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

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 6412 

To amend title XXVII of the Public Health Service Act to provide certain 

informational resources related to Down syndrome. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 14, 2023 

Mr. MOLINARO (for himself, Ms. BUDZINSKI, and Mr. LAWLER) introduced 

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and 

Commerce 

A BILL 

To amend title XXVII of the Public Health Service Act 

to provide certain informational resources related to 

Down syndrome. 

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 ‘‘Down Syndrome Diag5 nosis Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PROVIDING INFORMATIONAL RESOURCES RELATED 

7 TO DOWN SYNDROME. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subpart II of part A of title 

9 XXVII of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 6412 IH

1 300gg–11 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the 

2 following new section: 

3 ‘‘SEC. 2730. INFORMATIONAL RESOURCES RELATED TO 

4 DOWN SYNDROME. 

5 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—In the case of an individual en6 rolled under a group health plan or group or individual 

7 health insurance coverage who is diagnosed with Down 

8 syndrome while so enrolled (or who is pregnant and is 

9 given a diagnosis of Down syndrome with respect to the 

10 fetus while so enrolled), not later than 60 days after such 

11 plan or coverage is made aware (through claims data or 

12 otherwise) of the relevant diagnosis, such plan or coverage 

13 shall provide the informational resources described in sub14 section (b) to— 

15 ‘‘(1) the individual; or 

16 ‘‘(2) if the individual is under the age of 18, a 

17 parent or legal guardian of the individual. 

18 ‘‘(b) INFORMATIONAL RESOURCES DESCRIBED.—For 

19 purposes of subsection (a), the informational resources de20 scribed in this subsection are the following: 

21 ‘‘(1) Written information about Down syn22 drome, including information on the range of phys23 ical, developmental, educational, and psychosocial 

24 outcomes for individuals living with Down syndrome, 

25 that— 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•HR 6412 IH

1 ‘‘(A) is up-to-date, evidence-based, and cul2 turally and linguistically appropriate for the in3 dividual; and 

4 ‘‘(B) was developed by— 

5 ‘‘(i) medical experts or representatives 

6 of national medical or genetics organiza7 tions; and 

8 ‘‘(ii) disability experts or representa9 tives of patient advocacy groups. 

10 ‘‘(2) Contact information for 1 or more organi11 zations that specialize in Down syndrome support, 

12 such as the National Down Syndrome Congress, the 

13 National Down Syndrome Society, or the Global 

14 Down Syndrome Foundation.’’. 

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

16 subsection (a) shall apply with respect to plan years begin17 ning on or after January 1, 2024. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
EX-10.1



 EXHIBIT 10.1 

FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE HORIZON BANCORP 
 2005 SUPPLEMENTAL EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT PLAN 
 (Effective as of
January 1, 2005) 
 WHEREAS, Horizon Bancorp (the “Company”) maintains the Horizon Bancorp 2005 Supplemental
Executive Retirement Plan (Effective as of January 1, 2005) (the “Plan”) for the benefit of certain eligible employees of the Company, Horizon Bancorp, N.A. and any other affiliated company that adopts the Plan; and 

WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Company (the “Board”) has determined that the Plan should be amended to comply with the
final regulations promulgated under Internal Revenue Code Section 409A; and 
 WHEREAS, pursuant to the authority contained
in Section 8.1 of the Plan, the Company has reserved the right to amend the Plan by action of the Board; 
 NOW, THEREFORE,
pursuant to the powers reserved to the Board under Section 8.1 of the Plan, and delegated to the undersigned individuals, the Plan is hereby amended, effective as of January 1, 2008, by replacing Section 4.7 of the Plan in its
entirety with the following: 
 “Section 4.7 Acceleration of Time of Payment. Except as provided in
Section 4.6 or this Section, the time or schedule of payment of a Participant’s Account provided in Sections 4.1 through 4.5 may not be accelerated. The time and schedule of payment of a Participant’s Account may be accelerated in
accordance with Treas. Reg. § 1.409A-3(j)(4).” 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned officers of the Company have
caused this First Amendment to be executed this 25th day of September, 2008, but effective as of January 1, 2008. 
  

			
	HORIZON BANCORP
		
	By:	 	/s/ Craig M. Dwight
		 	 Craig M. Dwight,
 President
and Chief Executive Officer



  

			
	ATTEST:
		
	By:	 	/s/ James H. Foglesong
		 	James H. Foglesong, Chief Financial Officer
**Exhibit 31(b)**

 

CERTIFICATION 

 

I, Michael R. Sayre, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Pinnacle Data Systems, Inc.; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary 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 quarterly report; 

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report; 

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have: 

 

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the periodin which this quarterly report is being prepared; 

 

b) evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this quarterly reportbased on such evaluation; 

 

c) disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report); and 

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

 

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data; and 

 

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal controls over financial reporting. 

 

Date: April 27, 2005
(January 29, 2004)

#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jermaine Vanhoesen, Appellant.

