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

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 6728 

To require public school, and public institution of higher education, athletic 

teams and clubs to be designated for membership based on biological 

sex, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 12, 2023 

Mrs. MCCLAIN (for herself, Mr. DONALDS, Mr. TIMMONS, Mr. HIGGINS of 

Louisiana, Mr. BURCHETT, Mr. GROTHMAN, Mr. GOSAR, Mr. SESSIONS, 

Mrs. LUNA, Mr. FRY, Ms. MACE, and Mr. TONY GONZALES of Texas) 

introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 

Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To require public school, and public institution of higher 

education, athletic teams and clubs to be designated for 

membership based on biological sex, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Save Women’s Sports 

5 Act of 2023’’. 


ssavage on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 6728 IH

1 SEC. 2. REQUIRED DESIGNATION OF SCHOOL ATHLETIC 

2 TEAMS. 

3 (a) TYPES OF DESIGNATIONS.—An intercollegiate, 

4 intramural, or club athletic team or sport that is spon5 sored by a public school, or a public institution of higher 

6 education, or that is a competing team or sport sponsored 

7 by a non-public school or institution, and that receives 

8 Federal financial assistance, shall be expressly designated 

9 as, and composed of students of, only 1 of the following 

10 categories of team or club members based on biological 

11 sex at birth: 

12 (1) Males. 

13 (2) Females. 

14 (3) Coed members described in paragraphs (1) 

15 and (2). 

16 (b) REQUIREMENT.—The membership of athletic 

17 teams or sports designated only for females shall only be 

18 open to biological females at birth. 

19 SEC. 3. PENALTY. 

20 All Federal financial assistance shall be terminated 

21 for a failure to comply with section 2. 

Æ 


ssavage on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2




                            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 SCB Computer Technology, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending January 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael
J. Boling, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Treasurer of
the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.
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 result of operations of the
Company.



March 12, 2003



By:  /s/  Michael J. Boling
   ---------------------------
       Michael J. Boling
      Executive Vice President,
  Chief Financial Officer, and Treasurer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>

<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-02-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-04-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-03-1999
<CASH>                                          29,691
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  192,659
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    169,418
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               423,194
<PP&E>                                         514,380
<DEPRECIATION>                                 126,951
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,007,035
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          125,701
<BONDS>                                        687,387
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           122
<OTHER-SE>                                     112,499
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,007,035
<SALES>                                        732,944
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               732,944
<CGS>                                          667,709
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  667,709
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              45,256
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (5,576)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,960)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,616)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,616)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.30)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.30)



</TABLE>
#### Johnny R. ANDOE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Donald J. TRUMP *, President; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-35178

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted July 11, 2017 **

Filed July 18, 2017

Johnny R. Andoe, Pro Se

Before: CANBY, KOZINSKI, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.

*

 Donald J. Trump has been substituted for his predecessor, Barack Obama, as President of the United States under Fed R. App. P. 43(c)(2).

**

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

MEMORANDUM ****

Johnny R. Andoe, an Idaho state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action brought under *Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics,*403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971), challenging the constitutionality, of various federal and state laws. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. *Hamilton v. Brown,*630 F.3d 889, 892 (9th Cir. 2011) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A); *Barren v. Harrington,*152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (order) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)). We reverse and remand.

The district court dismissed Andoe’s action on the basis that it was barred by *Heck v. Humphrey,*512 U.S. 477, 114 S.Ct. 2364, 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994). However, we note that none of the statutes cited in the complaint are relevant to An-doe’s criminal conviction or term of confinement. Thus, success on the merits of Andoe’s constitutional challenge would not necessarily imply the invalidity of his conviction or sentence. *See id.*at 487, 114 S.Ct. 2364 (explaining that if *“&*judgment *525in favor of the plaintiff would necessarily imply the invalidity of his conviction or sentence ... the complaint must be dismissed unless the plaintiff can demonstrate that the conviction or sentence has already been invalidated”)- We reverse the judgment, and remand for the district court to consider the merits of Andoe’s claims in the first instance, and to determine whether leave to amend would be appropriate. *See Lucas v. Dep’t of Corr.,*66 F.3d 245, 248 (9th Cir. 1995) (“[A] pro se litigant is entitled to notice of the complaint’s deficiencies and an opportunity to amend prior to dismissal of the action.”).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

****

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-14-00030-CV

Mary Melinda Barnes

v.

