides as
follows:




“(d) Transition Relief. Notwithstanding paragraph (c)
above, the transition guidance issued by the Internal Revenue
Service under Section 409A of the Code provides an exception to the
general timing rules for distribution elections. As a result, a
Participant’s elections with respect to his or her Account may be
revised on or before December 31, 2008 with respect to the timing
and method of payment; provided, that such revised election does not
cause amounts that were otherwise payable in 2008 to be paid in a
subsequent year and does not provide for amounts payable in a
subsequent year to be paid in 2008. The Committee will interpret
and administer this provision to ensure compliance with IRS Notices
2007-86 and 2006-79 and any additional guidance issued by the IRS.”



     The effective date of this 2008 Amendment to the Federal Home Loan Bank of Dallas Special
Non-Qualified Deferred Compensation Plan shall be December 10, 2008.



     Executed this 10th day of December, 2008.



	 	 	 	 	 
	 	FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK OF DALLAS

 	 
	 	By:  	/s/ Timothy J. Heup
 	 
	 	 	Corporate Officer 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 



ATTEST:




	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	     /s/ Brehan Chapman
 	 	 
	Corporate Secretary
Daniel Jesus MARTIN v. STATE

CR-16-0371

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

February 1, 2017 Reh. denied February 23, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
IN RE: CONFIDENTIAL PARTY

No. 2017-OB-2053

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 25, 2018

Reconsideration denied.
Mackel D. WALKER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D16-5204

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 7, 2018

Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Joshua Schoen, Specially Appointed Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Cerese Crawford Taylor, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

NORTHCUTT, SILBERMAN, and MORRIS, JJ., Concur.
#### Nathan E. Benner v. Ernest Feige.

*Agent's e% post facto admissions to strangers*— Resgestm.

An agent’s talk with strangers concerning past transactions of his employer is not res gestse either in point of time or in relation to parties, and, being of no account as proof, cannot affect his principal’s rights under a contract on which the transactions were based.

Error to Saginaw. (Gage, J.)

October 9.

October 24.

Assumpsit. Defendant brings error.

Reversed.

*Sweet & Flwnders*and *Wm. A. Glwrk*for appellant.

*Tarsney <& Weadock*for appellee.

Campbell, J.

Plaintiff recovered judgment below for services in running logs. He claimed to have done so under a contract made for defendant by an agent named Mc-Manus, for 75 cents a thousand feet, and one important question related to the amount of logs. Appended to the paper on which the agreement relied on was written, was a memorandum not signed, but containing several names, with figures opposite, footing up 298,706. It was' claimed by plaintiff that these names represented persons who had fur*569nished logs, and that tbe figures signified their several amounts; and that this paper was intended to show what logs were to be moved and delivered. This was controverted by defendant.

The amount of logs actually run seems to have been got at by somewhat extraordinary methods of estimation. But reliance was pai’tly had on alleged admissions of McManus, some of which were said to have been made to various third persons at times subsequent to the dealings out of which the contract is said to have arisen, and after it was settled upon.

No authority has been presented and we think there is none which would justify the reception of such ex post fac-to admissions, if they were made. They were in no sense acts forming part of the res gestas, either in point of time, or in relation to the parties to whom they are said to have been made. An agent’s talk with strangers concerning past transactions of his employer is of no account as proof, and cannot affect the rights of the principal.

The judgment was erroneous on this ground and must be reversed with costs and new trial granted.

The other Justices concurred.
----

----

Neffs Bancorp 10-K/A

| ·   | the report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and |
|--------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| ·   | the information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the Corporation’s financial condition and results of operations. |
|--------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                          |   |
|-----------------------------------------------|--------|
| /s/ John J. Remaley            |   |
| John J. Remaley, Chief Executive Officer |   |
|                                          |   |
```

[Federal Register: September 14, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 177)]
[Notices]               
[Page 55846]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr14se10-123]                         

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

 
Draft Re-Evaluation for Environmental Impact Statement: Sikorsky 
Memorial Airport, Stratford, CT

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public that a 
Draft Re-Evaluation for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) has 
been prepared for Sikorsky Memorial Airport in Stratford, Connecticut.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Doucette, Environmental 
Program Manager, Federal Aviation Administration New England, 12 New 
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA. (781) 238-7613.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA is making available a Draft Re-
Evaluation document, which evaluates the impacts of Runway Safety Areas 
and other airfield improvements at Sikorsky Memorial Airport in 
Stratford, Connecticut. The document will assist the FAA in determining 
the suitability of the May 1999 EIS and October 1999 Record of Decision 
(ROD). No action has been taken on the prior EIS or ROD. The Re-
Evaluation document is available for review during normal business 
hours at the following locations:
    FAA New England Region, 16 New England Executive Park, Burlington, 
MA, 781-238-7613.
    Stratford Public Library, 2203 Main St., Stratford, CT, 203-385-
4161.
    Bridgeport Public Library, Borroughs Bldg., 925 Broad St., 
Bridegport, CT, 203-576-7777.
    Igor Sikorsky Memorial Airport, Administration Bldg., 1000 Great 
Meadow Dr., Stratford, CT, 203-576-8162.
    A public hearing will be held to solicit public comment on the 
document. The hearing will be held on September 22 at the Stratford 
Ramada Inn, 225 Lordshop Blvd., Stratford, Connecticut at 7 p.m. Public 
comments will be accepted through September 30, 2010.

    Issued on: August 27, 2010.
LaVerne F. Reid,
Manager, Airports Division.
[FR Doc. 2010-22823 Filed 9-13-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-6614
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JOHN OKPALA, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CR-91- 452-L, CA-96-2524-L) Submitted: December 23, 1997 Decided: January 9, 1998 Before NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge, and BUTZNER and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judges. Affirmed in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion. John Okpala, Appel lant Pro Se. Steve Zimmerman, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, 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 orders denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997), and his motions for reconsideration. The district court granted a certificate of appealability as to one issue: "Were Mr. Okpala'sdue process rights violated during his arrest in Nigeria and extradition to the United States?" We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. According,we affirm the issue for which the district court granted a certificate of appealability and deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal as to the remaining issues on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Okpala , Nos. CR-92-452-L; CA96-2524-L (D. Md. Feb. 27 & Apr. 11 & Apr. 24, 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 IN PART, DISMISSED IN PART
A.T.E. v. R.N. and K.N.

2150751

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

January 6, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Reh. denied.