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

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6471 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 6471

    To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to prohibit 
  contributions and donations by foreign nationals in connection with 
  State or local ballot initiatives or referenda and recall elections.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 21, 2023

Ms. Porter (for herself, Mr. Gallagher, Ms. Sewell, Mr. Ciscomani, Mr. 
 Kilmer, Mr. LaMalfa, Mrs. Torres of California, Mr. Duarte, and Mrs. 
Kim of California) introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
                 the Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to prohibit 
  contributions and donations by foreign nationals in connection with 
  State or local ballot initiatives or referenda and recall elections.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Stop Foreign Interference in Ballot 
Measures Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON CONTRIBUTIONS AND DONATIONS BY FOREIGN NATIONALS 
              IN CONNECTION WITH BALLOT INITIATIVES AND REFERENDA AND 
              RECALL ELECTIONS.

    (a) In General.--Section 319(a)(1)(A) of the Federal Election 
Campaign Act of 1971 (52 U.S.C. 30121(a)(1)(A)) is amended by striking 
``election;'' and inserting the following: ``election, including a 
State or local ballot initiative or referendum or recall election;''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this Act shall apply 
with respect to elections held in 2024 or any succeeding year.
                                 <all>
```
#### Allen R. BLAIR, Plaintiff-Appellant v. YUM BRANDS; Taco Bell, Defendants-Appellees

No. 17-60350 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed September 7, 2017

Allen R. Blair, Pro Se

Robin Banck Taylor, Esq., Timothy Wayne Lindsay, Esq., Blythe Lollar, Ogle-tree Deakins, P.C., Ridgeland, MS, for Defendants-Appellees

Before JOLLY, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

*353PER CURIAM:*

Allen Blair appeals the district court’s judgment against him on his claims stemming from his employment at a Mississippi Taco Bell. He alleges that Defendants violated the Thirteenth Amendment and his right to free speech. Construed liberally, he also alleged violations of state wage laws and the Fair Labor Standards Act and referenced the Fourteenth Amendment and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, *et seq.,*in his summary judgment briefing.

We have carefully reviewed the district court’s memorandum opinion and order and the parties’ briefs in light of the pertinent portions of the record. We AFFIRM for substantially the same reasons given by the district court.

*

 Pursuant to 5th CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th CIR. R. 47.5.4.
**Exhibit 31b**

 

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: July 27, 2005
8040.5 

# FAA-20 10-0703 Contacts. With whom outside the FAA hasthisproposal been discussed?

Organization Person Contacted Date Response National Business Aircraft Association EliCoiti 

# IO/rs/o"l 

# - Regional Airline Assocililioll Dave Lotterer 

# lo!/3)O'i 

# - Aircraft Owners &Pilots Associlltioll Robert Hllckman 

# loh3)Cfi 

# - ATA Cnlig Fabian 

# IOJi?,)oq 

# - 09129106
#### Keith M. ACKERSON, Claimant-Appellant v. David J. SHULKIN, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee

2016-1486

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

April 6, 2017

Kenneth M. Carpenter, Law Offices of Carpenter Chartered, Topeka, KS, argued for claimant-appellant.

Kristin Mcgrory, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, argued for respondent-appellee. Also represented by Benjamin C. Mizer, Robert E. Kirschman, Jr., Martin F. Hockey, Jr.; Y. Ken Lee, Bryan Thompson, Office of General Counsel, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, DC.

(Moore, Clevenger, and Chen, Circuit Judges).

JUDGMENT

Per Curiam

This Cause having been heard and considered, it is Ordered and Adjudged:

AFFIRMED. *See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.
