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

Calendar No. 387

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. J. RES. 53

Making corrections to Public Law 104–134.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

APRIL 29, 1996

Mr. HATFIELD (for himself and Mr. BYRD) introduced the following joint

resolution; which was read twice and ordered to be placed on the calendar

JOINT RESOLUTION

Making corrections to Public Law 104–134.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That:

4 (a) In Public Law 104–134, insert after the enacting

5 clause:

6 ‘‘TITLE I—OMNIBUS APPROPRIATIONS’’.

7 (b) The two penultimate undesignated paragraphs

8 under the subheading ‘‘ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS,

9 FOREST SERVICE’’ under the heading ‘‘TITLE II—RE10 LATED AGENCIES, DEPARTMENT OF AGRI-
2

SJ 53 PCS

1 CULTURE’’ of the Department of the Interior and Relat2 ed Agencies Appropriations Act, 1996, as contained in sec3 tion 101(c) of Public Law 104–134, are repealed.

4 (c) Section 520 under the heading ‘‘TITLE V—

5 GENERAL PROVISIONS’’ of the Departments of Veter6 ans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and

7 Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 1996, as con8 tained in section 101(e) of Public Law 104–134, is re9 pealed.

10 (d) Strike out section 337 under the heading

11 ‘‘TITLE III—GENERAL PROVISIONS’’ of the Depart12 ment of the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations

13 Act, 1996, as contained in section 101(c) of Public Law

14 104–134, and insert in lieu thereof:

15 ‘‘SEC. 337. The Secretary of the Interior shall

16 promptly convey to the Daughters of the American Colo17 nists, without reimbursement, all right, title and interest

18 in the plaque that in 1933 was placed on the Great South19 ern Hotel in Saint Louis, Missouri by the Daughters of

20 the American Colonists to mark the site of Fort San Car21 los.’’

22 (e) Section 21104 of Public Law 104–134 is repealed.

Calendar No. 387

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. J. RES. 53

JOINT RESOLUTION

Making corrections to Public Law 104–134.

APRIL 29, 1996

Read twice and ordered to be placed on the calendar
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6352 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 6352

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend for one year the 
  above-the-line deduction for qualified tuition and related expenses.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 17, 2016

 Mr. Grayson 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 extend for one year the 
  above-the-line deduction for qualified tuition and related expenses.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF ABOVE-THE-LINE DEDUCTION FOR QUALIFIED TUITION 
              AND RELATED EXPENSES.

