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

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5343 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5343

To protect State and Federal judges by clarifying that Federal judicial 
    immunity covers all acts undertaken by judges pursuant to legal 
                               authority.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 10, 2006

 Mr. Gohmert introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To protect State and Federal judges by clarifying that Federal judicial 
    immunity covers all acts undertaken by judges pursuant to legal 
                               authority.

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

SECTION 1. CLARIFICATION OF JUDICIAL IMMUNITY.

    (a) In General.--Chapter 21 of title 28, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 464. Judicial immunity for administrative functions
    ``(a) In General.--Subject to subsection (b), each justice or judge 
of the United States and each justice or judge of a State shall have 
immunity against any Federal civil cause of action arising from or as a 
result of the discharge of any legislatively or constitutionally 
authorized duty, unless such justice or judge, in the course of 
discharging such duty, was committing a crime.
    ``(b) Other Immunity.--This section shall not preempt any Federal 
or State law providing immunity in addition to the immunity provided by 
this section.''.
    (b) Chapter Analysis.--The chapter analysis for chapter 21 of title 
28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

``464. Judicial immunity for administrative functions.''.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT
      31




CERTIFICATION





I,
      Hideyuki Shiraishi, certify that:





1.
      I have
      reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Amanasu Technologies
      Corporation;





2.
      Based
      on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material
      fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under
      which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
      covered by this report;





3.
      Based
      on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
      included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
      condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and
      for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;





4.
      I am
      responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures
      (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant
      and we have:





a)
      Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
      controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that
      material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
      subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
      during the period in which this report is being prepared;


b)
      Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
      procedures and presented in this report my conclusions about the effectiveness
      of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
      by this report based on such evaluation; and


c)
      Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over
      financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal
      quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
      affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
      and





5.
      I have
      disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and
      the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing
      the equivalent function):








a)
      All
      significant deficiencies and material weakness in the design or operation of
      internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
      adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and
      report financial data; and


b)
      Any
      fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
      who
      have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls over financial
      reporting.








Date:
      November 10, 2005





/s/
      Hideyuki Shiraishi


Hideyuki
      Shiraishi


CEO,
      CFO,
      CAO
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5215 

To designate the United States bankruptcy courthouse located at 271 Cadman 

Plaza East, Brooklyn, New York, as the ‘‘Conrad Duberstein United 

States Bankruptcy Courthouse’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 26, 2006 

Mr. TOWNS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To designate the United States bankruptcy courthouse located at 271 Cadman Plaza East, Brooklyn, New York, 

as the ‘‘Conrad Duberstein United States Bankruptcy 

Courthouse’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

4 The United States bankruptcy courthouse located at 

5 271 Cadman Plaza East, Brooklyn, New York, shall be 

6 known and designated as the ‘‘Conrad Duberstein United 

7 States Bankruptcy Courthouse’’. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
2 

•HR 5215 IH 

1 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

2 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

3 paper, or other record of the United States to the United 

4 States courthouse referred to in section 1 shall be deemed 

5 to be a reference to the ‘‘Conrad Duberstein United States 

6 Bankruptcy Courthouse’’. 

Æ 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
Exhibit 99.1

CERTIFICATIONS

I,
Charles S. Leavell, certify that:

1.  I
have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Renaissance Entertainment Corporation.

2.  Based
on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual report;

3.  Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;

4.  The
registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:



5.  The
registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



6.  The
registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this annual report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors
that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material
weaknesses.

Date:
March 26 2003

| |  | /s/CHARLES S. LEAVELLCharles S. Leavell Chief Executive and Chief Financial Officer
| |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------



The
undersigned hereby certifies, for the purposes of Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title XVIII of the United States Code, in his capacity as an officer of Renaissance
Entertainment Corporation, that, to his knowledge, the Annual Report of Renaissance Entertainment Corporation on Form 10-KSB for the year
ended December 31, 2002, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13a of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such report fairly represents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of Renaissance Entertainment Corporation.

| |  | /s/CHARLES S. LEAVELLCharles S. Leavell Chief Executive and Chief Financial Officer
| |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:
March 26 2003



QuickLinks
PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP IS PROTECTING THE UNITED STATES FROM TERRORISM

“When it comes to terrorism, we will do whatever is necessary to protect our Nation.” – President Donald J. 

Trump

THE PATH TO VICTORY: President Donald J. Trump is releasing a new National Strategy for

Counterterrorism that will protect American citizens and interests at home and abroad.

 Today, President Trump is releasing his National Strategy for Counterterrorism, the United 

States’ first robust and fully-articulated strategy on counterterrorism since 2011.

 The Administration is outlining a new approach to counter and prevent the evolving terrorist 

threat, making it clear that we will take all steps necessary to keep our country safe.

 President Trump’s National Strategy for Counterterrorism focuses on:

o Pursuing terrorists to their source;

o Isolating terrorists from their sources of support;

o Modernizing and integrating the United States’ counterterrorism tools;

o Protecting American infrastructure and enhancing resilience;

o Countering terrorist radicalization and recruitment; and

o Strengthening the counterterrorism abilities of our international partners.

