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

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5947 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5947

   To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to include foster care 
transition youth as members of targeted groups for purposes of the work 
                          opportunity credit.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 7, 2016

  Mr. McDermott (for himself, Mr. Reichert, Mr. Doggett, Mr. Danny K. 
 Davis of Illinois, and Mr. Reed) introduced the following bill; which 
            was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to include foster care 
transition youth as members of targeted groups for purposes of the work 
                          opportunity credit.

    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 ``Improved Employment Outcomes for 
Foster Youth Act of 2016''.

SEC. 2. INCLUSION OF FOSTER CARE TRANSITION YOUTH FOR PURPOSES OF WORK 
              OPPORTUNITY CREDIT.

    (a) In General.--Section 51(d)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
1986 is amended by striking ``or'' at the end of subparagraph (I), by 
striking the period at the end of subparagraph (J) and inserting ``, 
or'', and by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
                    ``(K) a qualified foster care transition youth.''.
    (b) Qualified Foster Care Transition Youth Defined.--Section 51(d) 
of such Code is amended by adding at the end the following new 
paragraph:
            ``(16) Qualified foster care transition youth.--The term 
        `qualified foster care transition youth' means any individual 
        who is certified by the designated local agency as--
                    ``(A) not having attained age 27 as of the hiring 
                date, and
                    ``(B) having been in foster care (within the 
                meaning of section 477 of the Social Security Act), 
                after attaining the younger of--
                            ``(i) age 16, and
                            ``(ii) the age specified in subsection 
                        (a)(7) of such section.''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply with respect to individuals who begin work for the employer after 
the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 99.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
          PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                           (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

     The undersigned executive officer of Jacksonville Bancorp, Inc. (the
"Registrant") hereby certifies that the Registrant's Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended December 31, 2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained
therein fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Registrant.


                            /s/ Bill W. Taylor
                            ------------------------------------
                            Name:   Bill W. Taylor
                            Title:  Executive Vice President and
                                    Chief Financial Officer

Date: February 5, 2003
EPA Form 5900-84

 OMB No. 2060-0336, Approval Expires 06/30/2015

Federal Operating Permit Program (40 CFR Part 71)

EMISSION CALCULATIONS (EMISS)

Calculate potential to emit (PTE) for applicability purposes and actual emissions for fee purposes for 

each emissions unit, control device, or alternative operating scenario identified in section I of form GIS. 

If form FEE does not need to be submitted with the application, do not calculate actual emissions.

A. Emissions Unit ID __EGEN 2_____

B. Identification and Quantification of Emissions

First, list each air pollutant that is either regulated at the unit or present in major amounts, then list any other 

regulated pollutant (for fee calculation) not already listed. HAP may be simply listed as "HAP." Next, 

calculate PTE for applicability purposes and actual emissions for fee purposes for each pollutant. Do not 

calculate PTE for air pollutants listed solely for fee purposes. Include all fugitives for fee purposes. You may 

round to the nearest tenth of a ton for yearly values or tenth of a pound for hourly values.

Air Pollutants

Emission Rates

CAS No.

Actual

Annual

Emissions

(tons/yr)

Potential to Emit

Hourly

(lb/hr)

Annual

(tons/yr)

CO 0.38 0.095

VOM 0.14 0.035

NOx 1.76 0.441

PM2.5 0.12 0.031

PM10 0.12 0.031

Part 0.12 0.031

SOx 0.116 0.029

HAP 0.0305 0.0071
**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

**18      U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|   | 1. | The                report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(D)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;                and |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |   |   |
|--------|--------|--------|
|   | 2. | The                information contained in the Report fairly resents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the                Company. |
|--------|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                              |   |   |                                                                                                                                                                    |
|---------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Date:              December 12,              2007 |   |   | */s/              Isidore              Sobkowski*                                                                                                                  |
|                                                   |   |   | By:              Isidore Sobkowski                                                                                                                                      |
|                                                   |   |   | Isidore                  Sobkowski, President, Chief Executive                  Officer and                  Interim Chief Financial                  Officer |

