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

Calendar No. 318

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 826

[Report No. 104–216]

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a certificate of documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the coastwise

trade for the vessel PRIME TIME, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 18 (legislative day, MAY 15), 1995

Mr. THURMOND introduced the following bill; which was read twice and

referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

JANUARY 26, 1996

Reported by Mr. PRESSLER, without amendment

A BILL

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a

certificate of documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the coastwise trade for the vessel

PRIME TIME, 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,
2

•S 826 RS

1 SECTION 1. CERTIFICATE OF DOCUMENTATION.

2 Notwithstanding section 27 of the Merchant Marine

3 Act, 1920 (46 U.S.C. App. 883), section 8 of the Act of

4 June 19, 1886 (24 Stat. 81, chapter 421; 46 U.S.C. App.

5 289), and section 12106 of title 46, United States Code,

6 the Secretary of Transportation may issue a certificate of

7 documentation with appropriate endorsement for employ8 ment in the coastwise trade for the vessel PRIME TIME,

9 United States official number 660944.

Calendar No. 318

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 826

[Report No. 104–216]

A BILL

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to

other purposes.wise trade for the vessel PRIME TIME, and forpriate endorsement for employment in the coastissue a certificate of documentation with approJANUARY 26, 1996

Reported without amendment
H. R. 7032 

One Hundred Eighteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and twenty-four 

An Act 

To amend the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 to 

provide the Congressional Budget Office with necessary authorities to expedite 

the sharing of data from executive branch agencies, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Congressional Budget Office 

Data Sharing Act’’. 

SEC. 2. REQUESTS BY CBO OF INFORMATION FROM EXECUTIVE AGENCIES. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 201(d) of the Congressional Budget 

and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 601(d)) is 

amended— 

(1) by striking ‘‘The Director is authorized’’ and inserting 

‘‘(1) The Director is authorized’’; 

(2) by striking ‘‘(other than material the disclosure of which 

would be a violation of law)’’ and inserting ‘‘(with or without 

written agreement) provided that the Director maintains the 

level of confidentiality required by law of the department, 

agency, establishment, or regulatory agency or commission from 

which it is obtained in accordance with section 203(e)’’; and 

(3) by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘(2) No provision of law enacted after the date of the enactment 

of the Congressional Budget Office Data Sharing Act shall be construed to supersede, limit, or otherwise modify the authority of 

the Director to obtain any material under this subsection unless 

such provision specifically provides, by specific reference to this 

paragraph, that such authority is to be superseded, limited, or 

otherwise modified.’’. 

(b) REPORT.—Not later than one year after the date of the 

enactment of this Act, the Director of the Congressional Budget 

Office shall submit, to the chairs of the Committees on the Budget 

of the House of Representatives and the Senate, a report listing 

any request for information pursuant to a written agreement under 

section 201(d) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 601(d)), as amended by subsection (a) 

of this Act, made to any department, agency, or establishment 

of the executive branch of Government or any regulatory agency 
H. R. 7032—2 

or commission of the Government and any challenges faced 

accessing information under such section. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
### 33-15-14-02. Permitto construct. 

### 1. Permitto 

### construct required.
a.



### b.

c. General permits. The department may issue a general permit to construct covering numerous similar sources which are not subject to permitting requirements under chapter 33-15-13 or 33-15-15 orsubpart Bofsection 33-15-22-03. Anygeneral permit shall comply with all requirements applicable to other permits to construct and shall identify criteria by which sources may qualify for the general permit. To sources that qualify, the department shall grant the conditions and terms of the general permit. Sources thatwould qualifyfora general permit mustapply to the department for coverage under the terms of the general permit orapply for an individual permit to construct. Without repeating the public participation procedures undersubsection 6 ofsection


### 8

### 13. Exemptions.

### (4) The exemptions listed in paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 do not apply to engines that are a utility unit as defined in section 33-15-21-08.1.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Wayne Clyde TERRY Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-10073 Non-Argument Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

(October 3, 2017)

Curtis Ivy, Jr., Sandra J. Stewart, George L. Beck, Jr., U.S. Attorney’s Office, Montgomery, AL, for Plaintiff-Appel-lee

Before HULL, JULIE CARNES and JILL PRYOR, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Carly B. Wilkins, appointed counsel for Wayne Clyde Terry in this direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and filed a brief pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and. Terry’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.
#### IN RE: INTELLECTUAL VENTURES II, LLC, Appellant

2016-2416

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

October 3, 2017

*1025Henry A. Petri, Jr., Polsinelli PC, Washington, DC, argued for appellant.

Robert J. McManus, Office of the Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria, VA, argued for appellee Joseph Matal. Also represented by Nathan K. Kelley Kakoli Caprihan, Thomas W. Krause.

(Moore, Mayer, and Hughes, Circuit Judges).