#### Ma Dolores Soto CASTRO, Petitioner v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS, III, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent

No. 16-60618 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed October 30, 2017

REVISED October 31, 2017

David Anton Armendariz, Esq., De Mott McChesney Curtright & Armendariz, L.L.P., San Antonio, TX, for Petitioner

Tim Ramnitz, Trial Attorney, Jennifer Raquel Khouri, Office of Immigration Litigation, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, for Respondent

Before BENAVIDES, SOUTHWICK, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Ma Dolores Soto Castro, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) order dismissing her appeal and affirming the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) order denying her applications for waiver of inadmissibility, adjustment of status, asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). Her sole argument on appeal is that the BIA and ÍJ erred in determining, in connection with her request for withholding of removal, that her claimed membership in a protected social group was limited to the group comprised of Americanized Mexican returnees and did not include a claim based on family ties.

Soto Castro briefs no argument challenging the denial of her requests for a waiver . of inadmissibility, adjustment of status, asylum, or relief under the CAT, and she has therefore abandoned any such challenge. *See Sama v. Hannigan,*669 F.3d 585, 589 (5th Cir. 2012); *Soadjede v. Ashcroft,*324 F.3d 830, 833 (5th Cir. 2003). She likewise does not dispute that her prior alien smuggling conviction is an aggravated felony or that she is removable based on that conviction. *See Sama,*669 F.3d at 589; *Soadjede,*324 F.3d at 833.

Because Soto was removable as an aggravated felon, this court has jurisdiction *426to consider only constitutional claims or questions of law. 8 U.S.C. §§ 1252(a)(2)(C), (a)(2)(D); *Marquez-Marquez v. Gonzales,*455 F.3d 548, 560-61 (5th Cir. 2006). Soto’s petition raises neither a legal nor constitutional question. We lack jurisdiction to consider her fact-based argument. *See Siwe v. Holder,*742 F.3d 603, 613 (5th Cir. 2014); *Arciniega v. Holder,*702 F.3d 781, 785 (5th Cir. 2012). Accordingly, the petition for review is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
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 Veterans Affairs

                    The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. 2, that the National Research Advisory Council will hold a meeting on Wednesday, May 4, 2022, by Webex. The teleconference number is 1-404-397-1596, conference ID 199 811 6717 or the meeting link is                     *https://veteransaffairs.webex.com/​veteransaffairs/​j.php?​MTID=​m000894cb2081a6845cd69505d4ba34e5.*                     The meeting will convene at 11:00 a.m. and end at 2:00 p.m. Eastern daylight time. This meeting is open to the public.                

The purpose of the National Research Advisory Council is to advise the Secretary on research conducted by the Veterans Health Administration, including policies and programs targeting the high priority of Veterans' health care needs.

                    On May 4, 2022, the agenda will include introduction of new NRAC members, discussion of calendar year 2022 goals; follow up discussion of diversity, equity, and inclusion activities in response to the NRAC recommendations; and discussion of subcommittee activities. No time will be allocated at this meeting for receiving oral presentations from the public. Members of the public wanting to attend, have questions or presentations to present may contact Rashelle Robinson, Designated Federal Officer, Office of Research and Development (14RD), Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20420, at 202-443-5768, or                     *Rashelle.robinson@va.gov no later than close of business on April 29, 2022.*                     All questions and presentations will be presented during the public comment section of the meeting. Any member of the public seeking additional information should contact Rashelle Robinson at the above phone number or email address noted above.                

Dated: February 16, 2022.

