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

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 302

To authorize the production of records by the Committee on Indian Affairs.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 26, 1996

Mr. LOTT (for himself and Mr. DASCHLE) submitted the following resolution;

which was considered and agreed to

RESOLUTION

To authorize the production of records by the Committee

on Indian Affairs.

Whereas the United States Department of Justice and counsel for the plaintiff-relators and defendant in the case of

United States of America ex rel. William I. Koch, et al.

v. Koch Industries, Inc., et al., Case No. 91–CV–763–B,

pending in the United States District Court for the

Northern District of Oklahoma, have requested that the

Committee on Indian Affairs provide them with copies of

records of the former Special Committee on Investigations of the Committee on Indian Affairs for use in connection with the pending civil action;

Whereas by the privileges of the Senate of the United States

and rule XI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, no evidence under the control or in the possession of the Senate can, by administrative or judicial process, be taken
2

SRES 302 ATS

from such control or possession but by permission of the

Senate; and

Whereas when it appears that documents, papers, and

records under the control or in the possession of the Senate may promote the administration of justice, the Senate

will take such action as will promote the ends of justice

consistently with the privileges of the Senate: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the chairman and ranking minority

2 member of the Committee on Indian Affairs, acting joint3 ly, are authorized to provide to the United States Depart4 ment of Justice, counsel for the plaintiff-relators and de5 fendant in United States of America ex rel. William I.

6 Koch, et al. v. Koch Industries, Inc., et al., and other re7 questing individuals and entities, copies of records of the

8 Special Committee on Investigations for use in connection

9 with pending legal proceedings, except concerning matters

10 for which a privilege should be asserted.

Æ
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.41

                                  DOVEBID, INC.
                                  -------------

                            AMENDMENT TO CONVERTIBLE
                          SUBORDINATED PROMISSORY NOTE

     This Amendment is entered into as of March 1, 2001, by and between Richard
Nucian ("Payee") and DoveBid, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Company"). This
Amendment amends the terms and conditions of that certain Convertible
Subordinated Promissory Note issued by the Company to Payee on March 24, 2000 in
the principal amount of $884,629.87 (the "Note").

     Whereas, Payee and the Company desire to amend the Note on the terms and
conditions set forth below;

     Now, therefore, in consideration of the foregoing and for other good and
valuable consideration (receipt and sufficiency of which is mutually
acknowledged), the parties agree as follows:

     1. Amendment. The Maturity Date, as defined on page 1 of the Note, is
hereby changed from (x) the earlier of (i) the three year anniversary date of
the Note, or (ii) an Event of Default, as defined in Section 1.3 of the Note, to
(y) the earlier of (i) the four year anniversary date of the Note, or (ii) an
Event of Default.

     2. Effect of Amendment. This Amendment will be effective as of the date
first set forth above, upon execution of this Amendment by the Company and
Payee. This Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of
which shall be deemed an original and all of which, taken together, will
constitute one and the same Amendment. Except as expressly provided above, the
terms and conditions of the Note remain in full force and effect, unmodified, as
of the date hereof.

     In Witness Whereof, Payee and the Company have executed this Amendment to
Promissory Note by persons duly authorized to do so.

THE COMPANY:  DOVEBID, INC.                 PAYEE:  RICHARD NUCIAN

By:      /s/ Anthony Capobianco             /s/ Richard Nucian
       ------------------------------       ------------------------------------
                                            (Signature of Payee)
Title:   VP and General Counsel
       ------------------------------
III

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. RES. 21

To amend Senate Resolution 338 (which establishes the Select Committee

on Ethics) to change the membership of the select committee from

members of the Senate to private citizens.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 4, 1995

Mr. HELMS submitted the following resolution; which was ordered to lie over,

under the rule

RESOLUTION

To amend Senate Resolution 338 (which establishes the Select Committee on Ethics) to change the membership

of the select committee from members of the Senate

to private citizens.

1 Resolved, That (a) subsection (a) of the first section

2 of Senate Resolution 338, agreed to July 23, 1964 (88th

3 Congress, 2d session), is amended to read as follows:

4 ‘‘(a)(1) there is hereby established a permanent select

5 committee of the Senate to be known as the Select Com6 mittee on Ethics (referred to in this resolution as the ‘Se7 lect Committee’) consisting of 6 members all of whom

8 shall be private citizens. Three members of the Select
2

•SRES 21 IS

1 Committee shall be selected by the Majority Leader and

2 3 shall be selected by the Minority Leader. Each member

3 of the Select Committee shall serve 6 years except that

4 the Majority Leader and the Minority Leader when mak5 ing their initial appointments shall each designate 1 mem6 ber to serve only 2 years and 1 member to serve only 4

7 years. At least 2 members of the Select Committee shall

8 be retired Federal judges, and at least 2 members of the

9 Select Committee shall be former members of the Senate.

10 Members of the Select Committee may be reappointed.

11 ‘‘(2) The Select Committee shall select a chairman

12 and a vice chairman from among its members.

