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

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 804 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 804

    Recognizing Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia as the President-elect of 
                               Venezuela.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             August 1, 2024

 Mr. Rubio (for himself, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Scott of Florida, Mr. Kaine, 
Mr. Cassidy, and Mr. Bennet) submitted the following resolution; which 
           was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
    Recognizing Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia as the President-elect of 
                               Venezuela.

Whereas, on July 28, 2024, Venezuela held Presidential elections, the first in 
        the country since the widely discredited Presidential election in 2018;
Whereas the elections were neither free nor fair, and the process lacked respect 
        for fundamental freedoms, with the Carter Center stating, ``Venezuela's 
        2024 presidential election did not meet international standards of 
        electoral integrity and cannot be considered democratic.'';
Whereas President Joe Biden has publicly stated the need for an immediate 
        release of full, transparent, and detailed voting data by Venezuelan 
        authorities;
Whereas the data released by the vast majority of polling centers showed that 
        the leader of the opposition, Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia, won with an 
        overwhelming number of votes;
Whereas the Venezuelan people have demonstrated their desire to live in peace 
        and political freedom, represented by a democratically elected President 
        of their choosing;
Whereas many international organizations and heads of state have voiced concern 
        with the lack of transparency throughout the electoral process; and
Whereas numerous countries have either called for transparency in the tally of 
        election results or have rejected the results outright based on clear 
        evidence of fraud, including Argentina, Chile, Costa Rica, the Dominican 
        Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, France, Germany, Guatemala, Italy, 
        Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Portugal, Spain, and Uruguay: Now, therefore, be 
        it
    Resolved, That the Senate--
            (1) recognizes the victory of Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia in 
        the Presidential election in Venezuela held on July 28, 2024;
            (2) notes that such recognition is widely shared around the 
        world;
            (3) asserts that the victory of Edmundo Gonzalez marks the 
        return of a democratically elected leader at the national level 
        in Venezuela; and
            (4) stands in solidarity with the Venezuelan people in 
        their democratic aspirations to live freely without repression.
                                 <all>
```
# C_2018142EN.01001401.xml

| 23.4.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 142/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.4.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 142/14

---

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 28 February 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale amministrativo regionale per le Marche — Italy) — Comune di Castelbellino v Regione Marche and Others

(Case C-117/17) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Environment - Directive 2011/92/EU - Article 4(2) and (3) and Annexes I to III - Environmental impact assessment - Authorisation to carry out work in a plant for the production of electricity from biogas without preliminary examination of the need for an environmental impact assessment - Annulment - Regularisation after the event of the authorisation on the basis of new provisions of national law without preliminary examination of the need for an environmental impact assessment))

(2018/C 142/19)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Referring court

Tribunale amministrativo regionale per le Marche

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Comune di Castelbellino

Applicant:

Defendants: Regione Marche, Ministero per i beni e le attività culturali, Ministero dell’Ambiente e della Tutela del Territorio e del Mare, Regione Marche Servizio Infrastrutture Trasporti Energia — P. F. Rete Elettrica Regionale, Provincia di Ancona

Defendants:

Other party to the proceedings: Società Agricola 4 C S.S.

Other party to the proceedings:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Where a project to increase the capacity of a plant for the production of electricity, such as the project at issue in the main proceedings, has not been subject to a preliminary examination of the need to carry out an environmental impact assessment pursuant to national legislative provisions subsequently declared incompatible with Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment in that regard, EU law requires Member States to nullify the unlawful consequences of that breach and does not preclude that plant from being subject, after completion of the project, to a new assessment by the competent authorities for the purpose of verifying whether it complies with that directive and, where appropriate, to an environmental impact assessment, on condition that the national rules allowing for that regularisation do not provide the parties concerned with an opportunity to circumvent the rules of EU law or to dispense with applying them. The environmental impact of the project from the time of its completion must also be taken into account. Those authorities are entitled to take the view, on the basis of national provisions in force at the time they are required to give a decision, that such an environmental impact assessment is not required, in so far as those provisions are compatible with that directive.

---

(1)  OJ C 221, 10.7.2017.

1

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

**COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,**

**Respondent**

**v.**

**GARY ROBINSON,**

**Petitioner :** 

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**: No. 45 WM 2016** 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW **, this 12th day of May, 2016, the Petition for King’ s Bench and/or** 

**Extraordinary Relief is** DENIED

**.**
No. 99-20085 

-1-

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 99-20085

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

GERARDO GUAPI LIZALDA,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-97-CR-168-4

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

February 16, 2000

Before EMILIO M. GARZA, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Gerardo Guapi Lizalda

has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required

by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Lizalda has filed

a response to counsel’s motion in which he argues that his trial

counsel was ineffective. The record has not been adequately

developed for us to consider Lizalda’s argument on direct appeal. 

See United States v. Haese, 162 F.3d 359, 363-64 (5th Cir 1998),
No. 99-20085 

-2-

cert. denied, ___ S. Ct. ___, 1999 WL 241837 (U.S., May 24,

1999). Our independent review of the brief, the record, and

Lizalda’s response discloses no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly,

the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused

from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS

DISMISSED.
