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

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5648 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5648

  To amend the Older Americans Act of 1965 to facilitate interaction 
      between students and older individuals with limited English 
                              proficiency.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 20, 2006

   Mrs. Davis of California introduced the following bill; which was 
        referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Older Americans Act of 1965 to facilitate interaction 
      between students and older individuals with limited English 
                              proficiency.

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

SECTION 1. AMENDMENT.

    Section 321(a)(21) is amended by striking ``school-age children and 
older individuals, including'' and inserting ``students and older 
individuals, including services to older individuals with limited 
English proficiency and''.
                                 <all>
```
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

June 3, 2019

No. 04-17-00645-CR

Gloria R. PROO,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 379th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013CR2757A

Honorable Ron Rangel, Judge Presiding

ORDER

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Irene Rios, Justice

The panel has considered the Appellant’s Motion for Rehearing, and the motion is 

DENIED. 

_________________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 3rd day of June, 2019.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

Silberstein Ungar, PLLC CPAs and Business Advisors

Phone (248) 203-0080

Fax (248) 281-0940

30600 Telegraph Road, Suite 2175

Bingham Farms, MI 48025-4586

www.sucpas.com

 

October 19, 2011

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

Board of Directors

OncoSec Medical Incorporated

San Diego, California

 

To Whom It May Concern:

 

Silberstein Ungar, PLLC hereby consents to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements No. 333-175779 on Form S-1 and Registration Statement No. 333-176537 on Form S-8 of our report dated November 15, 2010, with respect to the July 31, 2010 and 2009 and for the period from February 8, 2008 (date of inception) through July 31, 2010 financial statements of OncoSec Medical Incorporated and subsidiary, included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended July 31, 2010.

 
| Sincerely,                    |   |
|-------------------------------|--------|
|                          |   |
| /s/   Silberstein Ungar, PLLC |   |
|                          |   |
| Silberstein   Ungar, PLLC     |   |
|                          |   |
| Bingham   Farms, Michigan     |   |

 

----
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

RAQUEL GONZALEZ,

 Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

 Appellee.

§

§

§

§

§

§ 

No. 08-16-00287-CR

Appeal from the

County Court at Law Number One

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC# 20090C08960)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was error in the 

judgment. We therefore reverse the conviction and render judgment dismissing the DWI case 

against Appellant, in accordance with the opinion of the Court. This decision shall be certified 

below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2018.

GINA M. PALAFOX, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Palafox, JJ.

Rodriguez, J., dissenting
Exhibit 13.1





CERTIFICATION


PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-14(B) UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934








In connection with the Annual Report of China Networks International Holdings Ltd. (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Li Shuangqing, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, 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 of the Company as of December 31, 2009 and results of operations of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2009.








/s/ Li ShuangqingName:
Li ShuangqingTitle:

Date:
Chief Executive Officer

June 30, 2010








The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of this annual report or as a separate disclosure document.
EXHIBIT
32.1




CERTIFICATIONS
PURSUANT TO




SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




(18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350)




Pursuant
to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of
section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersigned
officer of Accelerated Acquisitions V, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the
"Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge,
that:




The
annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008 (the
"Form 10-K") of the Company 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 Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




Date:
      March 24, 2009/s/ Timothy J. NeherTimothy
      J. NeherPrincipal
      Executive Officer and PrincipalAccounting
      Officer




A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to ACCELERATED
ACQUISITIONS V, INC. and will be retained by ACCELERATED ACQUISITIONS V, INC.
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
EXHIBIT
32.01








CERTIFICATION
OF PRESIDENT 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 Morgan Stanley Smith Barney Charter
Campbell L.P. (the “Partnership”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September
30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the “Report”), I, Walter Davis, President of Demeter Management LLC, the
general partner of the Partnership, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to
the best of my 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 operations of the
      Partnership.