13 ‘‘(3) Members of the Select Committee shall serve

14 without compensation but shall be entitled to travel and

15 per diem expenses in accordance with the rules and regula16 tions of the Senate.’’.

17 (b) Subsection (e) of the first section of Senate Reso18 lution 338 (as referred to in subsection (a)) is repealed.

Æ
Opinion issued May 21 , 2019

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01
- 19
- 00017
- CV

——————————— GRENFELL, SLEDGE & S TEVENS, P.L.L.C. , Appella nt V. JOHN M. O’QUINN & AS SOCIATES, PLLC D/B/A THE O’QUINN LAW FIRM AND JOHN M. O’QUINN & ASSOCIATES , LLP D/B/A O’QUINN,

LAMINACK & PIRTLE , Appell e e s
On Appeal from the Probate Court No. 2

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Ca se No. 392,247
- 410

MEMORANDUM OPINION The parties have filed a joint motion to dismiss this appeal. No opinion has issued in this appeal. Accordingly, we grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. See
T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 42.1(a)(1). We dismiss any other pending motions as moot.2 PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Goodman and Countiss

.
EXHIBIT 32.2
 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; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of
operation of the Company.
 HOMELAND SECURITY CAPITAL CORPORATIONFebruary 22, 2010
    By:
    /s/ Michael T. BriganteName:
    Michael T. BriganteTitle:
    Chief Financial Officer and
Principal Accounting Officer
# Official Journal C 105/2014

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 105 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 578 April 2014 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 105

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 578 April 2014

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | III   Preparatory acts |
| | COUNCIL |
| 2014/C 105/01 | Position (EU) No 6/2014 of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Deposit Guarantee Schemes (recast)Adopted by the Council on 3 March 2014 | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

III   Preparatory acts

COUNCIL

2014/C 105/01

Position (EU) No 6/2014 of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Deposit Guarantee Schemes (recast)Adopted by the Council on 3 March 2014

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
* Pursuant to 5 T H 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-51171

Summary Calendar

MICHAEL T., by next friend Oralee T.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

EL PASO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. EP-00-CV-252-EP

May 30, 2002

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

M ichael T. appeals from the district court’s judgment

denying h im attorneys’ fees based on a finding that he was not a

prevailing party entitled to attorneys’ fees under the Individuals

with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). He argues that, despite an

administrative ruling in favor of the defendant on all issues, he

is a prevailing party because his mother Oralee T. obtained from an1 Jason D. W. v. Houston Indep. Sch. Dist.

, 158 F.3d 205, 208

(5th Cir. 1998); S cham v. District Courts Trying Criminal Cases

, 148 F.3d 554, 557 (5th Cir. 1998).

2 Jason D. W. , 158 F.3d at 209.

3 C f. Salley v. St. Tammany Parish Sch. Bd.

, 57 F.3d 458, 468

(5th Cir. 1995) (“Danielle was given a full evaluation as a result

of the due process hearing initiated by the Salleys, but this

result could have been obtained at any time and the Salleys were

well aware of this fact.”).

2 administrative hear ing officer orders for an assessment and an

Admissions, Review, and Dismissal (ARD) committee meeting.

Whether a party is a prevailing party under the IDEA is

reviewable only for clear error. 1 “[I]n IDEA cases, a prevailing

party is one that attains a remedy that both (1) alters the legal

relationship between the school district and the handicapped child

and (2) fosters the purposes of the IDEA.” 2

We are persuaded that the district court did not clearly err

in determining that Michael was not a prevailing party. The end

result of Michael’s due process hearing was that he received a full

assessment and an ARD committee meeting; however, the district

court found that those results could have been obtained at any time

from the district but for his mother’s refusal to give consent to

the initial assessment. 3 On this record, Michael has shown no

clear error in the district court’s determination that there was no

alteration in the partie s’ legal relationship. Furthermore, we

cann ot say that the district court clearly erred in determining

that the purposes of the IDEA are not fostered by encouraging3

parents of potentially disabled children to withhold consent to an

initial assessment in order to obtain prevailing party status.

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATION


Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. 1350


(Section
302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)





In
connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Action Acquisition Corporation
(the “Company”) for the year ended June 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Junning Ma, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§1350, as adopted pursuant to §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 results of operations of the Company.




Date:
              November
      22, 2010
              By:
              /s/ Junning MaName:
      Junning MaTitle:
      President and Chief Executive
Officer


This
certification accompanies each Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of §18 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
III

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. RES. 133

Expressing the sense of the Senate that the primary safeguard for the

well-being and protection of children is the family, and that, because

the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child could undermine the rights of the family, the President should not sign and transmit

it to the Senate.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 14 (legislative day, JUNE 5), 1995

Mr. HELMS (for himself, Mr. LOTT, Mr. ABRAHAM, Mr. ASHCROFT, Mr.

COATS, Mr. CRAIG, Mr. DEWINE, Mr. FAIRCLOTH, Mr. FRIST, Mr.

GRAMM, Mr. GRAMS, Mr. HATCH, Mr. KEMPTHORNE, Mr. MCCONNELL,

Mr. MURKOWSKI, Mr. NICKLES, Mr. SANTORUM, Mr. SMITH, and Mr.