# C_2019016EN.01001001.xml

| 14.1.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 16/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 16/10

---

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 14 November 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Vrhovno sodišče Republike Slovenije — Slovenia) — Nova Kreditna Banka Maribor d.d. v Republika Slovenija

(Case C-215/17) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Approximation of laws - Re-use of public sector information - Directive 2003/98/EC - Article 1(2)(c), third indent - Prudential requirements for credit institutions and investment firms - Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 - Information to be published by credit institutions and investment firms - Article 432(2) - Exceptions to public disclosure requirements - Information considered commercially sensitive or confidential - Applicability - Credit institutions predominantly owned by the State - National legislation laying down the public nature of certain commercial information held by those institutions))

(2019/C 16/11)

Language of the case: Slovene

Referring court

Vrhovno sodišče Republike Slovenije

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Nova Kreditna Banka Maribor d.d.

Respondent: Republika Slovenija

Operative part of the judgment

Article 1(2)(c), third indent, of Directive 2003/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 November 2003 on the re-use of public sector information, and Article 432(2) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on prudential requirements for credit institutions and investment firms and amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012, must be interpreted as not applying to national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which requires a bank which has been under the dominant influence of a body governed by public law to disclose information on contracts provided for consultancy and legal services, copyright contracts and other services of an intellectual nature which it concluded during the period in which it was under that dominant influence, with no exceptions on the ground of the protection of that bank’s business secrets, and, accordingly, as not precluding such national legislation.

---

(1)  OJ C 213, 3.7.2017.

---
EX PARTE CITY OF MONTGOMERY

(In re Carlishia Frank v. Charday P. Shavers and City of Montgomery)

2170143

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

October 31, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Transferred to Sup. Ct. for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
Exhibit 32.1

Statement Pursuant to Section
906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

The undersigned, Gary D. Woerz, President and CFO
of International American Technologies, Inc, a Nevada corporation, hereby makes the
following certification as required by Section 906(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
with respect to the following of this quarterly report filed pursuant to Section 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934: Quarterly Report for the period ended June 30, 2006.

The undersigned certifies that the above annual
report fully complies with the requirements of Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, and information contained in the above report fairly presents, in all
respects, the financial condition of International American Technologies, Inc. and results
of its operations.

Date: August 8, 2006
Gary D. Woerz
President and Chief Financial Officer/s/ Gary D. Woerz
Exhibit 13.1





906 CERTIFICATION




The certification set forth below is being submitted in connection with the annual report of RBS Holdings N.V. on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2013, as amended by Amendment No.1 (the “Report”) for the purpose of complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Securities Exchange Act of 1934”) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code.




Jan de Ruiter, Chairman of the Managing Board, and Cornelis Visscher, Chief Financial Officer, of RBS Holdings N.V., each certifies that, to the best of his 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 RBS Holdings N.V.









December 30, 2014






/s/ Jan de RuiterJan de Ruiter

Chairman of the Managing Board





/s/ Cornelis VisscherCornelis Visscher

Chief Financial Officer
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 the Quarterly Report of PetroHunter Energy Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending March 31, 2007, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Carmen
J. Lotito, Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer) of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)      The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
         15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


/s/ CARMEN J. LOTITO                                  Date:  May 21, 2007
-------------------------------------------
Carmen J. Lotito, Chief Financial Officer
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

HUBERT WARREN, §

§

Petitioner, §

§

VS. §

§ NO. 3-04-CV-0496-D

DOUGLAS DRETKE, Director §

Texas Department of Criminal Justice, §

Correctional Institutions Division §

§

Respondent. §

ORDER

After conducting a review of the pleadings, files, and records in this case, and the findings

and recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge, in accordance with 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1), I am of the opinion that the findings and recommendation of the magistrate judge are

correct, and they are hereby accepted as the findings of the court. 

In adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge, the court clarifies that the provision

of the judgment that prohibits petitioner from filing Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motions or otherwise

challenging his state criminal conviction in federal court, unless he obtains permission from a threejudge panel of the court of appeals to file a successive application for habeas relief, does not apply

to a Rule 60(b) motion that attacks “some defect in the integrity of the federal habeas proceedings.”

Gonzalez v. Crosby, ___ U.S. ___, 125 S.Ct. 2641, 2648 (2005).

SO ORDERED.

June 9, 2006.

_________________________________

SIDNEY A. FITZWATER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

 Case 3:04-cv-00496-D Document 47 Filed 06/09/06 Page 1 of 1 PageID 455
I 

119TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 92 

To provide for the development of a plan to increase oil and gas production 

under oil and gas leases of Federal lands under the jurisdiction of 

the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Energy, the Secretary 

of the Interior, and the Secretary of Defense in conjunction with a 

drawdown of petroleum reserves from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 3, 2025 

Mr. BIGGS of Arizona introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To provide for the development of a plan to increase oil 

and gas production under oil and gas leases of Federal 

lands under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Energy, the Secretary of the 

Interior, and the Secretary of Defense in conjunction 

with a drawdown of petroleum reserves from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. 

