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

House Calendar No. 56 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 266 

[Report No. 112–171] 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 18, 2011 

Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

JULY 20, 2011 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 266 RH

AN ACT 

To redesignate the Noxubee National Wildlife Refuge as 

the Sam D. Hamilton Noxubee National Wildlife Refuge. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 266 RH

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

3 SECTION 1. REDESIGNATION OF THE NOXUBEE NATIONAL 

4 WILDLIFE REFUGE. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Noxubee National Wildlife 

6 Refuge, located in the State of Mississippi, is redesignated 

7 as the ‘‘Sam D. Hamilton Noxubee National Wildlife Ref8 uge’’. 

9 (b) BOUNDARY REVISION.—Nothing in this Act pre10 vents the Secretary of the Interior from making adjust11 ments to the boundaries of the Sam D. Hamilton Noxubee 

12 National Wildlife Refuge (referred to in this section as the 

13 ‘‘Refuge’’), as the Secretary determines to be appropriate, 

14 to carry out the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge 

15 System in accordance with the National Wildlife Refuge 

16 System Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd et 

17 seq.) and any other applicable authority. 

18 (c) ADDITION OF LAND.—Nothing in this Act pre19 vents the Secretary of the Interior from adding to the Ref20 uge new land or parcels of the National Wildlife Refuge 

21 System, as the Secretary determines to be appropriate, to 

22 carry out the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge Sys23 tem in accordance with the National Wildlife Refuge Sys24 tem Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd et seq.) 

25 and any other applicable authority. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
4 

•S 266 RH

1 (d) REFERENCES.—Any reference in any statute, 

2 rule, regulation, executive order, publication, map, paper, 

3 or other document of the United States to the Noxubee 

4 National Wildlife Refuge is deemed to refer to the Sam 

5 D. Hamilton Noxubee National Wildlife Refuge. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS

srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
House Calendar No. 56 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 266 

[Report No. 112–171] 

AN ACT 

To redesignate the Noxubee National Wildlife RefWildlife Refuge. uge as the Sam D. Hamilton Noxubee National 

JULY 20, 2011 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Jasper STUART, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-0243 CASE NO.: 2D17-0146

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 22, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Granted.

Dismissal.
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the annual report of ECOtality,, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Jonathan R. Read, acting in the capacity as the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and I, H. Ravi Brar, acting in the capacity as the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify to the best of our knowledge, 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; and





(2)
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.





/s/ Jonathan R. ReadJonathan R. ReadChief Executive OfficerApril 14, 2011/s/ H. Ravi BrarH. Ravi BrarChief Financial OfficerApril 14, 2010
STATE EX REL. Trent DUBROC v. STATE of Louisiana

NO. 2017-KH-0304

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 11, 2018

*1016WRIT NOT CONSIDERED. Untimely filed pursuant to La.S.Ct.R. X § 5.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2674 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2674

   To suspend temporarily the rate of duty on N-[(4-methoxymethyl)-1-
      phenylmethyl-4-piperidinyl]N-phenylpropanamide-ethanedioate.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 7, 2012

   Mr. Casey introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To suspend temporarily the rate of duty on N-[(4-methoxymethyl)-1-
      phenylmethyl-4-piperidinyl]N-phenylpropanamide-ethanedioate.

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

SECTION 1. N-[(4-METHOXYMETHYL)-1-PHENYLMETHYL-4-PIPERIDINYL]N-
              PHENYLPROPANAMIDE-ETHANEDIOATE.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00        N-[(4-              Free            No change      No change      On or before     ''.
                          methoxymethyl)-1-                                                 12/31/2015
                          phenylmethyl-4-
                          piperidinyl]N-
                          phenylpropanamide-
                          ethanedioate (CAS
                          No. 61086-13-3)
                          (provided for in
                          subheading
                          2924.29.95)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to articles entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

March 24, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
135396 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 135396 COA: 271635 Genesee CC: 05-017370-FC JAQUAVIS LURAY TAYLOR, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 16, 2007 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.

t0317 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

March 24, 2008

Clerk
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

The undersigned Chief Executive Officer and President and Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Marquee
Holdings Inc. (the "Company"), each hereby certifies, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:



Dated May 26, 2009/s/ GERARDO I. LOPEZ Gerardo I. Lopez
Chief Executive Officer, Director and President/s/ CRAIG R. RAMSEY Craig R. Ramsey
Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer


[A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Marquee Holdings Inc. and will be retained by Marquee Holdings Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.]