THURMOND) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on Foreign Relations

RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the Senate that the primary safeguard for the well-being and protection of children is

the family, and that, because the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child could undermine

the rights of the family, the President should not sign

and transmit it to the Senate.

Whereas the Senate affirms the commitment of the United

States to work with other nations to enhance the protection of children, the advancement of education, the eradication of disease, and the protection of human rights;
2

•S RES 133 IS

Whereas the Constitution and laws of the United States are

the best guarantees against mistreatment of children in

our country;

Whereas the laws and traditions of the United States affirm

the right of parents to raise their children and to transmit to them their values and religious beliefs;

Whereas the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the

Child, if ratified, would become the supreme law of the

land, taking precedence over State and Federal laws regarding family life;

Whereas that Convention establishes a ‘‘universal standard’’

which must be met by all parties to the Convention,

thereby inhibiting the rights of the States and the Federal Government to enact child protection and support

laws inconsistent with that standard; and

Whereas the Convention’s intrusion into national sovereignty

was manifested by the Convention’s 1995 committee report faulting the United Kingdom for permitting parents

to make decisions for their children without consulting

those children: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that—

2 (1) the United Nations Convention on the

3 Rights of the Child is incompatible with the God4 given right and responsibility of parents to raise

5 their children;

6 (2) the Convention has the potential to severely

7 restrict States and the Federal Government in their

8 efforts to protect children and to enhance family life;
3

•S RES 133 IS

1 (3) the United States Constitution is the ulti2 mate guarantor of rights and privileges to every

3 American, including children; and

4 (4) the President should not sign and transmit

5 to the Senate that fundamentally flawed Convention.

Æ
* Pursuant to 5 TH 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 5 TH CIR
. R. 47.5.4. 

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-50029 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee
v. BALTAZAR GONZALEZ-VILLA Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:07-CR-1696-ALL Before JOLLY, CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Baltazar Gonzalez-Villa raises arguments that are foreclosed by Al mendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), whic h held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. United States v. PinedaArrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir. 2007), cert. denied, 128 S. Ct. 872 (2008). United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D July 9, 2008 Charles R. Fulbruge III ClerkNo. 08-50029

2 The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 10.42


 


RESDEVCO
LTD.


 



 


Commercialization
Rights of LO2A in China


 


Resdevco
Ltd. and Wize Pharma Ltd. hereby agree that Wize Pharma’s sole rights to commercialize LO2A in China, as declared in the
letter from Resdevco, dated, September 6, 2017, shall be limited to one year if by September 6, 2018, Wize Pharma has not
signed a distribution agreement of LO2A eye drops in China.




 





	/s/ Prof. S. Dikstein	 	September 25, 2017
	Resdevco Ltd	 	Date
	 	 	 
	/s/ Wize Pharma Ltd.	 	September 25, 2017
	Wize Pharma Ltd.	 	Date



 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 





 



 




P.O.B.
3338, Jerusalem, Israel


Tel. and Fax: 972-2-6524734
III

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 221

To authorize testimony by a former Senate employee.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

FEBRUARY 1, 1996

Mr. DOLE (for himself and Mr. DASCHLE) submitted the following resolution;

which was considered and agreed to

RESOLUTION

To authorize testimony by a former Senate employee.

Whereas the plaintiff in Margaret C. Carlson v. Mike Eassa,

et al., No. MDA 7203, a civil action pending in the Superior Court of California, County of Monterey, is seeking

testimony through submission of a declaration by Amy L.

Silvestri, a former employee of the Senate on the staff of

Senator William V. Roth, Jr.;

Whereas by the privileges of the Senate of the United States

and rule XI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, no evidence under the control or in the possession of the Senate can, by administrative or judicial process, be taken

from such control or possession but by permission of the

Senate;

Whereas, when it appears that evidence under the control or

in the possession of the Senate is needed for the pro-
2

SRES 221 ATS

motion of justice, the Senate will take such action as will

promote the ends of justice consistent with the privileges

of the Senate: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That Amy L. Silvestri is authorized to sub2 mit a declaration in the case of Margaret C. Carlson v.

3 Mike Eassa, et al., except concerning matters for which

4 a privilege should be asserted.

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         165,185
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,787
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                          24,807
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 496,037
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                        371,500
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            29
<OTHER-SE>                                     116,839
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   496,037
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                13,268
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              22,142
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (8,874)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (3,106)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (5,768)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (5,768)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (7.52)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (7.52)
        

</TABLE>
----

**EXHIBIT      32.2**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION      906 OF THE**

**SARBANES-OXLEY      ACT OF 2002**

| (1)    | the                Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period                ended June 30, 2007 (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 or 78o(d)); and |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     |
| (2)    | the                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the                Company.                                                                                                                                         |

----
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Adrian BACA, Defendant-Appellant

No. 17-50163 Conference Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed December 20, 2017

Joseph H, Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Adrian Baca, Pro Se '

Before JONES, DENNIS, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Adrian Baca 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). Baca 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*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.