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

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2279 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2279

   To amend title 38, United States Code, to make discretionary the 
 financial reporting requirements applicable to recipients of certain 
                          need-based benefits.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                July 13 (legislative day, July 11), 1994

 Mr. Rockefeller (by request) introduced the following bill; which was 
     read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend title 38, United States Code, to make discretionary the 
 financial reporting requirements applicable to recipients of certain 
                          need-based benefits.

    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 ``Veterans' Benefits Income 
Verification Amendments of 1994''.

SEC. 2. RELAXATION OF MANDATORY ELIGIBILITY VERIFICATION REPORTING 
              REQUIREMENTS.

    (a) Dependency and Indemnity Compensation for Parents.--Section 
1315(e) of title 38, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) in the first sentence--
                    (A) by striking out ``shall'' and inserting in lieu 
                thereof ``may''; and
                    (B) by striking out ``each year'' and inserting in 
                lieu thereof ``for a calendar year''; and
            (2) in the second sentence--
                    (A) by striking out ``revised''; and
                    (B) by striking out ``the estimated''.
    (b) Pension.--Section 1506 of such title is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (2)--
                    (A) by striking out ``shall'' and inserting in lieu 
                thereof ``may''; and
                    (B) by striking out ``each year'' and inserting in 
                lieu thereof ``for a calendar year''; and
            (2) in paragraph (3)--
                    (A) by striking out ``estimated'' each time it 
                appears; and
                    (B) by striking out ``such applicant's or 
                recipient's estimate of''.