Navarro Hospital, LP, Navarro Regional, LLC, d/b/a NAVREG, LLC

On Appeal from the

13th District Court of Navarro County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 11-20865-CV

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED. Costs of the appeal are adjudged 

against appellant.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

August 29, 2014
#### Brian KOPEIKIN, M.D., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MOONLIGHT BASIN MANAGEMENT, DBA Moonlight Basin Resort, LLC, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 15-35186

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted May 9, 2017 Seattle, Washington

Filed May 18, 2017

Shandor Badaruddin, Shandor S. Bada-ruddin, Missoula, MT, Troy L. Booher, Beth E. Kennedy, Attorneys, Zimmerman Jones Booher, Salt Lake City, UT, for Plaintiff-Appellant

Ian McIntosh, Attorney, Crowley Fleck PLLP, Bozeman, MT, for Defendant-Ap-pellee

Before: McKEOWN, BEA, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM *

The parties are familiar with the facts so we will not recite them here. We review de novo the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Moonlight Basin Management, LLC. *See Fontana v. Haskin,*262 F.3d 871, 876 (9th Cir. 2001). Dr. Brian Kopeikin appeals that ruling on the ground that the evidence supports sufficient inferences to charge Moonlight Basin with constructive knowledge of the rocks that caused Kopeikin’s injuries, and therefore avoid summary judgment with respect to Moonlight Basin’s negligence liability despite Montana’s Skier Responsibility statutes. *See*Mont. Code Ann. §§ 23-2-702, -731, -733, -736. We need not address the scope of the statutes here. Even if we accept Kopeikin’s construction of these provisions, there is no genuine dispute as to a material fact with respect to Moonlight Basin’s alleged constructive knowledge of the rocks that caused Kopeikin’s injuries. And, as Kopeikin acknowledged, there is no evidence that Moonlight Basin had actual knowledge of the rocks at the time of Kopeikin’s accident. ■

AFFIRMED.

*

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.18

                    AMENDMENT TO LOAN AND SECURITY AGREEMENT

         THIS AMENDMENT, made this 24th day of May, 1999, is by and among
NationsBank, N.A., a national banking association and the successor to
NationsBank of Tennessee, N.A. (the "Bank"), ARC Kentucky, LLC, a Tennessee
limited liability company (the "Kentucky Borrower") and Ambulatory Resource
Centres, Inc., a Tennessee corporation (the "Guarantor").

                                    RECITALS

         Bank has previously made a loan to the Kentucky Borrower, an Affiliate
of Guarantor, pursuant to a Loan and Security Agreement dated November 16, 1998
(the "Loan Agreement"). Capitalized terms not otherwise defined in this
Amendment shall have the meaning provided in the Loan Agreement. The Guarantor
has requested that the Bank make an additional loan to another of its
Affiliates. The Bank is willing to make such additional loan, subject, among
other things, to the execution of this Amendment.

         NOW, THEREFORE, the parties to this Amendment hereby amend the Loan
Agreement as follows:

1.       Amendment to Definitions. The definition of "Loan Termination Date" is
hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:

         "LOAN TERMINATION DATE" means November 15, 2001.

2.       Amendment to 6.15. Paragraph 6.15(f) of the Loan Agreement is hereby
deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:

         (f)      At all times, the Shareholder's Equity of Guarantor,
         calculated on a consolidated basis, shall be greater than $15,000,000
         plus the aggregate amount of any new equity raised by Guarantor after
         the date hereof.

3.       Ratification. Borrower and Guarantor, jointly and severally, hereby
restate and ratify, as of the date hereof, all the representations, warranties
and covenants contained in the Loan Agreement, confirm that the terms and
conditions of the Loan Agreement, as amended hereby, remain in full force and
effect, and agree that the provisions of Section 9 of the Loan Agreement shall
govern the Loan Agreement and this Amendment.


<PAGE>

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have duly executed this
Agreement as of the day and year first above written.


NATIONSBANK, N.A.                              ARC KENTUCKY, LLC

BY:                                            BY:
    -------------------------------                -----------------------------

TITLE:                                         TITLE:
       ----------------------------                   --------------------------



                                               AMBULATORY RESOURCE CENTRES, INC.

