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

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 111 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.111

                     One Hundred Eighteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
         the third day of January, two thousand and twenty three

                                 An Act

 
To require each agency, in providing notice of a rulemaking, to include 
    a link to a 100-word plain language summary of the proposed rule.

    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 ``Providing Accountability Through 
Transparency Act of 2023''.
SEC. 2. REQUIREMENT TO POST A 100-WORD SUMMARY TO REGULATIONS.GOV.
    Section 553(b) of title 5, United States Code, is amended--
        (1) in paragraph (2), by striking ``and'' at the end;
        (2) in paragraph (3), by striking the period at the end and 
    inserting ``; and''; and
        (3) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following:
        ``(4) the Internet address of a summary of not more than 100 
    words in length of the proposed rule, in plain language, that shall 
    be posted on the Internet website under section 206(d) of the E-
    Government Act of 2002 (44 U.S.C. 3501 note) (commonly known as 
    regulations.gov).''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
```

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 68 (Friday, April 10, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 16384]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-8234]

[[Page 16384]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. PR09-22-000]

Enogex, LLC; Notice of Filing

April 6, 2009.
    Take notice that on March 27, 2009, Enogex, LLC (Enogex) filed 
pursuant to section 284.123(b)(2) of the Commission's regulations, a 
petition requesting approval of rates pursuant to section 311(a)(2) of 
the Natural Gas Policy Act. Enogex is proposing to implement a new firm 
section 311 transportation service on its East Zone of its transmission 
system at a rate of $0.1655 per MMBtu. Additionally, Enogex proposes a 
rate of $0.1523 per MMBtu for interruptible service furnished in the 
East Zone and a rate of $0.1273 per MMBtu for interruptible service 
furnished in the West Zone.
    Any person desiring to participate in this rate proceeding must 
file a motion to intervene or to protest this filing must file in 
accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice 
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered 
by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, 
but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any 
person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or 
motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests 
must be filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing 
an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the 
Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the 
intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or 
protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an 
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail 
[email protected], or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, April 14, 2009.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-8234 Filed 4-9-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
```
Exhibit 10.3


 


CONSOLIDATION TERM NOTE (2022)


 


	$7,185,319.06	 	February 17, 2022
	 	 	Stamford, CT



 





The undersigned, for value
received, jointly and severally promise to pay to the order of Slipstream Communications, LLC
(the “Lender”) at its office in Stamford, Connecticut (or such other office designated by the Lender from time to time)
the aggregate unpaid amount of all Advances under the Consolidation Term Loan (2022) made to the undersigned by the Lender pursuant to
the Credit Agreement referred to below, such principal amount to be payable in the amounts and on the dates set forth in the Credit Agreement.


 


The undersigned further jointly
and severally promise to pay interest on the unpaid principal amount of each Advance under the Consolidation Term Loan from the date of
such loan until the Consolidation Term Loan is paid in full, payable at the rate(s) and at the time(s) set forth in the Credit Agreement.
Payments of both principal and interest are to be made in lawful money of the United States and in immediately available funds.


 


This Note evidences indebtedness
incurred under, and is subject to the terms and provisions of, that certain Second Amended and Restated Loan and Security Agreement, dated
as of February 17, 2022 (as amended, restated, supplemented or otherwise modified from time to time, the “Credit Agreement”;
terms not otherwise defined herein are used herein as defined in the Credit Agreement), by and between the undersigned and the Lender,
to which Credit Agreement reference is hereby made for a statement of the terms and provisions under which this Note may or must be paid
prior to its due date or its due date accelerated. This Note amends, restates and replaces (but is not given in repayment or satisfaction
of) that certain (a) Consolidation Term Note dated March 12, 2021 and made payable to the order of the Lender in the original principal
amount of up to $4,557,433.58, and (b) Special Convertible Term Note dated August 12, 2021 and made payable to the order of the Lender
in the original principal amount of up to $2,286,213.41.


 


This Note is made under and
governed by the laws of the State of New York applicable to contracts made and to be performed entirely within such State.


 


The undersigned shall pay
all costs of collection, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and legal expenses if this Note is not paid when due, whether or not
legal proceedings are commenced.


 


[Signature Page Follows]


 









     


     


    

 


Presentment or other demand
for payment, notice of dishonor and protest are expressly waived.


 


	 	Creative Realities, Inc.
	 	Creative Realities Canada, Inc.
	 	Allure Global Solutions, Inc.
	 	Reflect Systems, Inc.
	 	 	 
