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

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 18 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.Con.Res.18
                                         Agreed to June 27, 1995        

                       One Hundred Fourth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
  the fourth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-five

                          Concurrent Resolution
    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That the Architect of the Capitol is authorized and directed to 
transfer to the custody of the Chief Justice of the United States the 
catafalque which is presently situated in the crypt beneath the rotunda 
of the Capitol so that the said catafalque may be used in the Supreme 
Court Building in connection with services to be conducted there for 
the late Honorable Warren Burger, former Chief Justice of the Supreme 
Court of the United States.
  Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.

  Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.
```
# L_2008110EN.01001601.xml

| 22.4.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 110/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.4.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 110/16

---

Corrigendum to Council Regulation (EC) No 1788/2003 of 29 September 2003 establishing a levy in the milk and milk products sector

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 270, 21 October 2003
  )

On page 132, in Annex I, ‘Reference quantities’, in point (d), ‘Period 2007/2008’:

for:

| ‘Germany | 28 143 464,000 |
| --- | --- |
| (...) |
| Austria | 2 776 895,000 ’, |

‘Germany

28 143 464,000

(...)

Austria

2 776 895,000 ’,

read:

| ‘Germany | 28 142 465,561 |
| --- | --- |
| (...) |
| Austria | 2 777 893,609 ’. |

‘Germany

28 142 465,561

(...)

Austria

2 777 893,609 ’.

---
# EUR-Lex - 32003D0861 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 32003D0861

**2003/861/EC: Council Decision of 8 December 2003 concerning analysis and cooperation with regard to counterfeit euro coins **

*
Official Journal L 325 , 12/12/2003 P. 0044 - 0044 *

Council Decision

of 8 December 2003

concerning analysis and cooperation with regard to counterfeit euro coins

(2003/861/EC)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular the third sentence of Article 123(4) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,

Having regard to the opinion of the European Central Bank(1),

Whereas:

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 1338/2001 of 28 June 2001 laying down measures necessary for the protection of the euro against counterfeiting(2), and in particular Article 5 thereof, provides for the analysis and classification of counterfeit euro coins by the Coin National Analysis Centre (CNAC) in each of the Member States and by the European Technical and Scientific Centre (ETSC). The Commission has provided, since the year 2000, the framework for coordination of the relevant actions of those technical authorities.

(2) Since October 2001, the ETSC has been carrying out its tasks on a temporary basis at the French Mint with administrative support and management provided by the Commission, in line with an Exchange of Letters between the President of the Council and the French Minister for Finance of 28 February and 9 June 2000.

(3) In order to ensure the continuity and independence of the protection of euro coins against counterfeiting, the Commission should be given responsibility for performing the activities of the ETSC and for ensuring the coordination of the competent technical authorities in their actions in this field,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The Commission shall establish the European Technical and Scientific Centre and ensure its functioning and the coordination of the activities of the competent technical authorities to protect euro coins against counterfeiting.

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to the Member States which have adopted the euro as their single currency.

Done at Brussels, 8 December 2003.

For the Council

The President

F. Frattini

(1) OJ C 202, 27.8.2003, p. 31.

(2) OJ L 181, 4.7.2001, p. 6.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

May 30, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
133365 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 133365 COA: 275013 Genesee CC: 05-017112-FC JOHN JEROME TOPP, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 19, 2007 order of the Court of Appeals is consider ed, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.

t0521 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

May 30, 2007

Clerk
II

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. J. RES. 50

To disapprove the certification of the President under section 490(b) of

the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 regarding foreign assistance for

Mexico during fiscal year 1996.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 5, 1996

Mr. D’AMATO introduced the following joint resolution; which was read twice

and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations

JOINT RESOLUTION

To disapprove the certification of the President under section

490(b) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 regarding

foreign assistance for Mexico during fiscal year 1996.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That pursuant to subsection (d) of section 490 of the For4 eign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2291j), Congress

5 disapproves the determination of the President with re6 spect to Mexico for fiscal year 1996 that is contained in

7 the certification (transmittal No. lll) submitted to
2

SJ 50 IS

1 Congress by the President under subsection (b) of that

2 section on llllll, 1996.