                                 <all>
```
Exhibit
      32.1








**The
      following certification is provided by the undersigned Chief Executive Officer
      and Chief Financial Officer of Clark, Inc. on the basis of such officers’
knowledge and belief for the sole purpose of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section
      1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
      2002.**





**CERTIFICATION**




In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Clark, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2006 as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 1, 2006 (the “Report”), I,
      Tom Wamberg, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer and I, Jeffrey
      W.
      Lemajeur, Chief Financial Officer, of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant
      to
      18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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, as amended; and(2)
            The
                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
                Company.











/s/
      Tom Wamberg


Name:  Tom
      Wamberg


Title:
      Chairman of the Board


and
      Chief
      Executive Officer


Date:
      August 1, 2006











/s/
      Jeffrey W. Lemajeur


Name:  Jeffrey
      W. Lemajeur


Title:
      Chief Financial Officer


Date:
      August 1, 2006




















*A
      signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
      provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to
      the
      Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
      request.*
<PAGE>

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

The undersigned officer of Veridien Corporation (the "Company") hereby certifies
to my knowledge that the Company's quarterly report on Form 10-QSB for the
quarter ended September 30, 2003 (the "Report"), as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission the on date hereof, fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company. This certification is provided solely pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, and shall not be deemed to be part of the Report or "filed" for any
purpose whatsoever.

Date:  November 14, 2003            Name: /s/ Sheldon C. Fenton
                                          ----------------------------
                                           Sheldon C. Fenton
                                    Title: Chief Executive Officer and
                                           Acting Chief Financial Officer
#### In the Matter of Ousmane D., Appellant, v Halimatou B., Respondent.

[54 NYS3d 14]

Order, Family Court, Bronx County (John J. Kelley, J.), entered on or about August 26, 2015, which, among other things, denied petitioner father’s petition for sole legal and physical custody of the parties’ minor child, and granted re*510spondent mother’s cross petition for custody and relocation, with parenting time to the father, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Family Court’s determination that the child’s best interests would be served by awarding sole legal and physical custody of the child to the mother and allowing the mother to relocate with the child to the Gambia has a sound and substantial basis in the record *(Eschbach v Eschbach,*56 NY2d 167 [1982] [custody]; *Matter of Tropea v Tropea,*87 NY2d 727, 740-741 [1996] [relocation]; *see Matter of David J.B. v Monique H.,*52 AD3d 414, 415 [1st Dept 2008]; *see also Matter of Alaire K.G. v Anthony P.G.,*86 AD3d 216, 219 [1st Dept 2011]). Where, as here, Family Court had the benefit of a full evidentiary hearing, and its determination rests largely on the witnesses’ demeanor and the credibility of their testimony, “its findings must be accorded the greatest respect” *(Matter of Elissa A. v Samuel B.,*123 AD3d 638, 639 [1st Dept 2014] [internal quotation marks omitted]).

The evidence adduced at the hearing established that the mother has been the child’s primary caretaker since his birth, and that the father played, at best, a peripheral role in the child’s life. After moving out of the parties’ apartment when the child was three months old, the father did not have any contact with him again until he was two years old. Even then, visitation was sporadic. When the child was almost three years old, the mother, who is originally from West Africa, moved with the child to the Gambia, where she has family, including the child’s grandmother, living close by. As the court noted, at the time of the hearing, the child was living in the Gambia in a stable, loving home with the mother, his stepfather, and his half brother; he had his own bedroom and bathroom, and ample room to play; he attended a respected international school; and, unlike in New York, the mother had a work schedule that allowed her to spend significant time with her children. The father’s claims that the mother tried to alienate him from the child are not supported by the record.

We have considered the father’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

Concur—Sweeny, J.P., Renwick, Andrias, Feinman and Gesmer, JJ.
# DLA Distribution employee honored at retirement after 42 years of federal service

/ Published Oct. 19, 2021
NEW CUMBERLAND, Pa., 
Wesley Ingram, material handler at Defense Logistics Agency Distribution Europe, is retiring after 42 years of federal service.

“On behalf of everyone at the Agency, I thank you for your loyalty and devoted support of the Department of Defense mission,” wrote Vice Adm. Michelle C Skubic, Director DLA, in a letter to Ingram thanking him for his service.

Ingram’s service began when he enlisted in the U.S. Army in June 1970. He would remain with the Army, attaining the rank of Sgt. Maj., until July 2000. Ingram went on to serve with Morale Welfare and Recreation until 2008, and then joined DLA Distribution as a material handler.

During his 13 years with DLA Distribution Ingram was recognized as one of them most dedicated, responsible, and dependable employees. Drawing on years of leadership experience from military service Ingram fostered an environment of teamwork that utilized every possible aspect of his team’s diverse talents.

Through his example and personal drive, he earned the acclaim of his fellow DDDE employees. Over his career as a material handler Ingram processed over 100,000 material release orders with a personal 98% accuracy rating. His dedication to the task at hand and devotion to accomplishing the mission was a leading factor to the success of DDDE in supporting the warfighter. Ingram would always volunteer to assist others in completing tasks accurately and on time.

For his dedication to duty, selfless service, and superior service, Ingram was awarded the DLA Distinguished Career Service award.

                Wesley Ingram’s service began when he enlisted in the U.S. Army in June 1970. He would remain with the Army, attaining the rank of Sgt. Maj., until July 2000. Ingram went on to serve with Morale Welfare and Recreation until 2008, and then joined Defense Logistics Agency Distribution as a material handler.                            DLA Distribution employee honored at retirement after 42 years of federal service                            Wesley Ingram’s service began when he enlisted in the U.S. Army in June 1970. He would remain with the Army, attaining the rank of Sgt. Maj., until July 2000. Ingram went on to serve with Morale Welfare and Recreation until 2008, and then joined Defense Logistics Agency Distribution as a material handler.            SHARE IMAGE:Download ImageImage DetailsPhoto By: DLA Distribution Public AffairsVIRIN: 211019-D-D0441-0002
EXHIBIT 32.2
certification pursuant to 18 u.s.c. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of thesarbanes-oxley act of 2002
The undersigned officer of Veridien Corporation (the “Company”) hereby certifies to my knowledgethat the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 (the“Report”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission the on date hereof, fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. This certification isprovided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and shall not be deemed to be part of the Report or “filed” for anypurpose whatsoever.     Date:May 31, 2005 Name: /s/ Sheldon C. Fenton                 Sheldon C. Fenton   Title: Chief Executive Officer and              Acting Chief Financial Officer
