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

[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 93 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
H. Res. 93

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                      February 5, 2025.
    Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to 
consider in the House the bill (H.R. 27) to amend the Controlled Substances Act 
with respect to the scheduling of fentanyl-related substances, and for other 
purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The 
amendment printed in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying 
this resolution shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be 
considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as 
amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the 
bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to final passage without 
intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled 
by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce 
or their respective designees; (2) the further amendment printed in part B of 
the report of the Committee on Rules, if offered by the Member designated in the 
report, which shall be in order without intervention of any point of order, 
shall be considered as read, shall be separately debatable for the time 
specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an 
opponent, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question; and 
(3) one motion to recommit.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**Certification of Chief Financial Officer of**

**AdvanceAmerica, Cash Advance Centers, Inc.**

**Pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350**

**(Adopted bySection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of AdvanceAmerica, Cash Advance Centers, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarter ended September 30,2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I,J. Patrick O’Shaughnessy, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.                                       The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and

 

2.                                       The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
|     |     | /s/  J. PATRICK O’SHAUGHNESSY |
|----------|----------|------------------------------------|
|     |     |                               |
|     |     | J.  Patrick O’Shaughnessy     |
| * * | * * | *Executive Vice President and*     |
| * * | * * | *Chief Financial Officer*          |

 

November 8,2010

 

----
Case 3:05-cr-00155-M Document 19 Filed 03/31/09 Page 1 of 1 PageID 38
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-10775

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ADAM ALCANTAR YANEZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:07-CR-353-1

Before SMITH, PRADO, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Adam Alcantar Yanez

has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders

v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Yanez has filed a response. The record is

insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of Yanez’s claims of

ineffective assistance of counsel; such claims generally “cannot be resolved on

direct appeal when [they have] not been raised before the district court since no

opportunity existed to develop the record on the merits of the allegations.”

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

April 20, 2010

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

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.

Case: 09-10775 Document: 00511085637 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/20/2010
No. 09-10775

United States v. Cantwell, 470 F.3d 1087, 1091 (5th Cir. 2006) (internal

quotation marks and citation omitted). Our independent review of the record,

counsel’s brief, and Yanez’s response discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal.

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

from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See

5TH CIR. R. 42.2. Yanez’s request for appointment of counsel is DENIED. Cf.

United States v. Wagner, 158 F.3d 901, 902-03 (5th Cir. 1998).

2

Case: 09-10775 Document: 00511085637 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/20/2010
Dallas PERKINS v. Tara PERKINS

2160635

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

December 15, 2017

Affirmed.
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**





**CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**


**PURSUANT
      TO**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**


**SECTION 906
      OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**





I,
      Steven
      R. Delcarson, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
      pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the
      Quarterly Report of Innovative Card Technologies, Inc. on Form 10-Q
      for the quarter ended September 30, 2008 fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
      Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on
      Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition
      and results of operations of Innovative Card
      Technologies, Inc.





*Dated:
                October 31, 2008*
            *By:*
            */s/
                Steven R. Delcarson**Steven
                R. Delcarson**Chief
                Executive Officer*





I,
      Charles M. Caporale, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
      adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the
      Quarterly Report of Innovative Card Technologies, Inc. on Form 10-Q
      for the quarter ended September 30, 2008 fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
      Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on
      Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition
      and results of operations of Innovative Card
      Technologies, Inc.





*Dated:
                October 31, 2008*
            *By:*
            */s/
                Charles M. Caporale**Charles
                M. Caporale**Chief
                Financial Officer, Chief Accounting
                Officer*





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
      provided by Innovative Card Technologies, Inc. and will be retained by
      Innovative Card Technologies, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
      Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
STATE of Louisiana v. Treyson THEDY

No. 2018-KH-1996

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 22, 2019

**ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE THIRTY-FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF ST. BERNARD**

PER CURIAM:

Denied. Applicant fails to show that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel during plea negotiations under the standard of *Strickland v. Washington* , 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). As to his remaining claims, applicant fails to satisfy his post-conviction burden of proof. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.2.