LaTonya L. Small,

Federal Advisory Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 2022-03683 Filed 2-18-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                          9
                
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                            MAR-31-1998  
<PERIOD-END>                                 SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           274
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         6,028
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                               1,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                   0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                        2
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                        60,512
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                          59,785 
<LOANS>                                       40,422
<ALLOWANCE>                                      235
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               110,425
<DEPOSITS>                                    89,745
<SHORT-TERM>                                       0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                           10,390
<LONG-TERM>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0
<PREFERRED>                                        0
<COMMON>                                          65
<OTHER-SE>                                    10,225
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               110,425  
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                1,560
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              2,217
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               3,777
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             1,936
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               299
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                          1,542
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                     17
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 0 
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                1,010
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  622
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    0
<CHANGES>                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                                     357
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    .55
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    .55
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                  2.83
<LOANS-NON>                                        0
<LOANS-PAST>                                     148
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                    0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 235
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      0
<RECOVERIES>                                       0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             235
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            0
        


</TABLE>
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY 

2000 TRAVERWOOD DRIVE 

ANN ARBOR, MI 48105-2498 

 OFFICE OF 

AIR AND RADIATION 

 August 7, 2012 

MEMORANDUM 

SUBJECT: American Honda Manufacturing Meeting with EPA and NHTSA Regarding Proposal 

for 2017-2025 Light-Duty (LD) Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Standards 

FROM: Arvon L. Mitcham, Program Manager/Engineer 

TO: EPA Docket #EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0799 

This memo documents meetings held on March 22, 2012 between representatives of American 

Honda Manufacturing (AHM or Honda), EPA, and NHTSA to discuss Honda’s comments on the 

LD GHG proposed rule. The meeting attendees included the following: 

Honda: Robert Bienenfeld, Pete Meier, Ayumu Matsuo, Wataru Taga 

EPA: Ed Nam, Linc Wehrly, Jeff Cherry, Arvon Mitcham, Byungho Lee, Robin Moran, Rob 

French 

 

NHTSA: Jim Tamm, Rebecca Yoon, Greg Powell, Volpe Center - Corralie Cooper, Kevin 

Greene 

The topics discussed included off-cycle credit technology such as: high efficiency exterior 

lighting, lighting and other electrical relays, engine heat recovery, active transmission and engine 

warm-up, electric heater circulation pump, solar reflective paint, glass and glazing, and a review 

of comments on general policy aspects (e.g., minimum fleet percentages). All materials for this 

meeting are in the docket.
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) OR RULE 15d-14(b)

OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the Annual Report of Rentrak Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the Report), I, Mark L. Thoenes, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 results of
operations of the Company.



|    |  |                                                                         
|--- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------
|By: |  | /s/ Mark L. Thoenes                                                     
|    |  | Mark L. Thoenes                                                         
|    |  | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Rentrak Corporation
|    | 
|    |  | June 13, 2008
IN THE MISSOURI COURT OF APPEALS

HANDDOWN LIST OF SEPTEMBER 30, 2014

WESTERN DISTRICT

THE FOLLOWING CASES WERE AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 84.16(b)

AND ISSUED PER CURIAM

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

WD76480 Kevin D. Roberts vs. State of Missouri

WD76624 In Re the Matter of: Makenzie Irene Cullen, A Minor, by her

Father and Next Friend, Troy A. Cullen and Troy A. Cullen, 

Individually vs. Laura Shupert

WD76678 Alonzo Darrough vs. State of Missouri

WD76762 Bradley Roberts vs. State of Missouri

WD76802 Travis L. Knott vs. State of Missouri

WD76979 Derick Miller vs. State of Missouri

WD77026 J.S.N. and A.E.G-N. vs. B.M.N. and R.T., Co-Guardian and

Co-Conservator of B.M.N. and L.T., Co-Guardian and CoConservator of B.M.N.

WD77027 Consolidated with WD77026

WD77116 In Re: Mark P. Reynolds vs. Boone County, Missouri

WD77247 R.K.H. and T.D.H. vs. L.K.P.

THE FOLLOWING CASES WERE AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 30.25(b)

AND ISSUED PER CURIAM

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

WD75816 State of Missouri vs. John J. Smothers

WD76629 State of Missouri vs. Joseph B. Sprofera
TEEATTORNEY G~ZNERAX. 

OF ?lhcx&3 

Mr. Graham P. Stewart 

Graham, Texas 

Dear Mr. Stewart: Opinion No. O-4324. 

Re:' Should a SO00 deposit In the 

First National Bank, Graham, 

be returned to the Brazes Rlver 

Conservation & Reclamation Dls- _ . trlct because the President of 

said Bank has been selected &nd 

qualified as one of the Dlrecters of said District? 