Æ
# C_2004222EN.01000201.xml

| 4.9.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 222/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.9.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case No COMP/M.3235 — TEIJIN/ZEON/JV)

(2004/C 222/02)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 12 August 2003, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/) free of charge. This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/) free of charge. This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form in the ‘CEN’ version of the CELEX database, under document number 32003M3235. CELEX is the computerized documentation system of European Community law. (http://europa.eu.int/celex) |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form in the ‘CEN’ version of the CELEX database, under document number 32003M3235. CELEX is the computerized documentation system of European Community law. (http://europa.eu.int/celex)

---
#### Priest Momolu V.S. SIRLEAF, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Eddie PEARSON, Warden; Commonwealth of Virginia, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 17-6798

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: November 9, 2017

Decided: November 28, 2017

Momolu V.S. Sirleaf, Appellant Pro Se.

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER .CURIAM:

Priest Momolu V.S. Sirleaf, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition without prejudice for his failure to comply with the magistrate judge’s directives. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); *Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp.,*337 U.S. 541, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order that Sir-leaf seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, deny the motion for abatement, and dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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.

*DISMISSED*
Prepared by R.R. Donnelley Financial -- Agreement of Termless Share Management Agreement


  
 Exhibit 10.2 
  
 AGREEMENT OF TERMLESS SHARE MANAGEMENT (IRREVOCABLE TRUST) 
 #____             
  

	Chisinau 
 	“12” June 2002 
 

 
 Asconi SRL, Chisinau, represented by Mr. Jitaru Constantin general director, acting on basis of the Charter, hereinafter referred to as “the Shareholder”, on one side, and Talmaci Irina acting as a natural
person, hereinafter referred to as “the Shareowner”, on the other side, hereinafter referred to collectively as “the Parties”, have entered into this Agreement as follows: 
  
 1.    SUBJECT OF THE CONTRACT 
  
 1.1    The Shareowner is obliged to deliver the 5,200 (five thousand two hundred) shares of Vitis Hincesti SA to the Shareholder for termless share management
(irrevocable trust). 
  
 1.2    The Shareholder is obliged to accept the 5,200 (five
thousand two hundred) shares of Vitis Hincesti SA from the Shareowner for termless share management (irrevocable trust). 
  
 2.    DELIVERY DATE 
  
 2.1    The date of this
agreement signing is considered as date of delivery of the shares of Vitis Hincesti SA for termless management (in irrevocable trust). 
  
 2.2    The right for termless management (irrevocable trust) of Vitis Hncesti SA shares is considered as the date when this Agreement was signed 
  

3.    DELIVERY-ACCEPTANCE FOR TERMLESS SHARE MANAGEMENT (IRREVOCABLE TRUST) 
  
 3.1    The shares of Vitis Hincesti SA are considered as quantitatively delivered for termless share management (irrevocable trust) in accordance with the statement from the share
register. 
  
 3.2    The Shareowner provides the Shareholder with all the necessary
documentation for shares. 
  
 4.    ARBITRATION 
  
 4.1    Any dispute and controversy that result or relate to the present Agreement must be resolved by means of bilateral negotiations between the
Parties. In case the Parties are unable to resolve the disputes by means of negotiations, the Arbitration Court at the plaintiff’s location shall resolve such disputes. The Arbitration judgment is final for both Parties. 

 
 5.    FORCE MAJOR 
  
 5.1    In case of Force major circumstances (fire, flood, earthquake, war or regional conflicts or other factors of social instability, having an influence on the Agreement
execution), not stipulated by this Agreement shall postpone in proportion with the period of these circumstances duration. 
 

 1 







  
 5.2    The Shareholder shall notify the
Shareowner of the force major circumstances appearance with the attested letter and a confirming document 
  
 JURIDICAL ADDRESS AND BANKING DETAILS OF THE PARTIES 
  
 
	
	
	

	 Shareowner
 	  	 Shareholder—trustee
 
	
	
	

	 Irina
Talmaci                /S/ IRINA TALMACI
 	  	 Asconi SRL                    /S/
CONSTANTIN JITARU
 
	
	
	

	 0991311037965
 	  	 F/c 231582/6700446
 
	
	
	

	 A 03045463 of 11/16/99, of. 03
 	  	 Universalbank, 280101803
 
	
	
	

	 59/2 Vasile Lupu str., apt. 14
 	  	 22240001016 Chisinau
 
	
	
	


 
 

 2
Historical Cost Indexes

The table below lists both the RSMeans Historical Cost Index based on

Jan. 1, 1993 = 100 as well as the computed value of an index based on

Jan. 1, 2011 costs. Since the Jan. 1, 2011 figure is estimated, space is left

to write in the actual index figures as they become available through

either the quarterly Means Construction Cost Indexes or as printed in

the Engineering News-Record. To compute the actual index based on Jan. 1,

2011 = 100, divide the Historical Cost Index for a particular year by the actual

Jan. 1, 2011 Construction Cost Index. Space has been left to advance the

index figures as the year progresses.