    (a) In General.--Subsection (e) of section 222 of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``December 31, 2016'' and 
inserting ``December 31, 2017''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2016.
                                 <all>
```
# Official Journal L 103/2018

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 103 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6123 April 2018 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 103

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6123 April 2018

---

| Contents | | I   Legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Regulation (EU) 2018/596 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 April 2018 amending Regulation (EU) No 1295/2013 establishing the Creative Europe Programme (2014 to 2020) | 1 |
| | | DIRECTIVES |
| | * | Directive (EU) 2018/597 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 April 2018 amending Council Directive 92/66/EEC introducing Community measures for the control of Newcastle disease (
  1
  ) | 4 |
| | | DECISIONS |
| | * | Decision (EU) 2018/598 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 April 2018 providing further macro-financial assistance to Georgia | 8 |

Contents

I   Legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Regulation (EU) 2018/596 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 April 2018 amending Regulation (EU) No 1295/2013 establishing the Creative Europe Programme (2014 to 2020)

1

DIRECTIVES

*

Directive (EU) 2018/597 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 April 2018 amending Council Directive 92/66/EEC introducing Community measures for the control of Newcastle disease (
  1
  )

1

4

DECISIONS

*

Decision (EU) 2018/598 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 April 2018 providing further macro-financial assistance to Georgia

8

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Garland D. MILLER, Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-31266 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed December 7, 2017

Camille Ann Domingue, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s' Office, Western District of Louisiana, Lafayette, LA, Carol Mignonne Griffing, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Louisiana, Shreveport, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Garland D. Miller, Pro Se

Before WIENER, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Garland Miller, former federal prisoner # 13658-035, appeals the district court’s denial of the petition for a writ of coram nobis that he filed with respect to his 2008 convictions for tax evasion. He raises claims related to his restitution order, indictment, and the denial of his motion to suppress evidence.

We review the district court’s “factual findings for clear error, questions of law de novo, and the district court’s ultimate decision to deny the writ [of coram nobis] for abuse of discretion.” *Santos-Sanchez v. United States,*548 F.3d 327, 330 (5th Cir. 2008), *vacated on other grounds by*559 U.S. 1046, 130 S.Ct. 2340, 176 L.Ed.2d 559 (2010). This court’s “review is limited by the presumption of correctness of prior proceedings and the narrow range of claims cognizable in granting the” writ of coram nobis. *United States v. Dyer,*136 F.3d 417, 422 (5th Cir. 1998).

Miller has failed to show that the district court abused its discretion by denying his petition. A writ of eoram nobis is not a substitute for an appeal and will issue only if there is no other remedy available. *See id.*at 422. “[A] petitioner seeking coram nobis must exercise reasonable diligence in seeking prompt relief.” *Id.*at 427 (internal *326quotation marks and citations omitted). Miller has failed to provide sound reasons for failing to seek appropriate relief earlier with respect to his claims challenging his restitution order and indictment. *See id.*at 422. Additionally, Miller’s Fourth Amendment claim was previously addressed and denied in his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. *See United States v. Esogbue,*357 F.3d 532, 535 (5th Cir. 2004). Miller abandons any challenge to the district court’s decision concerning Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) by failing to address the district court’s holding that Rule 60(b) is not cognizable in the instant proceeding. *See Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner,*813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). Accordingly, the district court judgement is AFFIRMED and any outstanding motions are DENIED.

*

 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.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998             MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1997             APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          23,091                  23,091
<SECURITIES>                                    13,072                  13,072
<RECEIVABLES>                                   17,211                  17,211
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,034                   1,034
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                54,135                  54,135
<PP&E>                                          14,964                  14,964
<DEPRECIATION>                                   7,589                   7,589
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  61,910                  61,910
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           21,411                  21,411
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                           195                     195
<OTHER-SE>                                      39,752                  39,752
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    61,910                  61,910
<SALES>                                         17,345                  49,507
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                17,345                  49,507
<CGS>                                            5,094                  13,972
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    5,094                  13,972
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                18,372                  48,548
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (5,659)                (11,483)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       630                      35
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (6,289)                (11,518)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,289)                (11,518)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.32)                   (.60)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.32)                   (.60)
        

</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Bruce Chance RASH, also known as Chaos, Defendant-Appellant

No. 17-10425 Conference Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed December 20, 2017

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

Bruce Chance Rash, Pro Se

Before JONES, DENNIS, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.-

PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Bruce Chance Rash 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). Rash has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
EXHIBIT 32.1
                                  ------------

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

      In connection  with the Quarterly  Report of Celerity  Systems,  Inc. (the