JUDGMENT

Per Curiam

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

AFFIRMED. *See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.
EXHIBIT 32.2
                                                                    ------------


CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C SECTIONS 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES - OXLEY ACTS OF 2002


In connection with the Quarterly Report of Wireless Xcessories Group, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report"), I Ronald E.
Badke, Chief Financial 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, to the best of my knowledge, that:

(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

(4) The information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


                                                By: /s/ Ronald E. Badke
                                                    --------------------------
                                                    Ronald E. Badke
                                                    Chief Financial Officer
                                                    August 16, 2004
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



The undersigned, Brian Cole, Chief Financial Officer of Play LA Inc., hereby certifies, 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 on Form 20-F of Play LA Inc. for the year ended  December  31, 2008 (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 Play LA Inc.



Dated:  March 12, 2009









/s/ Brian Cole_______

Brian Cole





Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
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 Justice

###### Antitrust Division

                    Notice is hereby given that, on January 13, 2022, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301*et seq.*                     (“the Act”), Cooperative Research Group on HEDGE V (“HEDGE V”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, FCA US LLC, Auburn Hills, MI, has been added as a party to this venture.                

No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and HEDGE V intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.

                    On June 18,2021, HEDGE V filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on August 16, 2021 (86 FR 45750).                

Suzanne Morris,

Chief, Premerger and Division Statistics, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 2022-05088 Filed 3-9-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

IN THE INTEREST

OF C.S.I.A. AND A.A.A.,

CHILDREN §

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 1 6

- 00 174

- CV

Appeal from the

83rd District Court

of Pecos C ounty, Texas

(TC# P

- 6811

- 83

- CV )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Pending before the Court is Appellant’s motion to dismiss his appeal pursuant t o

T EX .R.A PP .P. 42.1(a)(1). We grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. Costs of the appeal are

taxed against Appellant. See T EX .R.A PP .P. 42.1(d).

December 14, 2016

YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Hughes, JJ.
**Exhibit 35.1**

**WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK**

**OFFICER’S CERTIFICATEANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE** 

            I, H. John Berens, an authorized officer of Washington Mutual Bank (the “Servicer”), do hereby certify to WaMu AssetAcceptance Corp. (the “Depositor”), pursuant to the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of  August 1, 2006 (as amended, the “Servicing Agreement”) by and between the Depositor, the Servicer, LaSalle Bank, NationalAssociation, as Trustee, and Christiana Bank & Trust Company, as Delaware Trustee,  the following with respect to Washington Mutual Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates WMALT Series 2006-AR10 Trustfor the 2006 fiscal year (the “Relevant Year”):

1.                  A review of the activities of the Servicer during the Relevant Year and of performance under the Servicing Agreement has beenmade under my supervision.

2.                  To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the ServicingAgreement in all material respects throughout the Relevant Year. 

Dated as of February 22, 2007.

                                                                                                      /s/ H. John Berens

| ___________________________________________Name:  H. John BerensTitle:    Senior Vice President |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
#### PEOPLE *v.*GREGORY.

Criminal Law — Driving While Under the Influence of Intoxicating Liquor — Record.

Record in prosecution for driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor *held,*to disclose no prejudicial error (CLS 1961, § 257.625).

Reference for Points in Headnote

7 Am Jur 2d, Automobiles and Highway Traffic § § 253, 330,

Appeal from Recorder’s Court of Detroit; Wood (Andrew C.), J.'

Submitted Division 1 May 6, 1968, at Detroit.

(Docket No. 2,924.)

Decided May 31, 1968.

Dennis Gregory was convicted of driving an automobile while under the influence of intoxicating liquor.

Affirmed.

*Frank J. Kelley,*Attorney General, *Robert A. Derengoski,*Solicitor General, *William L. Gahalan,*Prosecuting Attorney, *Samuel J. Torina,*Chief Appellate Lawyer, and *Luvenia D. Dockett,*Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for the people.

*William R. McNamee,*for defendant.

*567Per Curiam:.

Dennis Gregory appeals from a conviction of driving- while under the influence of intoxicating liquor. CLS 1961 § 257.625 (Stat Ann 1960 Rev § 9.2325). An examination of the record discloses no prejudicial error. The conviction is affirmed on authority of *People*v. *Alford*(1967) 8 Mich App 211.

Levin, P. J., and Burns and Dalton, JJ., concurred.
Exhibit 99.1

CERTIFICATION OF CEO

STATEMENT FURNISHED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002, 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

The undersigned, Larry M. Rinehart is the President, ChiefExecutive Officer and Director of PFF Bancorp, Inc. (the "Company").

This statement is being furnished in connection with thefiling by the Company of the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for thequarter ended June 30, 2002 (the "Report").

By execution of this statement, I certify that:

       the Report fully complies with the requirements of          Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934          (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)) and
       the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations          of the Company as of the dates and for the periods covered by the          Report.

