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

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 6565 

To establish a system to expedite gate passes and flight access procedures 

to allow caregivers, parents, and guardians to accompany minors and 

passengers needing assistance to their flights. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 1, 2023 

Mr. STEUBE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Homeland Security, for a period to be subsequently determined 

by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall 

within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To establish a system to expedite gate passes and flight 

access procedures to allow caregivers, parents, and 

guardians to accompany minors and passengers needing 

assistance to their flights. 

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 ‘‘Fast Lane for Youths 

5 Act’’ or the ‘‘FLY Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 6565 IH

1 SEC. 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF SYSTEM TO EXPEDITE GATE 

2 PASSES AND FLIGHT ACCESS PROCEDURES 

3 TO ALLOW CAREGIVERS, PARENTS, AND 

4 GUARDIANS TO ACCOMPANY MINORS AND 

5 PASSENGERS NEEDING ASSISTANCE TO 

6 THEIR FLIGHTS. 

7 Not later than 180 days after the date of the enact8 ment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal Avia9 tion Administration and the Administrator of the Trans10 portation Security Administration (TSA) shall collaborate 

11 to establish a system to better expedite gate passes and 

12 flight access procedures to allow caregivers, parents, and 

13 guardians to accompany minors and passengers needing 

14 assistance to their flights. Such system shall ensure up 

15 to two such gate passes are provided to such caregivers, 

16 parents, and guardians who already qualify for TSA Pre17 Check, and such gate passes note such status in the same 

18 manner and to the same extent as such status would be 

19 noted on a ticket issued to such caregivers, parents, and 

20 guardians. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
**EXHIBIT - 31.1**

 

MOSSIMO, INC.

 

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

 

I, MossimoGiannulli, Chairman and Co-Chief Executive Officer of the registrant, certifythat:

 

1.               I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Mossimo,Inc.;

 

2.               Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.

 

3.               Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and otherfinancial information included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.               The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsiblefor establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as definedin Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

(a)              Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the registrant is made known to usby others, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;

 

(b)             Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

 

(c)              Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recentfiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonable likely to affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and

 

5.               The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal controls over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

 

(a)              All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the designor operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and

 

(b)             Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.

 
| /s/ MOSSIMO GIANNULLI                   |   |
|-----------------------------------------|--------|
| Mossimo Giannulli                       |
| Chairman and Co-Chief Executive Officer |
| May 13, 2005                            |

 

----
elgo_ex1019.htm


Exhibit 10.19


 


 


This letter Agreement is dated as of May 10, 2012 and is entered into between Enterologics, Inc., a Nevada corporation with an address at 1264 University Avenue West, Suite 404 - St. Paul MN 55104 with an additional address at 20 East Sunrise Hwy, Valley Stream, NY 11581 AND The 1999 Family Trust with an address of 66 Greenway South Forest Hills, NY 11375.


 


WHEREAS


 


Enterologics, Inc seeks to borrow certain funds for its operational needs and;


 


WHEREAS


 


The 1999 Family Trust  is willing to provide a bridge loan, the total not to exceed   Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000) and;


 


WHEREAS


 


The parties have agreed to certain terms of the loan(s) as more fully described in the Promissory Loan Agreement and Corporate Resolution of even date;


 


THEREFORE


 


For good and valuable consideration, the parties hereby agree as follows:


 



	
1.  

	
The 1999 Family Trust  will loan Enterologics, Inc., a total of $50,000;








	
2.  

	
Interest and other terms are outlined in the Promissory Note (Exhibit A);








	
3.  

	
In  consideration of this loan, the Company will  issue 250,000 shares of the Company’s common stock to the Trust;








	
4.  

	
It is understood that the total loan, is backed by the Promissory Note only and is otherwise an  unsecured loan;












Agreed:


 







 



	/s/ Robert Hoerr                                                    	 	/s/ Irving Bader                                                       
	 	 	 
	Robert Hoerr, CEO	 	Irving Bader, Trustee
#### Paul MOSELEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITIMORTGAGE INC., Defendant-Appellee.