Applicant has now fully litigated his application for post-conviction relief in state court. Similar to federal habeas relief, *see*28 U.S.C. § 2244, Louisiana post-conviction procedure envisions the filing of a second or successive application only under the narrow circumstances provided in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4 and within the limitations period as set out in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8. Notably, the legislature in 2013 La. Acts 251 amended that article to make the procedural bars against successive filings mandatory. Applicant's claims have now been fully litigated in accord with La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.6, and this denial is final. Hereafter, unless he can show that one of the narrow exceptions authorizing the filing of a successive application applies, applicant has exhausted his right to state collateral review. The district court is ordered to record a minute entry consistent with this per curiam.
# C_2019016EN.01000701.xml

| 14.1.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 16/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 16/7

---

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 13 November 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bezirksgericht Bleiburg/Okrajno Sodišče Pliberk — Austria) — Čepelnik d.o.o. v Michael Vavti

(Case C-33/17) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 56 TFEU - Freedom to provide services - Restrictions - Services in the internal market - Directive 2006/123/EC - Labour law - Posting of workers in order to carry out construction works - Reporting of workers - Retention and translation of payslips - Suspension of payments - Payment of a security by the recipient of the services - Surety for a possible fine to be imposed on the service provider))

(2019/C 16/07)

Languages of the case: German and Slovenian

Referring court

Bezirksgericht Bleiburg/Okrajno Sodišče Pliberk

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Čepelnik d.o.o.

Defendant: Michael Vavti

Operative part of the judgment

Article 56 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, under which the competent authorities can order a commissioning party established in that Member State to suspend payments to his contractor established in another Member State, or even to pay a security in an amount equivalent to the price still owed for the works in order to guarantee payment of the fine which might be imposed on that contractor in the event of a proven infringement of the labour law of the first Member State.

---

(1)  OJ C 86, 20.3.2017.

---
Alan P. NUNEZ NINO, DC #Y15694, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D16-1485

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed January 23, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Michael Schmidt, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Form 10-Q/A of Language Line Holdings, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this 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
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this 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-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:

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

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

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

5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

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

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

Date: September 13, 2007



|                                                               
|---------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Michael Schmidt                                            
|Michael Schmidt                                                
|Chief Financial Officer, Vice President, Secretary and Director
Case 3:05-cr-00075-N Document 274 Filed 12/29/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 473
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 6 (Friday, January 10, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Page 2034]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-00275]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL FOUNDATION OF THE ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES

Institute of Museum and Library Services

Special Meeting of the National Museum and Library Services Board

AGENCY: Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS), National 
Foundation of the Arts and the Humanities (NFAH).

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The National Museum and Library Services Board, which advises 
the Director of the Institute of Museum and Library Services in 
awarding national awards and medals, will meet by teleconference on 
February 6, 2025, to review nominations for the 2024 National Medal for 
Museum and Library Service.

DATES: The meeting will be held on Thursday, February 6, from 3:30 p.m. 
Eastern Time until adjourned.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will convene virtually.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Katherine Maas, Chief of Staff and 
Alternate Designated Federal Officer, Institute of Museum and Library 
Services, Suite 4000, 955 L'Enfant Plaza North SW, Washington, DC 
20024; (202) 653-4798; [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The National Museum and Library Services 
Board is meeting pursuant to the National Museum and Library Service 
Act, 20 U.S.C., 9105a, and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) as 
amended, 5 U.S.C. App. to review nominations for the 2025 National 
Medal for Museum and Library Service.
    The meeting will be closed to the public pursuant to subsections 
(c)(4), (c)(6) and (c)(9) of section 552b of Title 5, United States 
Code, as amended. The closed meeting will consider information that may 
disclose: Trade secrets and commercial or financial information 
obtained from a person and privileged or confidential; and information 
the premature disclosure of which would be likely to significantly 
frustrate implementation of a proposed agency action.