29
*December 13, 2017*

2017-Ohio-8990.]

2017-1742.

#### State v. Mick.

Erie App. No. E-16-074, 2017-Ohio-8922. On appellant’s motion for stay of attorney’s contempt sentence. Motion denied.

Kennedy and Fischer, JJ., dissent.

O’Neill, J., not participating.
No. 12-6797.

#### Abraham *v.*UAW International Union et al.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
# 36 km 12 km4thhighest8-hrO3Max24-hrPM2.5AnnualAveragePM2.5AnnualAveragePM10AnnualAveragePSO4AnnualAveragePNO3AnnualAveragePNH4AnnualAveragePOAAnnualAveragePECAnnualAverageSOAAnnualAverageFPRM+FCRS8thHighest24-HourPM2.5
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , 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.

October 25, 2013

h1022 

# Order

Clerk October 25, 2013

147230

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 147230

COA: 312664

Oakland CC: 2011

- 235676

- FH

TERENCE DARRYLE JENKINS,

Defendant

- Appellant.

____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 9, 2013 order of

the Court of Appeals is considere d, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that

the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

M ARKMAN , J. For the reasons set forth in my separate dissenting statement in

People v Alexander , 494 Mich 876, 878

- 879 (2013), I would reman d this case to the trial

court and require that court to articulate reasons explaining and justifying its specific

upward departure from the sentencing guideline range in this case in accordance with

People v Smith , 482 Mich 292 (2008).

M C C ORMACK , J., joins the statement of M ARKMAN , J.
#### Com. v. Green10

05/03/2016

28 WAL (2016)

10

. Justice DONOHUE and WECHT did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.

Denied

Pa.Super., 131 A.3d 82
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2271 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2271

To provide for the transfer of certain tuna fishing vessels documented 
               in the United States to foreign registry.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                 July 1 (legislative day, June 7), 1994

  Mr. Breaux introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
   referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide for the transfer of certain tuna fishing vessels documented 
               in the United States to foreign registry.

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

SECTION 1. TRANSFER OF REGISTRY FOR CERTAIN FISHING VESSELS.

    (a) In General.--The transfer of registry of a tuna fishing vessel 
which is an agreement vessel documented under the laws of the United 
States to foreign registry shall not be treated, for purposes of the 
Merchant Marine Act, 1936, or any other law of the United States, as--
            (1) a disposition vessel, or
            (2) a failure to meet any substantial obligation under an 
        agreement entered into between the owner or operator of the 
        vessel and the Secretary,
if the vessel continues to be owned, directly or indirectly, by a 
United States person and to be operated in compliance with section 307 
of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1417).
    (b) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
            (1) any term defined in section 607(k) of the Merchant 
        Marine Act, 1936 (46 App. U.S.C. 1177(k)) that is used in this 
        section shall have the meaning given that term in that section; 
        and
            (2) the term ``United States person'' has the meaning given 
        that term in section 7701(a)(30) of the Internal Revenue Code 
        of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 7701(a)(30)).
    (c) Effective Date.--This section shall apply to any transfer of 
registry effected before January 1, 1996.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 31.1RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATIONS, ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEYACT OF 2002I, Sheldon C. Fenton certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Veridien Corporation;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have: a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;  b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  c) disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s most recentfiscal quarter (the small business issuer’s fourth physical quarter in the case of anannual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.5. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small businessissuer’s auditors and the audit committee of small business issuer’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe small business issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and     b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.     Date: November 14, 2006                     /s/ Sheldon C. Fenton                    Sheldon C. Fenton,                   Chief Executive Officer  
21
Exhibit 32.1

 

**                                                THE MONARCH CEMENT COMPANY                                                   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 The Monarch Cement Company (the"Company") onForm 10-Qfor the quarter ended September 30,2008, as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the datehereof(the "Report"), the undersigned, in the capacity and on the dateindicatedbelow, hereby certifiespursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuanttoSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that:

(1)   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to The MonarchCement Company and will be retained by The MonarchCement Company and furnishedto the Securitiesand Exchange Commission or itsstaff upon request.

 

Dated:  November 7, 2008

|   |   | /s/ Walter H. Wulf, Jr.                 Walter H. Wulf, Jr.    President and     Chairman of the Board 
                                                   

 

 

  |
|--------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
No. 09-10808.

#### Bobby Len Franklin, Petitioner v. Mark Chatterton, et al.

562 U.S. 824, 131 S. Ct. 383,

178 L. Ed. 2d 18,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6491.

October 4, 2010.

Motion of petitioner for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied.
#### Juan Carlos Rodriguez De La Cruz, Respondent, v Eugene K. Dalmida et al., Appellants.

[54 NYS3d 279]

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Laura G. Douglas, J.), entered November 2, 2015, which granted plaintiff’s motion to compel certain discovery to the extent of directing defendants to produce the documents for an in camera review, and denied defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiff’s negligent entrustment claim, and order, same court and Justice, entered February 24, 2016, which granted plaintiff’s motion seeking sanctions for failure to exchange discovery, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, defendants’ motion to dismiss the negligent entrustment claim granted, plaintiffs’ related discovery request denied, and the sanction order vacated.

*564Defendant Eugene K. Dalmida, an employee of Verizon, was using its van with permission and within the scope of his employment when the accident occurred. Verizon’s vicarious liability in light of those admitted facts renders plaintiff’s cause of action for negligent entrustment academic, and subject to dismissal *(see Karoon v New York City Tr. Auth.,*241 AD2d 323 [1st Dept 1997]). Plaintiff’s claim that this case is an exception to the general rule, since punitive damages are sought, is without merit given that plaintiff has neither made a claim for punitive damages, nor pled facts sufficient to support such a claim *(compare Cristallina v Christie, Manson & Woods Intl.,*117 AD2d 284, 295 [1st Dept 1986]). With regard to the discovery issue, upon this appeal, plaintiff does not contest that he is not entitled to production of the subject material if the negligent entrustment cause of action is dismissed. While we are troubled by defendant’s neglect of its discovery obligations, since we are dismissing the negligent entrustment cause of action, the related discovery request is denied.

Concur— Friedman, J.P., Moskowitz, Manzanet-Daniels, Kapnick and Webber, JJ.