No. 15-35210

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted December 14, 2016 *

Filed December 22, 2016

Paul A. Moseley, Pro Se

Bradley Lloyd Fisher, Attorney, Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, Seattle, WA, for Defendant-Appellee

Before: WALLACE, LEAYY, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Paul Moseley appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action alleging state and federal claims aris-*1009mg from defendant’s alleged improper failure to discharge his mortgage loan. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a district court’s dismissal for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), and we may affirm on any ground supported by the record. *Hooks v. Kitsap Tenant Support Servs., Inc.,*816 F.3d 550, 554 (9th Cir. 2016). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Moseley’s claim under Washington Uniform Commercial Code § 3-603 because Moseley is neither an indorser nor an accommodation party under the deed of trust, and because a personal check with “ETF Only” written on it does not constitute an unconditional tender. *See*Wash. Rev. Code § 62A.3-603(b) (“If tender of a payment of an obligation to pay an instrument is made ... and the tender is refused, there is a discharge, to the extent of the amount of the tender, *of the obligation of an indorser or accommodation party*having right of recourse with respect to the obligation to which the tender relates.” (emphasis added)); *id.*§ 62A.3-204(b) (defining “indorser”); *id.*§ 62A.3-419 (discussing “accommodation party”); *see also*Wash. Rev. Code § 62A.3-106(a) (“[A] promise ... is unconditional unless it states ... an express condition to payment....”); *Jones v. Best,*134 Wash.2d 232, 950 P.2d 1, 6-7 (1998) (en banc) (“We have held that tender of the amount due must be unconditional in order to stop interest from running.”).

We lack jurisdiction to consider the district court’s award of attorney’s fees. *See Hunt v. City of Los Angeles,*638 F.3d 703, 719 (9th Cir. 2011) (“[A] supplemental notice of appeal is required for us to have jurisdiction over an attorney fees issue that becomes final subsequent to the initial notice of appeal.” (citation and emphasis omitted)).

Moseley’s motion to strike CitiMort-gage’s answering brief, filed on November 9, 2015, and request for a mandatory judicial notice, filed on December 4, 2015, are denied.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
| ·   | The report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended and |
|--------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| ·   | The information contained in the Report fairly represents, in all material respects, the Company’s financial condition and results of operations. |
|--------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/ Gary L. Nalbandian              |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Gary L. Nalbandian,Chief Executive Officer                                                           |

| /s/ Mark A. Zody                      |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Mark A. Zody,Chief Financial Officer                                                                                                           |

----
#### In the Matter of Claude Waters, et al., Respondents, against Ellsworth B. Buck, et al., Constituting the Board of Education of the City of New York, et al., Appellants.

Argued April 7, 1943;

decided May 27, 1943.

*841
      *Thomas D. Thacher, Corporation Counsel (Nicholas Bucci*and *Paxton Blair*of counsel), for appellants.

*Jacob E. Heller*for John J. Kassner, *amicus curiae,*in support of appellants’ position.

*Albert De Roode*for respondents.

Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Lehman, Ch. J., Loughran, Rippey, Lewis, Conway and Desmond, JJ. Taking no part: Finch, J.
## Dftt'd^^r - ia[<\f , - IZ ^ 

# Gogebic-Iro n Count

y Airpor t CiOGhBIC-lRO N AIRI'OR l Josep h BonoveL: , Cftairma n Robert Ber g Ji m Olive r LeRo y Kanga s Bria n Tarr o Bo b Mon n Joh n Wiil a Pau l Multar d Donn a Scors e E556 0 Airpor t Roa d .y.^lAR P Ironwood , Michiga n 4993 8

Phon e 906-932-312 1 FA X 906-932-440 1 e-mail ' iwdairplaneigjflylromironw'oo d co m Duan e R . DuRay . Manage r Mind y Prenderville , Admi n Ass t

Jul y 15.201 0 Denni s Devan y Chief . F.s.scntia l Ai r Se n ic e Division . X-5. ^ Offic e o t Aviatio n Analysi s Departnicn l ol " Transportatio n 40 0 Sevent

h Strect. S \V . Washington . D C Dea r Mr . DcVany . On Jul y 15 , 2010 . th e Gogebic-Iro n Count y Airport Boardhel da.specia

l meetin g to addres s th e HA S proposals . Th e publi c was invite dto th e meetin g t o pro \id c opinions . concerns , an didea s regardin g th e proposal s submitte dt o th e DO T fro mCharte r