    Dated: January 3, 2025.
Brianna Ingram,
Paralegal Specialist.
[FR Doc. 2025-00275 Filed 1-8-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
```
Case 3:05-cv-00954-L Document 12 Filed 09/23/05 Page 1 of 2 PageID 41
 

 Case 3:05-cv-00954-L Document 12 Filed 09/23/05 Page 2 of 2 PageID 42
Case 3:05-cv-00881-L Document 5 Filed 04/28/05 Page 1 of 2 PageID 80
 

 Case 3:05-cv-00881-L Document 5 Filed 04/28/05 Page 2 of 2 PageID 81
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 this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of Language Line Holdings, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended September 30, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Dennis G. Dracup, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|(i) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(ii) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Language Line Holdings, Inc.
|---- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: March 17, 2005



/s/ Dennis G. DracupDennis G. DracupChief Executive Officer and Director(Principal Executive Officer)




The foregoing certification is
being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of this Report.



28
# C_2017277EN.01002401.xml

| 21.8.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 277/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.8.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 277/24

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Amsterdam (Netherlands) lodged on 18 May 2017 — Openbaar Ministerie v Tadas Tupikas

(Case C-270/17)

(2017/C 277/34)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Referring court

Rechtbank Amsterdam

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Openbaar Ministerie

Applicant:

Defendant: Tadas Tupikas

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Are appeal proceedings

| — | in which there has been an examination of the merits and |
| --- | --- |

—

in which there has been an examination of the merits and

| — | which resulted in the passing of a (new) sentence on the person concerned and/or the confirmation of the sentence handed down at first instance, |
| --- | --- |

—

which resulted in the passing of a (new) sentence on the person concerned and/or the confirmation of the sentence handed down at first instance,

| — | where the EAW [European Arrest Warrant] concerns the execution of that sentence, |
| --- | --- |

—

where the EAW [European Arrest Warrant] concerns the execution of that sentence,

the ‘trial resulting in the decision’ as referred to in Article 4a(1) of Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA? (1)

1

---

(1)  Council Framework Decision of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States (OJ 2002 L 190, p. 1).

1

---
Jarel CHAMBERS v. STATE

CR-16-0901

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

October 6, 2017 Reh. denied November 3, 2017

Affirmed.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-6997

CHARLES M. CASSELL, III,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

FNU DAWKINS, Dr.; DAVID GUINN, P. A.,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Frank D. Whitney, 

Chief District Judge. (5:14-cv-00089-FDW)

Submitted: January 29, 2015 Decided: April 2, 2015

Before NIEMEYER and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Charles M. Cassell, III, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Charles M. Cassell, III seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(g), 1915A(a), (b)(1) (2012). 

Although we conclude that Cassell did not have three qualifying 

previous “strikes” as necessary to justify dismissal under 

28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), as the district court found, we nonetheless 

affirm for the reasons given by the district court for dismissal 

under § 1915A(a), (b). Cassell v. Dawkins, No. 5:14-cv-00089-

FDW (W.D.N.C. June 16, 2014). We dispense with oral argument 

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented 

in the materials before this court and argument would not aid 

the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Latrenton Demorris BOWENS v. STATE

CR-16-0667

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

October 6, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
III 

119TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 26 

To constitute the majority party’s membership on certain committees for 

the One Hundred Nineteenth Congress, or until their successors are chosen. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 14, 2025 

Mr. THUNE submitted the following resolution; which was considered and 

agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

To constitute the majority party’s membership on certain 

committees for the One Hundred Nineteenth Congress, 

or until their successors are chosen. 

1 Resolved, That the following shall constitute the ma2 jority party’s membership on the following committees for 

3 the One Hundred Nineteenth Congress, or until their suc4 cessors are chosen: 

5 COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION, AND

6 FORESTRY: Mr. Boozman (Chair), Mr. McConnell, Mr. 

7 Hoeven, Ms. Ernst, Mrs. Hyde-Smith, Mr. Marshall, Mr. 

8 Tuberville, Mr. Justice, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Thune, Mrs. 

9 Fischer, Mr. Moran. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

SRES 26 ATS 

1 COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES: 

2 Mr. Lee (Chair), Mr. Barrasso, Mr. Risch, Mr. Daines, 

3 Mr. Cotton, Mr. McCormick, Mr. Justice, Mr. Cassidy, 

4 Mrs. Hyde-Smith, Ms. Murkowski, Mr. Hoeven. 

5 SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON AGING: Mr. Scott (FL) 

6 (Chair), Mr. McCormick, Mr. Justice, Mr. Tuberville, Mr. 

7 Johnson, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Scott (SC). 

8 COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS AND ENTREPRE9 NEURSHIP: Ms. Ernst (Chair), Mr. Risch, Mr. Paul, Mr. 

10 Scott (SC), Mr. Young, Mr. Hawley, Mr. Budd, Mr. Cur11 tis, Mr. Justice, Mrs. Blackburn. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
James Anthony Shaun SPARKS v. STATE

CR-16-0880

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

December 8, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

May 1, 2020

No. 04-20-00203-CV

Michael S. GOODLETT, Jr., through his legal Guardian, Michael S. Goodlett, Sr.,

Appellant

v.

NORTHEAST INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT,

Appellee

From the 225th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2019-CI-03596

Honorable Cathleen M. Stryker, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The trial court clerk filed a notification of late record stating that the clerk’s record has 

not been filed because appellant failed to pay or make arrangements to pay the clerk’s fee for 

preparing the record and that appellant is not entitled to appeal without paying the fee. It is 

therefore ORDERED that appellant provide written proof to this court within ten (10) days of the 

date of this order that either (1) the clerk’s fee has been paid or arrangements have been made to 

pay the clerk’s fee; or (2) appellant is entitled to appeal without paying the clerk’s fee. If 

appellant fails to respond within the time provided, this appeal will be dismissed for want of 

prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b).

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

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

court on this 1st day of May, 2020.

___________________________________

Michael A. Cruz,

Clerk of Court