----
EXHIBIT 24.1  POWER OF ATTORNEY  KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that each of the undersigned, being a director or officer, or both, of The Digital Development Group Corp., a Nevada corporation, (registrant) hereby constitutes and appoints Martin W. Greenwald, acting individually, as the undersigneds true and lawful attorney-in-fact and agent, with full power of substitution and re-substitution, for him and in his name, place and stead in any and all capacities, to sign any and all amendments to the registrants annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 and to file the same, with all exhibits thereto and all other documents in connection therewith, with the Securities and Exchange Commission, granting unto said attorney-in-fact and agents, and each of them, full power and authority to do and perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done that such annual report and its amendments shall comply with the Securities Act, and the applicable rules and regulations adopted or issued pursuant thereto, as fully and to all intents and purposes as he or she might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that said attorneys-in-fact and agents, or any of them or their substitute or re-substitute, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.  In accordance with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant in the capacities and on the dates indicated.  SignatureTitleDate/s/ MARTIN W. GREENWALD
Martin W. GreenwaldChief Executive Officer, Interim Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer) Director (Principal Executive Officer) and Acting PresidentMay 2, 2014/s/ BRYAN SUBOTNICK
Bryan SubotnickDirectorMay 2, 2014
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           1,507,000
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,453,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                        81,000
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 7,362,000
<PP&E>                                           6,754,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,763,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  18,615,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,782,000
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                            99,000
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,380,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    17,175,000
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,953,000
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    4,296,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 155,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,458,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        46,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,504,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,504,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       (0.15)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       (0.15)
                                               


</TABLE>
#### Martin PEARSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 16-56837

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted October 23, 2017 *

Filed November 9, 2017

Martin Pearson, Pro Se

Robert J. Im, Howard D. Hall, Attorney, Hall Huguenin LLP, Santa Ana, CA, for Defendant Appellee

Before: McKEOWN, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.

*

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

*771MEMORANDUM **

Martin Pearson appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing his action alleging federal and state law claims related to the foreclosure of his property. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal on the basis of res judicata. *Manufactured Home Cmtys. Inc. v. City of San Jose,*420 F.3d 1022, 1025 (9th Cir. 2005). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Pearson’s action as barred by the doctrine of res judicata because his claims were raised, or could have been raised, in a prior state court action that resulted in a final judgment. *See Adam Bros. Farming, Inc. v. County of Santa Barbara,*604 F.3d 1142, 1148-49 (9th Cir. 2010) (setting forth elements of res judicata under California law); *see also Brodheim v. Cry,*584 F.3d 1262, 1268 (9th Cir. 2009) (“If two actions involve the same injury to the plaintiff and the same wrong by the defendant, then the same primary right is at stake even if in the second suit the plaintiff pleads different theories of recovery, seeks different forms of relief and/or adds new facts supporting recovery.” (citations and internal quotation marks omitted)); *City of Martinez v. Texaco Trading & Transp. Inc.,*353 F.3d 758, 764 (9th Cir. 2003) (privity applies under California law “if a party’s interests are so similar to another party’s interests that the latter was the former’s virtual representative in the earlier action.” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Pearson’s action without leave to amend because amendment would have been futile. *See Cervantes v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.,*656 F.3d 1034, 1041 (9th Cir. 2011) (setting forth standard of review and explaining that a district court can dismiss without leave to amend where amendment would be futile).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Pearson’s motion for default judgment. *See Eitel v. McCool,*782 F.2d 1470, 1471-72 (9th Cir. 1986) (setting forth standard of review and factors for entry of default judgment, and noting the strong policy in favor of deciding cases on their merits); *Aldabe v. Aldabe,*616 F.2d 1089, 1092-93 (9th Cir. 1980) (affirming denial of default judgment based on “the lack of merit in” plaintiffs underlying claims).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
MEMO TO FILE: MEETING WITH TREATED WOOD COUNCIL- 7/20/2015 

DISCUSS STATUS OF TWC PETITION FOR TREATED WOOD 
J a ... cJc 1-fy/e-;; 

Se~ <::A- 'fovr')~ 

t)~1 (M-\"t,b.v-h~ 

Toss El{, oft 

..cEl/J B12ct_ 

efJfJ o{y- {_ 

ErA OR<..K 

EPA-/o~ct?.... 