A NEW APPROACH: The new strategy builds on lessons learned from past counterterrorism 

efforts and offers a new path toward strengthening the security of Americans.

 The new strategy focuses the United States on countering all terrorists with the intent and 

ability to harm our country.

 The strategy emphasizes the use of all of America’s tools to prevent and counter terrorism, 

strengthening military approaches while delivering a new emphasis on non-military 

capabilities.

o Many United States Government agencies have important roles to play, including our 

law enforcement, diplomatic, and treasury officials.

 The strategy places America first, emphasizing strong borders, strengthening security at 

points of entry, protecting critical infrastructure, and facilitating preparedness.

 However, America First does not mean America alone. The new strategy commits us to 

expand our partnerships at home and abroad to encourage partners’ assistance in 

counterterrorism activities.

o This includes working with our North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Allies 

and partners.

DEFEATING TERROR: Thanks to President Trump’s leadership, the United States has accelerated 

efforts to defeat terrorists and protect the United States from global threats.

 Under President Trump, the United States and global partners have decimated ISIS and 

pushed the group to the brink of extinction in Iraq and Syria.

o Nearly all of the territory previously held by ISIS has been recaptured.

o More than 7.5 million people have been freed from the group’s oppressive rule.

 At President Trump’s urging, NATO members agreed to strengthen the alliance’s 

counterterrorism actions and capabilities. 

 In December 2017, President Trump issued a new National Security Strategy that focused, in 

part, on combatting terrorism.
1

 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

 ANN ARBOR, MI 48105

 

September 23, 2010

 OFFICE OF

AIR AND RADIATION

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: BASELINE FLEET FILE IN SUPPORT OF THE NOTICE OF INTENT

FROM: A. Neam, Assessment and Standards Division

TO: EPA/NHTSA Joint Rulemaking to Establish Light-duty Vehicle GHG 

Emissions Standards and CAFE Standards for Model Year 2017 and Later; Docket 

Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0799

This memo was created to document the submission of the baseline fleet file into the 

docket. The file name to the baseline fleet file is “2010_09_23 2008_2020 AND 2025 

Prod Sum Median Fuel Price For Docket.xls”.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration

          - [TA-W-65,339]

      ( print page 10305)    
Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on February 23, 2009 in response to a worker petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers of Pentagon Technologies Group, Inc., Portland, Oregon.

The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated.

Signed at Washington, DC, this 24th day of February 2009.

Richard Church,

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

 [FR Doc. E9-5050 Filed 3-9-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
#### Freeman v. Green

OP 16-0645

11/15/16

Denied

Original Proceeding Habeas Corpus
#### Ronald Law et al., Appellants, v New York City Transit Authority et al., Respondents.

[719 NYS2d 54]

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Joseph Giamboi, J.), entered June 30, 1999, dismissing the complaint at the close of evidence for failure to make out a prima facie case, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Even assuming that defendant City was negligent in its placement of traffic control signs at the intersection where the accident occurred, the evidence fails to show that such negligence proximately caused the accident. The accident occurred when an unidentified hit-and-run driver illegally changed into plaintiffs’ right-hand lane of traffic from a left-turn-only lane of traffic. Plaintiffs’ expert opined that the hit- and-run driver’s illegal change of lanes was impelled by his sudden and unexpected finding that he was in the wrong lane because of signs that did not give sufficient advance notice that vehicles in the left-hand lane must turn left. This was impermissible speculation where the only evidence of the other driver’s actions was plaintiffs’ testimony acknowledging unawareness of the other driver’s presence until he came up along side plaintiffs’ vehicle on the left and moved ahead. There is no reason to assume the signs had causal effect on this particular accident *(see, Cassano v Hagstrom,*5 NY2d 643, 645-646). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Rubin and Saxe, JJ.
exv10w38







Exhibit 10.38




THIRD AMENDMENT OF LEASE



     THIS AGREEMENT, made as of the 7th day of August, 1991, between 401 PARK AVENUE
SOUTH ASSOCIATES, a New York Partnership having an office at 527 Madison Avenue, Suite 2600, New
York, New York (“Landlord”), and HEALTH MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, INC., A New York Corporation having an
office at 401 Park Avenue South, New York, New York (“Tenant”).



W
I T N E S S E T H :




     WHEREAS, Landlord and Tenant entered into an Agreement of Lease dated September 24, 1982 as
amended and modified by a First Amendment of Lease dated January 6, 1986, and a Second Amendment of
Lease dated February 28, 1990, covering certain premises on the 10th, 11th
and 12th floors in the building known as 401 PARK AVENUE SOUTH in the City, County and
State of New York (said agreement of Lease, as amended, being hereinafter called the “Lease”); and



     WHEREAS, the parties hereto desire to amend the Lease in the respects and upon the terms and
conditions hereinafter set forth.