	 	By:	/s/ Richard Mills
	 	Name:  	Richard Mills
	 	Title: 	Chief Executive Officer



 


Signature Page to Consolidation
Term Note (2022)
**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 theQuarterly Report of Brooktrout, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q forthe quarter ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert C. Leahy, VicePresident of Finance and Operations of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that:

 

(1) The Report fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

(2) The information containedin the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| Date: August 7, 2003 | By:    | /s/  ROBERT  C. LEAHY            |   |
|----------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------|--------|
|                 |   | Robert  C. Leahy                           |
|                 |   | *Vice President of Finance and Operations* |
|                 |   | *(Principal Financial and Accounting*      |
|                 |   | *Officer)*                                 |

 

 

A signed original of this written statementrequired by Section 906 has been provided to Brooktrout, Inc. and will beretained by Brooktrout, Inc. and furnished to the SEC or its staff uponrequest.

 

----
Exhibit 32.1

                        CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TOSECTION
                      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                            (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

In connection with the quarterly filing of American Resource Technologies, Inc.,
a Kansas corporation (the "Company"), on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June
30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"),
I, B. Fred Oden, III, President of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.ss.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 and results of operations of the Company.

July 17, 2007

By: /s/ B. Fred Oden, III
-------------------------
B. Fred Oden, III
President
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________

No. 97-1959EM

_____________

Valerie Kaelin; Terry Kaelin; Robert *

Thomure; Helene Thomure, *

*

Appellants, *

*

v. *

*

Anne-Marie Clarke; Charles Mischeaux; *

Freeman Bosley, Jr.; Matthew Padberg; * Appeal from the United States

Robert Haar, in their capacity as * District Court for the Eastern

members of the Board of Police * District of Missouri.

Commissioners for Metropolitan St. *

Louis Police Department; Daniel G. * [UNPUBLISHED]

Simpher; Jack Huelsman; James *

Gieseke; Ronald Henderson; Antoinette *

Filla; Raymond Lauer; Clarence *

Harmon, individually, each in their *

capacity and as a police officer for the *

City of St. Louis, *

*

Appellees. *

_____________

 Submitted: December 10, 1997

Filed: 

_____________

Before FAGG, BEAM, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

_____________

PER CURIAM.
-2-

The police officer appellants appeal an adverse grant of summary judgment

rejecting their contention that the Board of Police Commissioners and others violated

the police officers' constitutionally protected right to privacy in undertaking an

investigation into the police officers' compliance with a residency requirement that

members of the police department live in the City of St. Louis. Having reviewed the

record and the parties' briefs, we conclude that an extensive discussion is not

warranted. The district court has written a comprehensive opinion addressing the

issues raised by the parties, and we have nothing to add to the district court's analysis.

We see no error by the district court and affirm the judgment substantially for the

reasons stated in the district court's order. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
CERTIFICATION

I,  Tami J. Story, Acting Chief Financial Officer of Earth Search Sciences,
Inc., certify  that:

     1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Earth Search
Sciences, Inc.;

     2.  Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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
quarterly report;

     3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly 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.  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 we have:

          (a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 quarterly report is being prepared;

          (b)  evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure
controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of
this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

          (c)  presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation
as of the Evaluation Date;

     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 function):

          (a)  all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of
internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; 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; and

     6.  The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
quarterly report whether or not 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:  February 21, 2007                /s/  Tami J. Story
                                        ----------------------
                                        Tami J. Story
                                        Acting Chief Financial Officer
                                        (Principal Financial Officer)
f10k2011ex10ii_chinaginseng.htm


Exhibit 10.2







Labor Contract







This labor contract is based on the People’s Republic China’s labor law and labor contract law and other related laws and regulations.







Employer: China Ginseng Holdings Inc







Employer’s address: 1208A Jiyu Bldg. 1420 Jie Fang Da Road, Changchun City, Jilin, China







Legal Representative: Liu Chang Zhen







Employee: Liu, Changzhen







Gender: M







Employee’s ID Number: 220512195508150039







Employee’s address:  23-6 Hongqi St, Chaoyang District, Changchun City, Jilin, China







I. Contract Period & Probation Period







Both parties agree to choose (1)   for the employment terms:








	  	
1.

	
Fixed contract period: From Jan 1, 2011 to Jan 1 2014


	 	 	 
	 	2.	No fixed contract period:  From___________________
	 	 	 
	 	3.	By Project : From _______________to completion










II Job Description & Job Location







CEO







III Working Hours & Time Off







Both parties agree to choose (1) for working hours


 




	  	
1.

	
Standard full time






	  	 	 




	  	
2.

	
Non Standard hours






	  	 	 




	  	
3.

	
Combined hours

















 


IV Remuneration







By consensus, both parties confirm the probation wage is $ 731.85 a month, after probation is $ 731.85 a month.  Payment should be in monetary form and full payment of the monthly wages shall be delivered by the last day of the month. Employer shall not unjustifiably deduct or delay in paying the wages. The monthly wage shall not less than the minimum wage implemented by the city.