---



QuickLinks
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                         418,135
<SECURITIES>                                 8,689,447
<RECEIVABLES>                                  944,223
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    283,296
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            10,558,364
<PP&E>                                         394,581
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              12,892,280
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,652,317
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         7,899
<OTHER-SE>                                  10,101,272
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                12,892,280
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,985,859
<CGS>                                          443,999
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,093,037
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (166,132)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 58,954
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             58,954
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    58,954
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .01
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32




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 Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of PokerTek, Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Mark D. Roberson, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to 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 Company.








Date:  July 16, 2010






/s/ Mark D. RobersonMark D. RobersonChief Executive Officer and Chief FinancialOfficer
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2663 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2663

         To suspend temporarily the duty on Pigment Violet 23.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 7, 2012

   Mr. Casey introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
         To suspend temporarily the duty on Pigment Violet 23.

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

SECTION 1. PIGMENT VIOLET 23.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00      Pigment Violet 23   Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                        (CAS No. 6358-30-                                                  31/2015.......
                        1) (provided for
                        in subheading
                        3204.17.90)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
COLUMBIA BANK, Appellant, v. Barry D. JOYE; Luronda S. Joye; Greater Southeastern Land Development, LLC; Bruce Naylor; Gary Sorensen ; Southeastern Paving & Construction, LLC ; Tony D. Richards; and Donald K. Joye, Appellees.

No. 1D17-4150

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 30, 2018

Nicholas V. Pulignano, Jr. and Meagan L. Logan, of Marks Gray, P.A., Jacksonville, for Appellant.

Adam L. Morrison of Sellers, Taylor & Morrison, P.A., Live Oak, for Appellee Gary Sorensen.

No appearances for Appellees Barry D. Joye, Donald K. Joye, Luronda S. Joye, Greater Southeastern Land Development, LLC, Bruce Naylor, Southeastern Paving & Construction, LLC, or Tony D. Richards.

Per Curiam.

Upon consideration of Appellant's response to the Court's order of October 20, 2017, the Court has determined that the order on appeal is not a final order or appealable non-final order. We, therefore, dismiss the appeal.

Appellant seeks review of an order granting a motion to dismiss its amended counterclaim. We dismiss the appeal for two reasons. First, the order grants a motion *282to dismiss without actually dismissing. An order that merely grants a motion to dismiss or a motion for summary judgment, but that does not enter judgment on the motion, or otherwise qualify as a judgment, is not a final appealable order. *See**Dedge v. Crosby* , 914 So.2d 1055 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005).

Second, the order is not presently appealable because counterclaims and cross-claims, related to the claims addressed in the order on appeal, remain pending. *Jensen v. Whetstine* , 985 So.2d 1218, 1220-1221 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (dismissing appeal from order that did not dispose of remaining claims involving related facts); *Northcutt v. Pathway Fin.* , 555 So.2d 368 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (holding interrelatedness depends on "whether there is a factual and legal overlap between the claims").

The dismissal is without prejudice to seeking review upon rendition of a final order that disposes of all claims, including the pending, related counterclaims and cross-claims.

Roberts, Kelsey, and M.K. Thomas, JJ., concur.
EX PARTE Ronnie Lynn KIRKSEY

(In re: Ronnie Lynn Kirksey v. State of Alabama)

1160522

Supreme Court of Alabama.

June 23, 2017

**MAIN**, *Justice*.

WRIT DENIED. NO OPINION.

Stuart, C.J., and Bolin, Parker, Shaw, Wise, Bryan, and Sellers, JJ., concur.

Murdock, J., dissents.

**MURDOCK**, *Justice* (dissenting).

I would grant certiorari review in this capital case. Ronnie Lynn Kirksey, the petitioner, seeks review by this Court of a decision by the Court of Criminal Appeals upholding his sentence of death. The decision by the Court of Criminal Appeals follows certiorari review by the United States Supreme Court of the Court of Criminal Appeals' earlier decision upholding the petitioner's capital conviction and sentence of death and a remand by that Court to the Court of Criminal Appeals for further consideration of the sentence in light of the Supreme Court's holding in *Hurst v. Florida*, 577 U.S. ___, 136 S.Ct. 616, 193 L.Ed.2d 504 (2016). See *Kirksey v. State*, 191 So.3d 810 (Ala. Crim. App. 2015), vacated, 578 U.S. ___, 136 S.Ct. 2409, 195 L.Ed.2d 777 (2016).

I am concerned that the issue whether the aggravating circumstances outweigh the mitigating circumstances in a capital case, as required for the imposition of the death penalty under Alabama law, sufficiently partakes of the nature of a factual inquiry so as to trigger the principles articulated in *Hurst*. I also believe this Court should further consider the petitioner's argument that the jury's verdict was constitutionally insufficient to support a death sentence because the jury was instructed that its verdict would merely be a recommendation.
Robert Earl DAVIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-1359

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed December 22, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
*Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions that

have no precedential value and merely decide particular cases on

the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes needless

expense on the public and burdens on the legal profession."