Historical Current Index Historical Current Index Historical Current Index

Cost Index Based on Cost Index Based on Cost Index Based on

Year Jan. 1, 1993 = 100 Jan. 1, 2011 = 100 Year Jan. 1, 1993 = 100 Jan. 1, 2011 = 100 Year Jan. 1, 1993 = 100 Jan. 1, 2011 = 100

Est. Actual Est. Actual Actual Est. Actual Actual Est. Actual

Oct 2011* July 1996 110.2 59.6 July 1978 53.5 28.9

July 2011* 1995 107.6 58.2 1977 49.5 26.8

April 2011* 1994 104.4 56.4 1976 46.9 25.4

Jan 2011* 185.0 100.0 100.0 1993 101.7 55.0 1975 44.8 24.2

July 2010 183.5 99.2 1992 99.4 53.7 1974 41.4 22.4

2009 180.1 97.4 1991 96.8 52.3 1973 37.7 20.4

2008 180.4 97.5 1990 94.3 51.0 1972 34.8 18.8

2007 169.4 91.6 1989 92.1 49.8 1971 32.1 17.4

2006 162.0 87.6 1988 89.9 48.6 1970 28.7 15.5

2005 151.6 81.9 1987 87.7 47.4 1969 26.9 14.5

2004 143.7 77.7 1986 84.2 45.5 1968 24.9 13.5

2003 132.0 71.4 1985 82.6 44.7 1967 23.5 12.7

2002 128.7 69.6 1984 82.0 44.3 1966 22.7 12.3

2001 125.1 67.6 1983 80.2 43.3 1965 21.7 11.7

2000 120.9 65.4 1982 76.1 41.2 1964 21.2 11.5

1999 117.6 63.6 1981 70.0 37.8 1963 20.7 11.2

1998 115.1 62.2 1980 62.9 34.0 1962 20.2 10.9

1997 112.8 61.0 1979 57.8 31.2 1961 19.8 10.7

Adjustments to Costs

The Historical Cost Index can be used to convert National Average building

costs at a particular time to the approximate building costs for some other time.

Example:

Estimate and compare construction costs for different years in the same city.

To estimate the National Average construction cost of a building in 1970, knowing

that it cost $900,000 in 2011:

INDEX in 1970 = 28.7

INDEX in 2011 = 185.0

Note: The City Cost Indexes for Canada can be used to convert

U.S. National averages to local costs in Canadian dollars.

Time Adjustment using the Historical Cost Indexes:

Index for Year A

Index for Year B

x Cost in Year B = Cost in Year A

INDEX 1970

INDEX 2011

x Cost 2011 = Cost 1970

28.7

185.0 x $900,000 = .155 x $900,000 = $139,500

The construction cost of the building in 1970 is $139,500.

*Historical Cost Index updates and other resources are provided on the following website.

http://www.reedconstructiondata.com/rsmeans/chgnotice/842339

700
EXHIBIT 32.2
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                                 18 U.S.C. 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of TOMBSTONE,  INC. (the "Company") on Form
10-KSB for the period ended  December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, Neil A. Cox,  Chief
Financial  Officer of the  Company,  certify,  pursuant  to 18 U.S.C.  1350,  as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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



Date: April 2, 2008



By:      /s/ Neil A. Cox
         --------------------------------
         Neil A. Cox
         Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 35
                                  ----------


                      COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS SERVICING LP


                             OFFICERS' CERTIFICATE
                    ANNUAL STATEMENT OF THE MASTER SERVICER


                                  CWALT, INC.
                       ALTERNATIVE LOAN TRUST 2006-OC10
             MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2006-OC10


      The undersigned does hereby certify that the undersigned is an officer
of Countrywide GP, Inc., general partner of Countrywide Home Loans Servicing
LP (the "Master Servicer"), and does hereby further certify pursuant to
Section 3.16 of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement for the above-captioned
Series (the "Agreement") that:

(i) A review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the preceding
calendar year and of the performance of the Master Servicer under the
Agreement has been made under my supervision; and

(ii) To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer
has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material
respects throughout such calendar year.