By:
            /s/Walter
      DavisName:
            Walter
      DavisTitle:
            President
      ofDemeter
      Management LLC,general
      partner of the registrantDate:
            November
      12, 2009
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2009-1252

U.S. PHILIPS CORPORATION,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

IWASAKI ELECTRIC COMPANY LTD.,

Defendant!Third-Party PlaintiffAppellant,

v.

KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N.V.,

PHILIPS ELECTRONICS NORTH AMERICA CORP.,

and PHILIPS INTERNATIONAL B.V.,

Third-Party Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of

New York in case no. 03-CV-0172, Judge P. Kevin Castel.

ON MOTION

ORDER

U.S. Philips Corporation and Iwasaki Electric Company Ltd. move jointly for

extensions of time, until May 26, 2009 for Iwasaki to file its principal brief, until July 10,

2009 for U.S. Philips to file its brief, and until July 24, 2009 for Iwasaki to file its reply

brief.

Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

The motion is granted.
FOR THE COURT

APR 2 2 2009

/s/ Jan Horbaly

Jan Horbaly

Clerk FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

cc:	John M. DiMatteo, Esq.

Nicholas Groombridge, Esq.

s17

APR 2 2 2009

JRH nukbrui

CLERK

Date

2009-1252	 2
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5527 

To extend the authority of the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 

to restructure mortgages and rental assistance for certain assisted multifamily housing. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 6, 2006 

Mr. NEY (for himself, Ms. WATERS, Mr. GERLACH, and Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To extend the authority of the Secretary of Housing and 

Urban Development to restructure mortgages and rental 

assistance for certain assisted multifamily housing. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Mark-to-Market Ex5 tension Act of 2006’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION. 

7 Section 579 of the Multifamily Assisted Housing Re8 form and Affordability Act of 1997 (42 U.S.C. 1437f 

9 note) is amended— 


ccoleman on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
2 

•HR 5527 IH

1 (1) in subsection (a)(1), by striking ‘‘October 1, 

2 2006’’ and inserting ‘‘October 1, 2011’’; and 

3 (2) in subsection (b), by striking ‘‘October 1, 

4 2006’’ and inserting ‘‘October 1, 2011’’. 

Æ 


ccoleman on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-4284

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

BOBBY LEON JOHNSON,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Lacy H. Thornburg,

District Judge. (CR-01-210)

Submitted: September 27, 2005 Decided: September 29, 2005

Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Randolph M. Lee, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Robert

James Conrad, Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Jennifer

Marie Hoefling, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North

Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Bobby Leon Johnson appeals the district court’s judgment

sentencing him to 300 months in prison following his guilty plea to

nine counts of an eleven-count indictment for bank robbery in

violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 371, 922(g)(1), 924(c), 1951, 1956(h),

and 2113 (2000). In his appeal, filed pursuant to Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), counsel for Johnson asserts there

are no non-frivolous issues for appeal. Although concluding that

such allegations lack merit, counsel asserts that Johnson’s plea

was not knowing and voluntary. Johnson has been informed of his

right to file a pro se supplemental brief but has not done so. 

Because our review of the record discloses no reversible error, we

affirm Johnson’s conviction and sentence.

Johnson was advised of the nature of the charges against

him, the potential punishment, and the rights he was waiving by

entering a plea of guilty, and he knowingly and intelligently

waived those rights and pled guilty. Moreover, Johnson’s appellate

waiver forecloses any argument that his sentence, issued under the

mandatory guidelines system, was unconstitutional. See United

States v. Blick, 408 F.3d 162 (4th Cir. 2005).

In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire

record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for

appeal. We therefore affirm Johnson’s convictions and sentence.

This court requires that counsel inform his client, in writing, of
- 3 -

his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for

further review. If the client requests that a petition be filed,

but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then

counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from

representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof

was served on the client. 