Air Transport , Inc . andSovereig n Air . Inc . Bot h o f th e proposal s wer e reviewe dlookin g a t th e option s tha

t woul dprovid e th e mos t benefi t t o ou r communit y an dwhic h company display s th e bes t chanc e o f

becomin g a successfu l operator . Artc T acomplet e revie w o f

th e proposal s an dth e curren t activity displaye dfro

mbot h o f th e bidders , th e Gogebic - Iro n County Airport Boar dha s cas t

aunanimou s vot e i f

favor o f th e Charte r

Ai r Transpor t

proposa l utilizin g Milwauke e a s th e hub . Sincerely . Duan e DuRa v ane Airpor t Manage ;
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-2000
<CASH>                                             897
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   897
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     897
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           30,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,500
<OTHER-SE>                                    (30,603)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       897
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                10,130
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (10,130)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (10,130)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (.007)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (.007)


</TABLE>
**Exhibit 31.1**

**Certification**

I, David Lockwood,certify that:

1.                 I have reviewedthis annual report on Form 10-K/A of Liberate Technologies;

2.                 Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.                 Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

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

a)               Designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

b)              Evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

c)               Disclosed in thisreport any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting, and;

5.                 The registrant’sother certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent function):

a)               All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrols over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize, and reportfinancial information; and

b)              Anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.
|                                | By:      | /s/ DAVID  LOCKWOOD       |
|--------------------------------|----------|---------------------------|
|                           |     | David Lockwood            |
| Date:  September 28, 2005 | * * | *Chief Executive Officer* |

 

----
#### Nola Arndt, Respondent, *v.*Edwin J. Altman et al., Copartners Doing Business under the Name of M. B. Altman Sons, Appellants.

Argued January 19, 1943;

decided March 4, 1943.

*595
      *Clarence*J. *Shearn*for appellants.

*Tobias A. Keppler*and *David C. Lewis*for respondent.

Judgments reversed and a new trial granted with costs to the appellant to abide the event on the ground that as matter of law there has been no judicial determination by the trial court. No opinion.

Concur: Lehman, Ch. J., Loughran, Finch, Rippey, Lewis, Conway and Desmond, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET AND STATEMENT OF INCOME OF THE COMPANY AS OF AND FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED
SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BE REFERENCED TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                         517,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                6,855,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,831,000
<INVENTORY>                                    617,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,882,000
<PP&E>                                       1,267,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                  99,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              13,314,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        7,839,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        71,000
<OTHER-SE>                                   9,944,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                13,314,000
<SALES>                                      8,865,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             8,865,000
<CGS>                                        3,619,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                8,544,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             214,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                107,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                    38,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    69,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.01
        

</TABLE>
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER ON M OTION FOR R EHEARING

Appellate case name: Noel v. Oakbend Medical Center

Ap pellate case number: 01

- 21

- 00206

- CV

Trial court case number: 19

- DCV

- 265821

Trial court: 458 th District Court of Fort Bend County

It is ordered that the motion for rehearing filed by app ellant

, Brian Duane Noel, is denied

.

Ju dg e’s signature: /s/ Gordon Goodman

A cting for the Court

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Goodman and Hightower

.

Date: August 23 , 2022
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 

ROBERT WORLEY, § 

 § No. 393, 2018 

 Defendant Below, § 

 Appellant, § Court Below: Superior Court 

 § of the State of Delaware 

 v. § 

 § Cr. ID No. 1206000145 A & B (N) 

STATE OF DELAWARE, § 

 § 

 Plaintiff Below, § 

 Appellee. § 

 Submitted: October 22, 2018 

 Decided: January 7, 2019 

Before VAUGHN, SEITZ, and TRAYNOR, Justices. 

 ORDER 

After careful consideration of the appellant’s opening brief, the appellee’s 

motion to affirm, and the record below, we conclude that the Superior Court’s order 

of July 3, 2018, summarily dismissing the appellant’s second motion for 

postconviction relief, should be affirmed.*

 The Superior Court did not err in 

concluding that the appellant’s motion did not satisfy the pleading requirements of 

Superior Court Criminal Rule 61(d)(2) and thus was procedurally barred. 

 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the motion to affirm is 

GRANTED. The judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED. 

 BY THE COURT: 

 /s/ Collins J. Seitz, Jr. 

 Justice 

 

*

 2018 WL 3302806 (Del. Super. Ct. July 3, 2018).
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 Mortons Restaurant Group, Inc. (Mortons) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended October 4, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Thomas
J. Baldwin, the Chief Executive Officer of Mortons, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(i) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
and

(ii) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of Mortons.

Date: November 6, 2009





|                                         
|-----------------------------------------
|/s/ THOMAS J. BALDWIN                    
|Thomas J. Baldwin Chief Executive Officer