"Company")  on Form 10-Q for the period  ended  June 30,  2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  each of
the  undersigned,  in the capacities and on the dates  indicated  below,  hereby
certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his 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 results of  operation of the
Company.

Date:    August 15, 2005                     By: /s/ Robert Legnosky
                                                 -------------------------------
                                                 Robert Legnosky
                                                 Chief Executive Officer and
                                                 Interim Chief Financial Officer

A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document  authentications,  acknowledging,  or otherwise  adopting the signature
that  appears  in typed  form  within the  electronic  version  of this  written
statement  required by Section 906, has been provided to Celerity Systems,  Inc.
and will be retained by Celerity  Systems,  Inc. and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

                                       21
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 50 (Tuesday, March 15, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 14508]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-05440]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS


Notice of Public Meeting of the Virginia Advisory Committee; 
Correction

AGENCY: Commission on Civil Rights.

ACTION: Notice; revision to meeting access code.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Commission on Civil Rights published a notice in the 
Federal Register on Friday, March 4, 2022, concerning a briefing of the 
Virginia Advisory Committee. The document contained the incorrect 
meeting access code.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sarah Villanueva, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#6615100f0a0a07081303100726131505051448010910"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="7506031c1919141b001003143500061616075b121a03">[email protected]</span></a>, (310) 474-7102.
    Correction: In the Federal Register on Monday, Friday, March 4, 
2022, in FR Document Number 2022-04628, second column on page 12425, 
correct the meeting access code to: 2760 681 1173.

    Dated: March 10, 2022.
David Mussatt,
Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
[FR Doc. 2022-05440 Filed 3-14-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 23
- 0608 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. BILLIE JO HENDERSON,

Defendant and Appellant
.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including July 5 , 2024 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 29 2024

05/29/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0608
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

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

I,
Zhang Hui, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Amendment No. 2 to the
Annual Report on Form 10-K of Tsingda eEdu Corporation for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2011 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in
this Amendment No. 2 to Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents in all
material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Tsingda
eEdu Corporation.

|                        |  |        |                              
|----------------------- |  | ------ | -----------------------------
|                        |  | By:    | /s/
 Zhang Hui               
|                       
|                        |  |        |                              
|Date:
 February 4, 2013 |  | Name:  | Zhang Hui                    
|                        |  | Title: | Chief Executive Officer      
|                        |  |        | (Principal Executive Officer)

---
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











In
      connection with the Annual Report of 310 Holdings, Inc (the "Company") on Form
      10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Nicole Wright, Chief
      Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as
      adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2001,
      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.





Dated:
      March 25, 2008





/s/
                Nicole WrightNicole
                WrightChief
                Accounting Officer
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

MIDDLE DISTRICT 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

 Respondent 

 v. 

KEVIN JAMES NEELY, 

 Petitioner 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 158 MM 2015 

 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 24th day of November, 2015, the Application for Leave to 

Exceed Word Limitations is DENIED. Petitioner is DIRECTED to file a compliant Petition 

for Allowance of Appeal within 30 days.
EX-34 (d)
(logo) ERNST & YOUNG

* Ernst & Young LLP
  220 South Sixth Street, Ste. 1400
  Minneapolis, MN 55402-4509

* Phone: (612) 343-1000
  www.ey.com

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying Report on
Assessment of Compliance with SEC Regulation AB Servicing Criteria, that U.S.
Bank National Association (the Company) complied with the servicing criteria set
forth in Item 1122 (d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB
for the Corporate Trust Asset Backed Securities platform (the Platform) as of
and for the year ended December 31, 2006, except for criteria 1122 (d)(1)(i),
1122 (d)(1)(iii), 1122 (d)(2)(i) through 1122 (d)(2)(vii), 1122 (d)(3)(i)
through 1122 (d)(3)(iv), and 1122 (d)(4)(iv) through 1122 (d)(4)(xv), which the
Company has determined are not applicable to the activities performed by them
with respect to the servicing platform covered by this report. Management is
responsible for the Company's compliance with those servicing criteria. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertion about the
Company's compliance with the servicing criteria based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining,
on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the applicable
servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered
necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of less than
all of the individual asset backed transactions and securities that comprise the
Platform, testing of less than all of the servicing activities related to the
Platform, and determining whether the Company processed those selected
transactions and performed those selected activities in compliance with the
servicing criteria. Furthermore, our procedures were limited to the selected
transactions and servicing activities performed by the Company during the period
covered by this report. Our procedures were not designed to determine whether
errors may have occurred either prior to or subsequent to our tests that may
have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company
during the period covered by this report for the selected transactions or any
other transactions. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis
for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the
Company's compliance with the servicing criteria.

In our opinion, management's assertion that the Company complied with the
aforementioned servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31,
2006, for the Corporate Trust Asset Backed Securities platform is fairly stated,
in all material respects.

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

February 26, 2007

A Member Practice of Ernst & Young Global