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 ‘‘Strategic Production 

5 Response and Implementation Act’’. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 92 IH

1 SEC. 2. COMPENSATORY PRODUCTION INCREASE PLAN. 

2 Section 161 of the Energy Policy and Conservation 

3 Act (42 U.S.C. 6241) is amended by adding at the end 

4 the following new subsection: 

5 ‘‘(k) PLAN.— 

6 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Except in the case of a se7 vere energy supply interruption described in sub8 section (d), the Secretary may not execute the first 

9 drawdown of petroleum products in the Reserve 

10 after the date of enactment of this subsection, 

11 whether through sale, exchange, or loan, until the 

12 Secretary has developed and implemented a plan to 

13 increase the percentage of Federal lands (including 

14 submerged lands of the Outer Continental Shelf) 

15 under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Agri16 culture, the Secretary of Energy, the Secretary of 

17 the Interior, and the Secretary of Defense leased for 

18 oil and gas production by the same percentage as 

19 the percentage of petroleum in the Strategic Petro20 leum Reserve that is to be drawn down in that first 

21 and subsequent drawdowns, subject to the limitation 

22 under paragraph (2). 

23 ‘‘(2) LIMITATION.—The plan required by para24 graph (1) shall not provide for a total increase in 

25 the percentage of Federal lands described in paraVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:35 Jan 29, 2025 Jkt 059200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H92.IH H92

ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 92 IH

1 graph (1) leased for oil and gas production in excess 

2 of 10 percent. 

3 ‘‘(3) CONSULTATION.—The Secretary shall pre4 pare the plan required by paragraph (1) in consulta5 tion with the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary 

6 of the Interior, and the Secretary of Defense.’’. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

BILLY RAY HALL,

Petitioner,

VS.

NATHANIEL QUARTERMAN, Director,

Texas Department of Criminal Justice,

Correctional Institutions Division,

Respondent.

)

)

)

) CIVIL ACTION NO.

)

) 3:05-CV-0040-G

)

) ECF

)

)

)

ORDER

After reviewing all relevant matters of record in this case, including the

findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge

and any objections thereto, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the

undersigned district judge is of the opinion that the findings and conclusions of the

Magistrate Judge are correct and they are accepted as the findings and conclusions of

the court.

SO ORDERED.

July 31, 2007.
Calvin BROWN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D18-2593

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[March 21, 2019]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

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 Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. RM01-5-000]

                    Take notice that filers making eTariff currently are not able to add additional names to the service list through FERC Online. The account manager in Company Registration is added                           ( print page 1996)                        automatically. A solution for this problem is in progress. In the interim, if filers want to add additional names to the service list, they should file an Intervention through FERC Online.                

Dated: January 3, 2025.

Debbie-Anne A. Reese,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2025-00352 Filed 1-8-25; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
# C_2016111EN.01003702.xml

| 29.3.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 111/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.3.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 111/37

---

Appeal brought on 13 February 2016 by Carlo de Nicola against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 18 December 2015 in Case F-55/13 De Nicola v EIB

(Case T-60/16 P)

(2016/C 111/45)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Carlo de Nicola (Strassen, Luxembourg) (represented by: G. Ferabecoli, lawyer)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Investment Bank

Other party to the proceedings:

Form of order sought by the appellant

Form of order sought by the appellant

The appellant claims that the Court should:

| — | Uphold the present appeal and, partially reversing the judgment under appeal, annul points 2 and 3 of the operative part, together with paragraphs 59 to 64 of the judgment itself; |
| --- | --- |

—

Uphold the present appeal and, partially reversing the judgment under appeal, annul points 2 and 3 of the operative part, together with paragraphs 59 to 64 of the judgment itself;

| — | Consequently, annul the guidelines established for the year 2011 or declare that they are no longer applicable; order the EIB to compensate Dr De Nicola for the damage suffered, as requested in the application initiating proceedings or, in the alternative, refer the case to another Chamber of the Civil Service Tribunal in order that it may, in a different formation, give a fresh decision on the annulled paragraphs; |
| --- | --- |

—

Consequently, annul the guidelines established for the year 2011 or declare that they are no longer applicable; order the EIB to compensate Dr De Nicola for the damage suffered, as requested in the application initiating proceedings or, in the alternative, refer the case to another Chamber of the Civil Service Tribunal in order that it may, in a different formation, give a fresh decision on the annulled paragraphs;

| — | Order the European Investment Bank to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the European Investment Bank to pay the costs.

Grounds of appeal and main arguments

Grounds of appeal and main arguments

The present appeal is brought against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (single Judge) of 18 December 2015 in De Nicola v European Investment Bank (F-55/13).

De Nicola

European Investment Bank

The grounds of appeal and main arguments are those relied on in Case T-55/16 P De Nicola v European Investment Bank.

De Nicola

European Investment Bank

---