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before

the court and argument would not aid the decision process.

AFFIRMED
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 the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service

          - 26 CFR Parts 1 and 54
          - [TD 9447]
          - RIN 1545-BG80

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

# ACTION:

Correction to final regulations.

# SUMMARY:

                        This document contains a correction to final regulations (TD 9447) that were published in the                         **Federal Register**                         on Tuesday, February 24, 2009 (74 FR 8200) relating to automatic contribution arrangements. These regulations affect administrators of, employers maintaining, participants in, and beneficiaries of section 401(k) plans and other eligible plans that include an automatic contribution arrangement.                    

# DATES:

This correction is effective on March 19, 2009, and is applicable on February 24, 2009.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

 

R. Lisa Mojiri-Azad, Dana Barry, or William D. Gibbs at (202) 622-3860 (not a toll-free number).

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

## Background

The final regulations that are the subject of this document are under sections 401, 402, 411, 414, and 4979 of the Internal Revenue Code.

## Need for Correction

As published, final regulations (TD 9447) contains an error that may prove to be misleading and is in need of clarification.

## Correction of Publication

Accordingly, the publication of the final regulations (TD 9447), which was the subject of FR Doc. E9-3716, is corrected as follows:

                    On page 8206, column 1, in the preamble, under the paragraph heading “                    *D. Permissible Withdrawal*                    ”, fourth paragraph of the column, last line of the paragraph, the language “section 3405(a).” is corrected to read “section 3405(b).”.                

LaNita Van Dyke,

Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief Counsel  (Procedure and Administration).

[FR Doc. E9-5952 Filed 3-18-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

JASMINE RAMIREZ,

Petitioner

v.

LANCASTER EARLY EDUCATION CENTER AND MADELINE ECKERT,

Respondents :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 359 MAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 20th day of November, 2023

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.
1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket Nos. 38990/38991

STATE OF IDAHO ,
Plaintiff-Respondent ,

v.

BRUNO ANTONIO SANTOS

DOMINGUEZ ,
Defendant-Appellant

. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 2012 Unpublished Opinion No. 448

Filed: April 17, 2012

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Blaine County. Hon. Robert J. Elgee , District Judge.

Judgments of conviction and concurrent unified sentences of fourteen years with a minimum period of confinement of eight years, for trafficking in methamphetamine , and ten years, with a minimum period of confinement of five years, for delivery of cocaine

, affirmed

.
Silvey Law Office LTD; Greg S. Silvey, Star, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

________________________________________________ Before GRATTON, Chief Judge; LANSING, Judge; and MELANSON, Judge

PER CURIAM

In these consolidated appeals, Bruno Antonio Santos

- Dominguez pled guilty to
trafficking in methamphetamine (docket number 38991) . Idaho Code § 37

- 2732B(a)(4)(B) . The

district court sentenced Santos

- Dominguez to a unified term of four te en years, with a minimum

p eriod of confinement of eight years

. Santos

- Dominguez also pled guilty to delivery of cocaine
(docket number 38990) . Idaho Code § 37

- 2732(a)(1)(A) . The district court sentenced Santos

Dominguez to a unified term of ten years, with a minimum period of confinement of five years , and ordered the sentence to run concurrent with the sentence in docket number 38991

. Santos

-2 Dominguez appeals asserting that the district court abused its discretion by imposing excessive

sentences. Sentencing is a matter for the trial court ’ s discretion. Both our standard of review and the
factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the sentence are well established and
need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez

, 121 Idaho 114, 117

- 18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014

- 15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez , 106 Idaho 447, 449

- 51, 680 P.2d 869, 871

- 73 (Ct. App.
1984); State v. Toohill , 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct. App. 1982). When reviewing
the length of a sentence, we consider the defendant’s entire sentence. State v. Oliver , 144 Idaho
722, 726, 170 P.3d 387, 391 (2007). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record
in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.
Therefore, Santos

- Dominguez ’s judgments of conviction and sentences are affirmed.