This statement is authorized to be attached as an exhibit to theReport so that this statement will accompany the Report at such time as theReport is filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350.It is not intended that this statement be deemed to be filed for purposes of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

 

August 14, 2002 
/s/ Larry M. Rinehart
Dated 
Larry M. Rinehart
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED December 9, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-30349 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus PEDRO SANTILLANA, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 02-CR-238-3-S

-------------------- Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Pedro Santillana appeals his career-offender sentence following a guilty-plea conviction for marijuana-trafficking crimes. He contends that a Texas aggravated-assault conviction used to establish his career-offender status was not a “crime of violence” due to the facts that he was only 17 at the time of the prior felony, the crime involved only a BB gun, no one was harmed, and he received only probation. The underlying facts need not be considered because the guidelines define “crime ofNo. 03-30349 -2- violence” specifically to include “aggravated assault.” See U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2, comment. (n.1); United States v. Guerra , 962 F.2d 484, 485-86 & n.4 (5th Cir. 1992) (relying on application note defining “crime of violence”)

. Santillana expressly declares that he is not appealing the district court’s discretionary refusal to depart downward from career-offender status pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 4A1.3. His remaining argument on appeal is thus reduced to a meritless recharacterization of his unsuccessful first argument. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Signage Subcommittee

Conference Call Agenda - February 13 (1 to 3 pm ET), 2014

1.0 Introductions

2.0 Election of chair

2.1 Nominations

2.2 Vote (instructions to be provided)

3.0 Review subcommittee scope and objectives 

4.0 Report on February 6 conference call (staff)

5.0 Review subcommittee suggestions for and categories of various types of signs

6.0 Discussion

6.1 Determine how each type of information should be conveyed (accessible sign or 

another format)

6.2 Determine what technical provisions (raised letters, braille, visual access only) 

should apply to each type of sign

7.0 Public comment period

8.0 Closing remarks

Handout Attachments

 Scope and Objectives

 Signage List
#### Syracuse Grade Crossing Commission, Appellant and Respondent, *v.*Delaware, Lackawanna *&*Western Railroad Company et al., Respondents and Appellants; A. Cooper Metal Co., Inc., et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants.

Argued December 9, 1942;

decided March 4, 1943.

*634*Basil B. Aylesworth*for Delaware, L. & W. R. R. Co., et al., appellants.

*James C. Tormey, Corporation Counsel (Arthur M. Beach*and *John E. Walrath*of counsel), for Syracuse Grade Crossing Commission, plaintiff, appellant and respondent.

*George H. Kenny, Sherman C. Ward*and *Gay E. Brown*for Public Service Commission, respondent and appellant.

*Stewart F. Hancock*and *Morris Berman*for Wilson *&*Greene Lumber Co., Inc., appellant, *Stewart F. Hancock*and *Morris Berman*for Wilson & Greene Lumber Co., Inc., et al., respondents.

*Basil B. Aylesworth*for Delaware, L. & W. Coal Company, respondent.

*635Judgment affirmed, with costs to defendants-respondents A. Cooper Metal Co., Inc., et al. No opinion.

Concur: Loughran, Finch, Rippey and Conway, JJ. Lewis and Desmond, JJ., dissent insofar as the judgment determines that the tenants are entitled to compensation from the State. Taking no part: Lehman, Ch. J.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 708 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 708

  To require the Natural Resources Conservation Service to review the 
  national conservation practice standards, taking into consideration 
               climate benefits, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 1, 2023

 Ms. Brownley introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                        Committee on Agriculture

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To require the Natural Resources Conservation Service to review the 
  national conservation practice standards, taking into consideration 
               climate benefits, and for other purposes.

    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 ``Climate Agricultural Conservation 
Practices Act''.

SEC. 2. CONSIDERATION OF CLIMATE BENEFITS IN CONSERVATION PRACTICE 
              STANDARDS.

    Section 1242(h) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 
3842(h)) is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (1)--
                    (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``1 year after 
                the date of enactment of the Agriculture Improvement 
                Act of 2018'' and inserting ``5 years after the date of 
                enactment of the Climate Agricultural Conservation 
                Practices Act'';
                    (B) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``; and'' and 
                inserting a semicolon;
                    (C) in subparagraph (D), by striking the period at 
                the end and inserting ``; and''; and
                    (D) by adding at the end the following:
                    ``(E) evaluate the climate benefits of the 
                standards.'';
            (2) in paragraph (3)(B), by striking ``conservation 
        innovations and'' and inserting ``climate benefits, 
        conservation innovations, and''; and
            (3) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(5) Climate benefit defined.--In this subsection, the 
        term `climate benefit' means--
                    ``(A) a reduction in agricultural greenhouse gas 
                emissions;
                    ``(B) an increase in carbon sequestration; or
                    ``(C) mitigation against, or adaptation to, 
                increased weather volatility.''.
                                 <all>
```
11TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

In the interest of D.C., a child, * From the 29th District

 Court of Palo Pinto County,

 Trial Court No. C44764.

No. 11-13-00197-CV * January 3, 2014

 * Memorandum Opinion by Willson, J.

 (Panel consists of: Wright, C.J., 

 Willson, J., and Bailey, J.)

 This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is 

error in the order below. Therefore, in accordance with this court’s opinion, the 

order of the trial court is modified to delete paragraphs 6.2.1, 6.2.2, and 6.2.5; as 

modified, the order of the trial court is affirmed.