Pursuant to that Rule, the Court has determined that this opinion

should not be published.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-30089

IN THE MATTER OF: CHERIE WARD, 

Debtor, 

CHERIE WARD, 

Appellant, 

versus

JEAN O. TURNER, 

Appellee. 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

(CA 93 3429 R)

( August 14, 1995)

Before SMITH, WIENER and DEMOSS, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:* 

Having considered the record on appeal of this case, studied

the briefs of counsel, and heard oral argument of counsel for the

parties on appeal, we are firmly convinced that this appeal--in

fact, this entire case--is wholly without merit and frivolous as a
2

matter of law. For some six years now Appellant and her counsel

have dragged this matter up and down the judicial system from

bankruptcy court to district court to court of appeal and back in

what can only be described as dilatory and vexatious pettifoggery

including, as found unerringly by the bankruptcy court and two

different district judges, the exercise of bad faith. This abuse

and waste of judicial resources and of the assets of the bankruptcy

estate of Appellant must cease; further frivolous and unmeritorious

abuse of the civil justice system will not be tolerated. 

This appeal is dismissed as frivolous; and, in light of the

egregious abuses referred to above, we take the unusual but

authorized additional step of directing the Clerk of this court to

issue the mandate in this appeal forthwith. Additionally, the

Clerk of this court shall not accept for filing any pleadings or

other documents from or on behalf of Appellant without the prior

consent of a member of this court. 

Both Appellant and her counsel are sternly cautioned that any

further actions or filings, in this court or any other federal

court of this circuit, arising from or connected to the subject

matter of this case, that are deemed by this court to be

unmeritorious, frivolous, dilatory or contumacious, shall expose

them or the one in question to the full panoply of sanctions at the

disposal of this court including, without limitation, fines,

contempt, and professional discipline. 

SO ORDERED. 

DISMISSED with cautions and restrictions on future filings.
exh_1014.htm


Exhibit 10.14


 


EXECUTION COPY


 







 


ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO SECOND AMENDMENT TO CREDIT AGREEMENT


 


This ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED SUBORDINATION AND INTERCREDITOR AGREEMENT (this “Agreement”), dated as of October 20, 2011, is executed and delivered by LIBERTY BANK OF ARKANSAS an Arkansas state chartered bank whose address for purposes of notice hereunder is P.O. Box 10890, Fayetteville, AR  72703, attn:  Scott Hancock, Executive Vice President (“Liberty Bank”).


 


W I T N E S S E T H:


 


WHEREAS, on March 18, 2011, H.I.G. AERT, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, located at 500 Boylston Street, 13th Floor, Boston, MA 02116 (“H.I.G.”), made extensions of credit to Advanced Environmental Recycling Technologies, Inc., a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware (the “Company”) in an original principal amount of $19,000,000, in accordance with the provisions of a Credit Agreement, dated as of March 18, 2011, made by the Company in favor of H.I.G. (as amended, modified or restated, the “H.I.G. Credit Agreement”), such H.I.G. Credit Agreement representing and evidencing all of the debt that Company has with H.I.G; and


 


WHEREAS, Liberty Bank and H.I.G. entered into a Second Amended and Restated Subordination and Intercreditor Agreement, dated as of March 18, 2011 (as amended, modified or restated, the “Intercreditor Agreement”), consenting to the incurrence by the Company of the indebtedness relating to the H.I.G. Credit Agreement and agreeing the incurrence by the Company of the indebtedness relating to the H.I.G. Credit Agreement shall not constitute a default or event of default under the Liberty Bank Loan Documents (as defined in the Intercreditor Agreement); and


 


WHEREAS, H.I.G. and the Company are entering into an amendment to the H.I.G. Credit Agreement (the “Second Amendment”) to increase the Series B Term Loan Commitment (as defined therein) to an aggregate commitment of $14,000,000.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual agreements, provisions and covenants contained herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, Liberty Bank acknowledges that the Second Amendment shall not constitute a default or event of default pursuant to the Intercreditor Agreement or the Liberty Bank Loan Documents (as defined in the Intercreditor Agreement).


 


- Remainder of page intentionally left blank; signature page follows -


 




  





  











  






IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed by the party hereto as of the day and year first above written.


 




 



	 	 
LIBERTY BANK OF ARKANSAS


	 	 	 
	 	By:	 
/s/ Scott Hancock


	 	 	 
Scott Hancock, Executive Vice President