V Social Insurance and Labor benefits







In accordance with central government, state, provincial and municipal policies and regulations







VI Labor conditions and labor protection against occupational hazards







In accordance with central government, state and provincial requirements relating to the implementation of occupational safety and health







VII Termination & Renew of the Labor Contract


 




  





  











  








 


Both parties observe the central government, state and provincial regulations regarding the termination of the labor contract.  Unless the violation is expressly stipulated by state, either party in violation of the contract will be subject to the payment of appropriate compensation for breach of contract.







This contract is effective from the date signed by both parties.







Employer: China Ginseng Holdings, Inc








	
Legal Representative: Liu Chang Zhen

	
Date;  Jan 1, 2011


	  	  
	
Employee: Liu Chang Zhen

	
Date:  Jan 1, 2011












Governing Authority: Changchun City Employment Service (with seal)


Jan 4, 2011
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A24A0259. TAYLER BROOKE CUNNINGHAM v. MATTHEW JORDAN

MCDANIEL.

Tayler Brooke Cunningham(“themother”) and Matthew Jordan McDaniel(the

“father”) are the parents of a minor child who was legitimated pursuant to a 2015

consent order in which the trial court resolved issues of custody and child support.

In 2019, the father filed a “Petition for Modification of Custody and Child Support

and Application for Citation of Contempt.” In March 2023, the trial court entered an

order which modified custody and child support and reserved the issue of attorney

fees. In July 2023, the trial court entered an award of attorney fees to the father under

OCGA § 19-9-3 (g). The mother filed this direct appeal of the July 2023 order. We,

however, lack jurisdiction.

“Appeals from judgments or orders in divorce, alimony, and other domestic

relations cases” must be initiated by filing an application for discretionary review.

OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (2), (b). It is true that a direct appeal is proper under OCGA §

5-6-34 (a) (11) from all judgments or orders “in child custody cases” that award,

refuse to change, or modify child custody, or orders that hold or decline to hold

persons in contempt of child custody orders. On appeal, the mother challenges only

the trial court’s award of attorney fees to the father. Because neither custody nor

contempt is an issue on appeal, this is not a “custody” case within the meaning of 

OCGA § 5-6-34 (a) (11). See Voyles v. Voyles, 301 Ga. 44, 45-47 (799 SE2d 160)

(2017) (explaining that appellate courts examine the issue raised on appeal to

determine whether a party is entitled to a direct appeal); Capehart v. Mitchell, 358

Ga. App. 86, 88 (2) (851 SE2d 846) (2020). Rather, it remains a domestic relations

May 16, 2024
case in which an application for discretionary appeal is required. See Davidson v.

Callaway, 274 Ga. 813, 814 (559 SE2d 728) (2002) (“[I]n all domestic relations

cases, an appeal from an award of attorney fees must come to this Court via the

discretionary appeal procedures set forth in OCGA § 5-6-35.”).

“Compliance with the discretionary appeals procedure is jurisdictional.”

Smoak v. Dept. of Human Resources, 221 Ga. App. 257, 257 (471 SE2d 60) (1996).

The mother’s failure to file a discretionary application deprives this Court of

jurisdiction over this appeal, and it is accordingly DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

05/16/2024
Exhibit 10.05


Exhibit 10.05
#### Aida ABDELLA, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 02-73645.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 10, 2004.*

Decided May 18, 2004.

Dario Aguirre, Esq., San Diego, CA, for Petitioner.

Regional Counsel, Western Region, Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, District Director, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Diego, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office *191of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Emily A Radford, Esq., Blair T. O’Con-nor, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: CANBY, KOZINSKI and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Aida Abdella, a native and citizen of Ethiopia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration’s order summarily affirming an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of her application for asylum, withholding of *removal, and relief under the*Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b), and we grant the petition.

Because the IJ’s adverse credibility determination is based on speculation, conjecture and minor inconsistencies concerning the manner and circumstances under which Abdella traveled to the United States from Ethiopia and crossed the Mexico-United States border, we conclude that the IJ’s determination is not supported by substantial evidence. *See Zi Lin Chen v. Ashcroft,*362 F.3d 611, 617 (9th Cir.2004) (noting that an adverse credibility determination must be based on a “specific, cogent reason for any stated disbelief’) (citation omitted); *see also Salaam v. INS,*229 F.3d 1234, 1238 (9th Cir.2000) (per curiam) (“This Court reverses an adverse credibility determination that is based on ‘speculation and conjecture’ and is not supported by evidence in the record.”) (citation omitted).

We remand to the BIA for further proceedings to determine whether Abdella has established eligibility for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the CAT in light of her credible testimony. *See INS v. Ventura,*537 U.S. 12, 16-17, 123 S.Ct. 353, 154 L.Ed.2d 272 (2002) (per curiam).

Petition for review GRANTED; REMANDED with instructions.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

KOZINSKI, Circuit Judge,

dissenting.

Petitioner’s story of how she came to the United States and unwittingly crossed the United States border at Tijuana without inspection or travel documents of any kind is wholly implausible. The IJ got it exactly right. I would deny the petition.
Devante REED, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-2505

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed January 30, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.