/s/ Craig Baingo                                      Dated: March 14, 2007
-----------------

Craig Baingo
Executive Vice President, Finance
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). *** The Honorable Roger T. Benitez, United States District Judge for the Southern District of California, sitting by designation. NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
TADESSE AYLEKA AYELE, Petitioner,
v. ERIC H. HOLDER JR., Attorney General, Respondent. No. 09-73112 Agency No. A028-616-106
MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted January 11, 2011 ** Seattle, Washington Before: GRABER and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges, and BENITEZ, *** District Judge. 

# FILED
JAN 19 2011 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 Petitioner Tadesse Ayleka Ayele petitions for review of an order by the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) that dismissed his appeal of an immigration judge’s denial of protection under the Un ited Nations Convention Against Torture (“CAT”) and also denied his motion to remand for an adjustment of status. Petitioner is not a member of the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Party (“EPRP”), does not provide financial s upport for the EPRP, and his name does not appear on any EPRP list. Petitioner also has not suffered harm by or with the acquiescence of the Ethiopian government, nor has he received threats of such harm. Accordingly, substantial evid ence supports the BIA’s denial of CAT protection. See Morales v. Gonzales , 478 F.3d 972, 983 (9th Cir. 2007). The BIA also did not abuse its discretion by denying Petitioner’s motion to remand, as Petitioner was statutorily ineligible for an adjustment of status or a waiver of inadmissibility. See Romero-Ruiz v. Mukasey , 538 F.3d 1057, 1062 (9th Cir. 2008). The petition for review is DENIED
.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-1997
<CASH>                                       3,157,794
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  132,961
<ALLOWANCES>                                     9,000
<INVENTORY>                                     12,801
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,821,068
<PP&E>                                         628,149
<DEPRECIATION>                                  81,924
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,392,008
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          377,348
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     5,264,374
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,251,116)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,392,008
<SALES>                                        434,142
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               434,142
<CGS>                                          306,987
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  677,151
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               188,778
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (549,996)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       800
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (550,796)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (459,842)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 4.12



 Exhibit 4.12 
 Phil Hodkinson 
 c/o BT Centre 
 81 Newgate Street 
 London 
 EC1A 7AJ 
 21 November 2011 
 Dear Phil, 
 I am writing to confirm that the Board has agreed to extend your appointment for three years from
1 February 2012. Your appointment will continue in all other respects on the terms set out in your letter of appointment dated 21 February 2011 including, in particular, that either you or the Board may give the other at least three
months’ written notice to terminate the appointment at any time. 
 As agreed by the Board at its meeting in November 2011, you will cease to be
Chairman of the Audit & Risk Committee with effect from 1 January 2012 but will continue as a member, and you will become Chairman of the Equality of Access Board with effect from 14 January 2012. You will, from the
1 January 2012, receive £62,000 a year for your services as a director and £15,000 as a member of the Audit & Risk Committee. In addition, you will receive a fee of £72,500 as Chairman of the Equality of Access
Board with effect from 14 January 2012. All other committee fees remain unchanged.
 Please sign the attached copy of this letter to confirm
your acceptance of this extension and return a copy to me. 
 Yours sincerely, 
 /s/ Andrew Parker 
 A J PARKER 
  

 
  

	To:	Andrew Parker 


	    	Company Secretary 

 I accept this extension of my appointment on the
above terms. 
  

					
	 /s/ Phil Hodkinson
	  		  	 14/12/2011

	Phil Hodkinson	  		  	Date
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Diego Armando VALDOVINOS-CALVELLO, a.k.a. Diego Valdovinos-Calvello, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-50254

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Filed May 31, 2017

D.C. No. 3:16-cr-00110-GPC, Southern District of California, San Diego

Francis Anthony DiGiacco, Ryan A. Sau-sedo, Helen H. Hong, Emily J. Keifer, Assistant U.S. Attorneys, Office of the US Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Ap-pellee

Sandra Hourani, Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant

Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, and SILVERMAN and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

Appellee’s motion to dismiss this appeal as moot (Docket Entry No. 22) is granted. This sentencing appeal is moot because appellant has fully served his custodial sentence and is not subject to a term of supervised release. *See United States v. Palomba,*182 F.3d 1121, 1123 (9th Cir. 1999).

DISMISSED.