F4/t,~ 

1o3- ~0~ -8" ~c{g' 

t.//(i/t rt~>s ~ lefOt. j l -..1 

'f(7"'"ctf3bv~~ 

1o'J -Yt o~.) 7 

~klL. fo1J t.a" e [:I II tJdll
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Mario Torres QUINONEZ Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-16800 Non-Argument Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

(July 7, 2017)

Karin Bethany Hoppmann, Daniel Michael Baeza, Arthur Lee Bentley, III, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Tampa, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Jose Mario Torres Quinonez, Pro Se

Before TJOFLAT, MARCUS and JULIE CARNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Victor D. Martinez, appointed counsel for Jose Mario Torres Quinonez 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 *988relative 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 Quinonez’s convictions and sentences are AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 32.2

                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 8 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 Euro Group of Companies, Inc.
(formerly ICT Technologies, Inc.), a Delaware corporation (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB/A for the period ended June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 8 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to 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 result of operations of the
     Company.



                                            /s/  Andrew Eracleous
                                            -----------------------------------
                                                 Andrew Eracleous
                                                 Chief Financial Officer

January 9, 2008
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markm an Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_________________________________________ Clerk December 26, 2012

s1217 

# Order

December 26, 2012

145435

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 145435

COA: 306792

Genesee CC: 89

- 041072

- FC

VINCENT M. KNIGHT

, Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 13, 2012 order

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
20*-/5

ELECTRONIC RECORD

COA# 04-14-00877-CR

Failure to stop and

OFFENSE: render aid

Manuel G. Munoz v. The State

STYLE: ofTexas COUNTY: Bexar

Dismissed for Lack

COA DISPOSITION: of Jurisdiction TRIAL COURT: 437th District Court

DATE:01/28/2015 Publish: NO TC CASE #: 2014CR2011

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

ELECTRONIC RECORD

STYLE: «Style1»v. «Style2» CCA#:

PRO SE Petition

FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IN CCA IS:

fcZFUAgb JUDGE: _

DATE: O'jlfyt-ljty/f' SIGNED:,

JUDGE: ^1OkAc*^ PUBLISH:

2QH-/SCCA Disposition:

DATE:

REHEARING IN CCA IS:

JUDGE:

PC:

DNP:

MOTION FOR
Exhibit
32.1






CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


AND
CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350






In
connection with this Annual Report of Maxlife Fund Corp. (the “Company”) on Form
10-K for the year ending August 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Bennett Kurtz, Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certifies to the
best of his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:




1. Such
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ending August 31, 2009, 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 such Yearly Report on Form 10-K for the year ending
August 31, 2009, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of Maxlife Fund Corp..




Dated:
November 30, 2009




MAXLIFE
FUND CORP.




By:/s/
Bennett Kurtz


Bennett
Kurtz


President,
Chief Executive Officer,
 Chief
Financial Officer,
 Principal
Accounting Officer,
 and
Director
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.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         March 7, 2022.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on March 1, 2022, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express & Priority Mail Contract 130 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2022-43, CP2022-49.                

Sean Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2022-04771 Filed 3-4-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Marco Vinicio RODRIGUEZ-GARCIA, Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-41361 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed May 24, 2017

Carmen Castillo Mitchell, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Marco Vinicio Rodriguez-Garcia, Pro Se

Before DAVIS, SOUTHWICK, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Marco Vinicio Rodriguez-Gar*809cia 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 (6th Cir. 2011). Rodriguez-Garcia 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 nonfrivo-lous 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*6th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be *809published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.