You state in your letter of January 14, 1942, that 

you have been:appointed and hav& qualified as one of the Directors of the~Brazos River Conservation & Reclamation District. ,,: 

You state that you are the President of the First 

National Bank Fn Graham, and that said District is carrying 

an account in said Bank of $5000~. Under theabove facts 

YOU ask: 

.- 

"I would like to be further advised by you 

as to whether this balance should be returned to 

the proper authorities of the District to avoid 

any possible criticism OF vlolatlon of the law 

due to the fact that I wish to serve as a Director." 

was 

has 

tion 6 of said Act provides: 

The Braeos River Consepvatlon & Reclamation District 

created by a Speclal~Act of the Legislature in 1929, arid 

been amended in some respects at different times. Sec- 

"The Board of Directors shall elect one of 

their number President, one Vice-President, one 

Secretary, and appoint a Treasurer, who shall 

furnish a bond in the sum of seventy-five per cent 

of the amount of money estimated to be on hand 

during the year, In no event to be more than 

$100,000." 

There is nothing Fn'the Act creating said District 

that requires the Treasurer to be a member of the Board, or 
Mr. Graham'P. Stewart, page.2 ,:. O-4324. 

: 

places any llmltatl~n on where he.shall keep the funds on 

deposit. The Board of Directors has general authority and:. 

control over the entire business of the District, and it 

(the Board of Directors) could, if it desired, make ~recommendations to the Treasurer. His bond, however;.requLres him 

as Treasurer to keep the funds and pay same out as and when 

directed by the Board. 

It Is our opinion that It 13 not a violation of 

law for the Treasurer to leave the $5000 on deposit In the 

First Nati.onal.Bank at Graham. Whether this action would' 

create criticism is a question about which we do not have 

and could not therefore express any opinion. 

Very truly yours 

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

By s/Gao. W. Barcus 

Geo. W. Barbus 

Assistant 

GWB:MR:wc 

APPROVED JAN 27, 1942 ' 

s/Grover Sellers 

FIRST ASSISTANT 

ATTORNEY GENERAL 

Approved Opinion Commi%t& By s/BWB Chairman
#### NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. SAVOY LAUNDRY, INC., Respondent.

Docket 28119.

United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.

Submitted Oct. 24, 1966.

Decided Nov. 18, 1966.

See also 2 Cir., 354 F.2d 78.

*1001Melvin H. Reifin, Atty., N. L. R. B., Washington, D. C. (Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Paul Elkind, Washington, D. C., on the brief), for petitioner.

Jacob M. Mandelbaum, New York City (John F. Clancy, Bridgeport, Conn., on the brief), for respondent.

Before LUMBARD, Chief Judge, MOORE and KAUFMAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

The National Labor Relations Board petitions under date of September 28, 1966, for the enforcement of its Amended Order herein dated July 28, 1964, based upon its Supplemental Decision of the same date. Respondent, Savoy Laundry, Inc., filed a Response to the Board’s petition wherein it alleged that a dispute existed between the Board and the Respondent as to back pay and therein consented to proceedings by the Board under 29 CFR 102.52 et seq. The Board thereafter moved to strike Respondent’s Response as not constituting a defense to the Board’s petition.

In the Board’s Supplemental Decision various factors which may enter into any back pay determination are set forth. In the absence of a disclosure of the relevant facts relating both to the employees’ situations and to any economic justification in terminating Respondent’s wholesale shirt division, a determination cannot be made at this stage as to the limiting effect, if any, on any back pay liability. We agree with the Board that “until these problems are explored in a compliance proceeding, * . * * it is premature to assume that this remedy provides unlimited back pay accrual” (Supp.Dec.). See N. L. R. B. v. Dazzo Products, Inc., 358 F.2d 136, 138 (2 Cir., 1966).

The Board’s petition for enforcement of its Amended Order is granted. The Board’s motion to strike Respondent’s Response is granted.