[771 NYS2d 730]

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County (Rosen, J.), rendered August 22, 2000, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crime of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree.

Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree and was sentenced as a second felony offender to a prison term of 3 to 6 years. We reject defendant’s sole contention on appeal that the sentence imposed was harsh and excessive. The record establishes that County Court considered all relevant circumstances in imposing the sentence, including defendant’s remorse, claim of self-defense and the fact that he was on parole at the time of the incident. Under these circumstances, we find no extraordinary circumstances or abuse of discretion warranting a reduction of the sentence in the interest of justice *(see*CPL 470.15 [6] [b]; *People v Dolphy,*257 AD2d 681, 685 [1999], *lv denied*93 NY2d 872 [1999]).

Crew III, J.P., Peters, Carpinello, Mugglin and Rose, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Transport Transports Canada Canada TP 7245E



# AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE

The following airworthiness directive (AD) may be applicable to an aircraft which our records indicate is registered in your na me. ADs are issued pursuant to Canadian Aviation Regulation (CAR) 521 Division X . Pursuant to CAR 605.84 and the further details of CAR Standard 625, Appendix H , the continuing airworthiness of a Canadian registered aircraft is contingent upon compliance with all applicable ADs. Failure to comply with the requirements of an AD may invalidate the flight authorization of the aircraft. Alternative means of compliance shall be applied for in accordance with CAR 605.84 and the above-referenced Standard

. This AD has been issued b y the Continuin g Airworthiness Division ( AARDG ) , National Aircraft Certification Branch, Trans p ort Canada, Ottawa, tele p hone 613 952-4357.

Pursuant to CAR 202.51 the registered owner of a Canadian aircraft shall, within seven days, notify the Minister in writing of any change of his or her name or address. To request a change of address, contact the Civil Aviation Communicat ions Centre (AARC) at Place de Ville, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N8 , or 1-800-305-2059 , or www.tc.gc.ca/civilaviation/communications/centre/ address.asp
2 4-0022 ( 01-2005 ) 1/1 No

. CF-2011-34 Issue Date 16 August 2011

Number: CF- 2011-34 Subject: Ice Protection System – Failure of the Timer and Monitor Unit
Effective: 31 August 2011 Applicability: Bombardier Inc. DHC-8 Aeroplane Models 400, 401 and 402, serial numbers 4001 and subsequent, equipped with Aerazur TMU, Part Number 4100S018-06. Compliance: As indicated below, unless already accomplished. Background: There have been multiple reports of in-ser vice incidents where the automatic deicing mode became unavailable due to a failure of the Timer and Monitor Unit (TMU). Investigation has revealed that the failures were attributed to overstressed capacitors installed in the circuit board of the TMU “Module 300” power supply. The failure of the capacitors leads to failure of the TMU “Module 300” power supply and subsequent loss of the automatic deicing mode. This directive mandates the replacement of the TMU, part number (P/N) 4100S018-06, with a new improved unit, P/N 4100S018-07.
Corrective Actions: 1. Within 3000 hours air time or 18 months, fr om the effective date of this directive, whichever occurs first, incorporate Bo mbardier ModSum 4-126525. Bombardier Service Bulletin (SB) 84-30-14, Initial I ssue, dated 20 May 2011, or later revisions approved by the Chief, Continuing A irworthiness, Transport Canada, provides approved instructions for incorporating ModSum 4-126525.
2. As of the effective date of this direct ive, installation of a TMU, P/N 4100S018-06, is not permitted on any aeroplanes.
Authorization: For the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities 

### ORIGINAL SIGNED BY Derek Ferguson Chief, Continuing Airworthiness
Contact: Mr. Robert Farinas, Continuing Airworthiness, Ottawa, telephone 613-952-4357, facsimile 613-996-9178 or e-mail CAWWEBFeedback@tc.gc.ca or any Transport Canada Centre.
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 of Capital Corp of the West (the "Company")
        on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities
        and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Thomas T. Hawker,
        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; 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:
                  August 4, 2005
              By/s/
                  Thomas T. HawkerThomas
                  T. HawkerPresident
                  andChief
                  Executive Officer






Return
          to Form 10-Q
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alberto HERRERA-ARTEAGA, a.k.a. Alberto Herrera Arteaga, a.k.a. Juan A. Rita-Herrera, a.k.a. Juan Alberto Rita-Herrera, Defendant-Appellant.

Nos. 16-10493, 16-10494

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*422Submitted September 26, 2017 *

OCTOBER 2, 2017

Erica McCallum, Assistant U.S., Office of the US Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Eric W. Kessler, Kessler Law Offices, Mesa, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: SILVERMAN, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

In these consolidated appeals, Alberto Herrera-Arteaga appeals his guilty-plea conviction and 61-month sentence for reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326, and the revocation of supervised release and concurrent 18-month sentence imposed upon revocation. Pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Herrera-Arteaga’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided Herrera-Arteaga the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

Our independent review of the record pursuant to *Penson v. Ohio,*488 U.S. 76, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on these direct appeals.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
#### John Brown *versus*The Inhabitants of the County of Somerset.