     NOW, THEREFORE, in the consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) paid by each of the
parties hereto to the other (the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged) and of
other good and valuable consideration, including the covenants and understandings herein contained,
it is hereby agreed as follows:




	 	1.	 	On March 1, 1992, the entire ninth floor of the
Building shall be added to the Demises Premises.
	 
	 	2.	 	The annual rent shall be changed to $473,190 commencing
on July 1, 1992 and to $581,154 commencing on July 1, 1994.
	 
	 	3.	 	The 14.044 percent in Article 39 of the Lease shall be
changed to 18.209 percent on July 1, 1992 and to 22.374 percent on March 1,
1994. (04/01/01 to 18.995%)
	 
	 	4.	 	The figure 29,600 in Article 40 (c) of the Lease shall
be changed to 38, 350 on July 1, 1992 and to 47,100 on March 1, 1994.
	 
	 	5.	 	The amount $59,807.35 contained in Article 40 (g) of
the Lease shall be changed to $95,166.43.
	 
	 	6.	 	The amount $28,569.80 contained in Article 40 (h) of
the Lease shall be changed to $45,460.25.
	 
	 	7.	 	Except as heretofore and hereby amended, all of the
terms, conditions and covenants in the Lease, including, without
limitation, the provisions of the Lease relating to additional rent shall
remain in full force and effect.




 









 










IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have duly executed this Agreement as of the day and
year first above written.




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 

	 	 	401 PARK AVENUE SOUTH ASSOCIATES	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	BY:
	 	/s/ Stephen J. Meringoff
 

	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	HEALTH MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, INC.	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	BY:
	 	/s/ Vincent Hartley
STATE of North Carolina v. John Wesley MIDDLETON

No. COA18-131

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: August 6, 2019

NO ERROR.
Print	

The core mission of the ODNI is to lead the IC in intelligence integration. Intelligence integration means synchronizing collection, analysis, and counterintelligence so that they are fused, effectively operating as one team. Our vision is a nation made more secure by a fully integrated, agile, resilient, and innovative Intelligence Community that exemplifies America’s values.

### ODNI's NATIONAL INTEGRATION CENTERS 

The Intelligence Community maintains several national centers that integrate and coordinate the activities of the entire IC, or in some cases, broader U.S. Government activities.  At ODNI these include the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), the National Counterintelligence and Security Center (NCSC), the National Counterproliferation and Biosecurity Center (NCBC), the Cyber Threat Intelligence Integration Center (CTIIC) and the Foreign Malign Influence Center (FMIC). 

 

 

Many other agencies also have internal mission centers that integrate and coordinate their agency’s efforts in a certain mission area, such as CIA’s Counterterrorism Mission Center and DIA’s regional centers.

 

Our success as a Community is measured as much by our defense of America’s values as it is by the execution of our intelligence mission.

### AN INTEGRATED COMMUNITY

IC elements support policymakers in civilian departments, the U.S. military, Congress, and tribal/local/state governments. The breadth and scope of products and other support to customers vary greatly.

A number of policymaking departments have embedded intelligence organizations that provide direct and tailored support: the Department of State, the Department of the Treasury, the Department of Energy, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice, and the Department of Defense.

The Department of Defense oversees multiple IC organizations, such as the Defense Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency, the National Reconnaissance Organization, and the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency. The military services each have intelligence organizations that provide tailored support.

Only CIA and the ODNI do not report to a policy department and as such provide the broadest support to decision makers across the national security enterprise.
Opinion issued August 31, 2018

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01 - 1 8 - 00 65 3 - CV NO. 01 - 18 - 00725 - CV

——————————— IN RE BOBBY B. DASH , R ela t or
O riginal Proceeding s on Petition s for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION Relator, Bobby B. Dash , proceeding pro se, filed two related mandamus petitions, with the first one s eek ing to compe l the respondent dist ri ct judge to amend his orders denying relator’s motion s for summary judgment and motion for protective order on discovery in the underlying trial court proceeding
. 1 This Court

1 The underlying proceeding is Bobby B. Dash v. Parc Lake Estates Homeowners Association, Inc., and Carl Edward Bovermann, John Mgbere, Tracy Hermann , Cause No. 2017

- 16096, in the 152nd District Court, Harris County, the Honorable2

assigned th is first petition to appellate cause number 01

- 18

- 00653

- CV and requested and received a response. Then r elator file d a second pro se mandamus petition seeking to compel the resp ondent dis tri ct judge to allow a n appeal or to grant a final judgment and he also requests an opinion on Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 166a(e) to determine whether the denial of his summary judgment motions is appealable
. This Court assigned this second petition to 01

- 18

- 00725

- CV, but no response has been requested. We deny both mandamus petitions. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 52.8(a), (d). PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Keyes and Bland
.

Robert K. Schaffer presiding. This Court previously dismissed for want of jurisdiction as moot relator’s similar mandamus petition. See In re Bobby B. Dash , No. 01

- 18

- 00350

- CV, 2018 W L 3580944, at *1 (Tex. App.

— Houston [1st Dist.] July 26, 2018, orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (mem. op.) (dismissing petition seeking to compel the respondent to rule on relator’s pending motion s).