IV 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 277 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the United States 

Postal Service should take all appropriate measures to restore service 

standards in effect as of July 1, 2012. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 6, 2023 

Mr. BACON (for himself, Ms. KAPTUR, Mr. GRIJALVA, Ms. DEAN of Pennsylvania, Mr. COHEN, Mr. PAPPAS, Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin, Ms. LEE of 

California, Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mr. GARBARINO, Mr. BERA, Mr. 

NEGUSE, Mr. FITZPATRICK, Mr. BOYLE of Pennsylvania, Mr. MCGOVERN, Ms. CRAIG, Ms. DELBENE, Mr. SCHNEIDER, Mr. JOYCE of Ohio, 

Mr. CUELLAR, and Mr. SMITH of Washington) submitted the following 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Accountability 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that 

the United States Postal Service should take all appropriate measures to restore service standards in effect 

as of July 1, 2012. 

Whereas, on January 5, 2015, the United States Postal Service has implemented lower ‘‘service standards’’ to virtually eliminate overnight delivery of first class mail and 

periodicals, and further delay most other mail; 

Whereas the Postal Regulatory Commission found that it was 

not necessary to degrade postal services to realize subVerDate Sep 11 2014 22:57 Apr 06, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6300 E:\BILLS\HR277.IH HR277

pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HRES 277 IH 

stantial cost savings and that there are other ways to 

save the postal service money without jeopardizing the 

service Americans rely upon; 

Whereas delayed mail negatively impacts businesses, hurts 

residents, rural communities, and the economy, and 

drives customers away, resulting in lower revenue and 

worsens the Postal Service’s financial situation; and 

Whereas robust service standards implemented by the United 

States Postal Service are essential to providing prompt 

and timely delivery of all mail, online purchases, local 

newspapers, newsletters, bill payments, letters, invitations, packages, and medicines: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep2 resentatives that the United States Postal Service should 

3 take all appropriate measures to restore service standards 

4 in effect as of July 1, 2012. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Robert Calvin REESE, Appellant.

No. ED 105837

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION FOUR.

Filed: January 29, 2019

Justin A. Moody, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102, For Plaintiff/Respondent.

Carol D. Jansen, 1000 W. Nifong - Bldg. 7 Ste. 100, Columbia, MO 65203, For Defendant/Appellant.

Before Kurt S. Odenwald, P.J., Gary M. Gaertner, Jr., J., and Colleen Dolan, J.

***ORDER***

PER CURIAM.

Robert Calvin Reese ("Defendant") appeals the trial court's judgment entered upon a jury verdict finding him guilty of one count of first-degree domestic assault, arguing that the trial court abused its discretion in admitting certain testimony into evidence. Finding that Defendant has failed to demonstrate that the trial court abused its discretion or that Defendant was prejudiced as a result, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, we have provided the parties a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed under Rule 30.25(b).
** **

**Exhibit 32.1**

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

Inconnection with the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of United Wisconsin GrainProducers, LLC (the “Company”) for the quarter ended June 30, 2006, as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, J.F. Robertson, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1.                                       TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

2.                                       Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|        |   | /s/ J.F. Robertson      |
|--------|--------|-------------------------|
|   |   | J. F. Robertson         |
|   |   | Chief Executive Officer |
|   |   | Dated: August 14, 2006  |

 

 

----
**EXHIBIT 23.1****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**We haveissued our reports dated March 21, 2006, accompanying the consolidated financial statementsand management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reportingincluded in the Annual Report of Bay View Capital Corporation and subsidiaries on Form 10-K for theyear ended December 31, 2005. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said reportsin the previously filed Registration Statements of Bay View Capital Corporation and subsidiaries onForms S-8 (33-30602, 33-30603, 33-36161, 33-41924, 33-95724, 33-95726, 333-37027, 333-37029,333-37031, 333-92637, 333-70372 and 333-70362) and on Forms S-3 (333-29757 and 333-64877)./s/ Grant Thornton LLPSan Francisco, CAMarch 21, 2006