An action against the inhabitants of a county may be brought to the Court of Common Pleas holden for the same county.

This was an action of *assumpsit,*brought in the county of *Sontr erset,*upon sundry orders drawn by a committee appointed by the Court of Common Pleas for the county of *Somerset,*in June, 1811, to superintend the making a highway through certain unincorporated lands in said county, upon the county treasurer, in the plaintiff’s favor, dated March 24, 1813, and by him refused.

The cause was tried upon the general issue, at the last October term in this county, before *Parker,*J., when a verdict was taken for the plaintiff, subject to the opinion of the Court, upon two objections made by the defendants, *viz.:*1. That the action was not rightly brought in the county of *Somerset,*upon which they moved that the action should be dismissed; 2. That the orders declared on were drawn by a committee appointed by the Court of Common Pleas, in June, 1811, and the powers of that court, [ * 222 ] touching the subject of * roads having been transferred to the Court of Sessions, before the said orders were drawn, the said committee had no authority to draw the same.

*Bond,*for the defendants,

insisted that it was against the common principles of equity that a party should be a judge in his own cause; and to this he cited the express decision of this Court in the similar case of *Hawkes*vs. *The Inhabitants of the County of Kennebeck.**(1)*, *(a)*

*Boutell*for the plaintiff.

He also argued that the Court, which authorized the committee to draw the orders on which the action was brought, having ceased to exist, the powers of the committee had ceased also ; as, upon the death of an individual, the authority of his agent ceases.

(1)

7 *Mass. Rep.*461.

(a)

**And see *Gage*vs. *Gannett & Al.*10 *Mass. Rep.*170, and *note__Inhab of County of Lincoln*vs. *Prince,*2 *Mass. Rep.*544.

*Per Curiam.*

The case of a court is different from that of individual citizens. One court succeeds another, and takes, by statute, all the powers and authorities of its predecessor. The decision in *Hawkes’s*case was grounded upon the test of the writ; although the *reasoning*of the chief justice, in delivering the opinion of the Court, supports the objection made by the defendants’ counsel, grounded upon that decision.

*Judgment according to the verdict.*(2)

(2)

 Vide *Stat.*1809, c. 127.
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 21

- 00210

- CV

R OSA B USTILLOS AND P AULETTE

H ICKS

, Appellants

V

.

A DOLFO T ORRES AND M ARIA T ORRES

, Appellees §

§

§

§ On Appeal from County Co urt at

Law No. 1

of Tarrant County ( 2020

- 002150

- 1 )

May 19, 2022

Memorandum Opinion by Chief

Justice Sudderth

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there

was error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ord ered that the judgment of the trial

court is reversed and the case is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings

consistent with this opinion

.

It is further ordered that a ppellees Adolfo Torres and Maria Torres shall pay all

costs of this appea l, for whi ch let execution issue.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By /s/ Bonnie Sudderth

Chief Justice Bonnie Sudderth
BELL SPORTS CORP.
                          EXHIBIT - 11 - STATEMENT RE:
                        COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
                    (In Thousands, Except Per Share Amounts)
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                 Six Months Ended                        Three Months Ended

                                                            Dec. 28,          Dec. 30,               Dec. 28,          Dec. 30,
                                                              1996              1995                   1996              1995
                                                        ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                                       <C>                 <C>                  <C>                 <C>          
Net (loss) income                                         $       (472)       $ (13,094)           $      (475)        $  (7,724)


Net effect on net (loss) income
from conversion of other pontentially
dilutive securties                                               1,133           1,618                     566               809

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

Adjusted net (loss) income                                $        661        $(11,476)            $        91         $  (6,915)
                                                        ============================================================================



Weighted average number of common
and common equivalent shares outstanding
- primary                                                       13,759          13,944                  13,764            13,757

Net effect of other potentially dilutive
securities                                                       1,595           1,595                   1,595             1,595
                                                        ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Adjusted average shares outstanding for
fully diluted computation                                       15,354          15,539                  15,359            15,352
                                                        ============================================================================

Per share amount - fully diluted                          $       0.04        $  (0.74)            $      0.01         $   (0.45)
                                                        ============================================================================
</TABLE>
Svitlana LICHTENSTEIN, Appellant, v. REALCET, LLC, Appellee.

No. 4D17-2615

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[March 22, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
**Exhibit 32(a)**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 

OF QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-QSB 

OF PINNACLE DATA SYSTEMS, INC. 

FOR THE QUARTERENDED SEPTEMBER 25, 2004 

 

The undersigned is the Chief Executive Officer ofPinnacle Data Systems, Inc. (the “Issuer”). This Certification is made pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. This Certification accompanies the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Issuer for the quarterly periodended September 25, 2004. 

 

I, John D. Bair, certify that the Quarterly Reporton Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 25, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that information contained in the Quarterly Report on Form10-QSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer. 

 

This certification is executed as of November 12, 2004.