                                               BY:
                                                   -----------------------------

                                               TITLE:
                                                      --------------------------


                                        2
#### ABRASIVES-SOUTH INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. AWUKO ABRASIVES WANDMACHER GMBH & CO KG; Wandmacher GMBH; Marty Korte, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 16-2295

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: August 16,- 2017

Decided: August 24, 2017

John B. Kern, JOHN B. KERN INTERNATIONAL LAW, LLC, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellant. Russell S. Abrams, Karen E. Spain, K *&*L GATES LLP, Charleston, South Carolina, for Ap-pellees.

Before TRAXLER, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Abrasives-South, Inc., which brought this action against Defendants asserting several state law claims, including claims of interference with contractual relations, fraud and deceit, and unfair trade practices claims, appeals the district court’s orders granting Defendants summary judgment and denying its Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s orders. *See Abrasives-South Inc. v. Awuko Abrasives Wandmacher GMBH & Co KG,*No. 2:16-cv-00768-RMG (D.S.C. Aug. 17, 2016 & Oct. 4, 2016); *see also Hooper v. Ebenezer Sr. Servs. & Rehab. Ctr.,*386 S.C. 108, 687 S.E.2d 29, 33 (2009) (“Equitable tolling may be applied where it is justified under all the circumstances ... [but it] is a doctrine that should be used sparingly and only when the interests of justice compel its use.”). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED*
|    |                                                                                                                                                  |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 1. | I have reviewed this Amendment #1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2017, of Aviat Networks, Inc.; and |

|    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary 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 report. |

|        |
|--------|
|        |  |  |  |  |
| Date:  | October 6, 2017 | /s/ Ralph S. Marimon |
|   |   | Name: |   | Ralph S. Marimon |
|   |   | Title: |   | Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Principal Financial  Officer |
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

 
 

EXHIBIT 10(f)
  
    Loan Agreement    
  


        This Agreement between CDEX Inc (Company) and Kitty C. Philips (KCP) is for a loan of $20,000 from KCP to Company. The loan is made this date, November 14, 2001
(the loan date). CDEX agrees to repay the loan as soon as it has funds available. The loan will be repaid with simple interest of 9%. At the option of KCP, within one year from the loan date the loan
can be converted to restricted common stock of Company at a rate of $0.50 per share or the lowest rate given any investors during the six months following the loan date. 



	
 Kitty C. Philips	 	 
	

 Malcolm H. Philips, Jr.
 President and CEO CDEX Inc.	
 	

 




 
 

Loan Agreement    
  


        This Agreement between CDEX Inc (Company) and Kitty C. Philips (KCP) is for a loan of $20,000 from KCP to Company. The loan is made this date, November 14,
2001 (the loan date). CDEX agrees to repay the loan as soon as it has funds available. The loan will be repaid with simple interest of 9%. A the option of KCP, within one year from the loan date the
loan can be converted to restricted common stock of Company at a rate of $0.50 per share or the lowest rate given any investors during the six months following the loan date. 



	
 Kitty C. Philips	 	 
	

 Malcolm H. Philips, Jr.
 President and CEO CDEX Inc.	
 	

 











QuickLinks


EXHIBIT 10(f) Loan Agreement

Loan Agreement
#### Hermann Cohen, App’It, v. Asa Morehouse *et al.,*Resp’ts.

*Edward C. Perkins,*for app’It; *J. F. Bradner,*for resp’ts.

*1016Judgment affirmed, with costs. All concur, except Brown, J., not sitting,

Affirming 21 N. Y. State Rep., 436.
Exhibit 99.2

PERIODIC REPORT CERTIFICATION

of the Chief Financial Officer

I, Douglas H. Kelsall, Chief Financial Officer of eCollege.com (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 Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.



/s/ Douglas H. Kelsall       
Douglas H. Kelsall
Chief Financial Officer
March 28, 2002

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to eCollege.com and will be retained by eCollege.com and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Cedric Ray JONES, Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-11368 Conference Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed August 18, 2017

*814James Wesley Hendrix, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Jacob Austin Blizzard, Parker & Blizzard, P.L.L.C., Abilene, TX, for Defendant-Appellant

Cedric Ray Jones, Pro Se

Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Cedric Ray Jones has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and *United States v. Flores,*632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Jones has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

 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 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 Concierge Technologies, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the Report), I, David W. Neibert, 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, 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)

Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





|                         |     |                        
|------------------------ | --- | -----------------------
|Date:  November 18, 2008 | By: | /s/ DAVID W. NEIBERT   
|                         |     | David W. Neibert       
|                         |     | Chief Executive Officer





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Concierge Technologies, Inc. and will be retained by Concierge Technologies, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.