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

★(Star Print)

Calendar No. 468 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. J. RES. 55 

Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United 

States Code, of the rule submitted by the Council on Environmental 

Quality relating to ‘‘National Environmental Policy Act Implementing 

Regulations Revisions’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 13, 2022 

Mr. SULLIVAN (for himself, Mr. MCCONNELL, Mr. THUNE, Mrs. CAPITO, Mr. 

BARRASSO, Mr. CRAMER, Mr. CRUZ, Mr. DAINES, Mr. HOEVEN, Mr. 

LEE, Mr. TOOMEY, Mr. PAUL, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. MARSHALL, Mrs. 

BLACKBURN, Mr. TUBERVILLE, Ms. ERNST, Mr. GRASSLEY, Mr. SASSE, 

Mr. WICKER, Mr. HAGERTY, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. CRAPO, Mr. RISCH, Mr. 

ROUNDS, Mrs. HYDE-SMITH, Mr. SCOTT of Florida, Ms. MURKOWSKI, 

Mr. CASSIDY, Mr. JOHNSON, Mr. LANKFORD, Mr. ROMNEY, Mr. 

HAWLEY, Mr. PORTMAN, Mr. COTTON, Mr. TILLIS, Ms. LUMMIS, Mr. 

BOOZMAN, Mr. BURR, Mr. SHELBY, Mrs. FISCHER, Mr. MORAN, Mr. 

YOUNG, Mr. GRAHAM, Mr. CORNYN, Mr. RUBIO, Mr. BLUNT, Mr. SCOTT

of South Carolina, Mr. BRAUN, and Ms. COLLINS) introduced the following joint resolution; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

AUGUST 3, 2022 

Committee discharged, by petition, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 802(c), and placed 

on the calendar 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of 

title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by 

the Council on Environmental Quality relating to ‘‘NaVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:33 Sep 22, 2022 Jkt 029200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6652 E:\BILLS\SJ55.PCS SJ55

kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

SJ 55 PCS1S 

tional Environmental Policy Act Implementing Regulations Revisions’’. 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 That Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the 

4 Council on Environmental Quality relating to ‘‘National 

5 Environmental Policy Act Implementing Regulations Revi6 sions’’ (87 Fed. Reg. 23453 (April 20, 2022)), and such 

7 rule shall have no force or effect. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS

kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 468 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. J. RES. 55 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Providing for congressional disapproval under chapicy Act Implementing Regulations Revisions’’. Quality relating to ‘‘National Environmental Pol- submitted by the Council on Environmental ter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule 

AUGUST 3, 2022 

Committee discharged, by petition, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

802(c), and placed on the calendar 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
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 Quarterly Report of Pharma-Bio Serv, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ending January 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Elizabeth Plaza,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Pedro J. Lasanta, Chief Financial
Officer  of the Company, each certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 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, as amended; and





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





Dated:
March 17, 2010




/s/
      Elizabeth Plaza
              
              
              /s/
      Pedro J. LasantaElizabeth
      Plaza
              
              
              Pedro
      J. LasantaChief
      Executive Officer
              
              
              Chief
      Financial Officer
MUNILLA CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT, LLC, d/b/a MCM, and Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America, Appellants, v. SOUTHEASTERN ENGINEERING CONTRACTORS, INC., and Hartford Fire Insurance Company, Appellees.

No. 3D17-2111

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed February 13, 2019

Taylor Espino Vega & Touron, P.A., and Alejandro Espino, and Vanessa A. Van Cleaf, for appellants.

Vezina, Lawrence & Piscitelli, P.A., and Joseph W. Lawrence II, Michael A. Piscitelli, Robert L. Frye, and Steven K. Johnson (Ft. Lauderdale), for appellees.

Before SALTER, FERNANDEZ1 , and LINDSEY, JJ.

1

Judge Fernandez did not participate in oral argument

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. *See**Witt v. La Gorce Country Club, Inc.*, 35 So.3d 1033 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) ("The trial resolution judge's findings of fact are not reviewable on appeal." (citing § 44.104(11), Fla. Stat. (2008) ("Factual findings determined in the voluntary trial are not subject to appeal.") ) ).
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of
ChoicePoint Inc.


We have audited the consolidated financial statements of ChoicePoint Inc. and
subsidiaries (the "Company") as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, and for each of
the three years in the period ended December 31, 2005, management's assessment
of the effectiveness of the Company's internal control over financial reporting
as of December 31, 2005, and the effectiveness of the Company's internal control
over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, and have issued our reports
thereon dated March 13, 2006; such consolidated financial statements and reports
are included in your 2005 Annual Report to Shareholders and are incorporated
herein by reference. Our audits also included the consolidated financial
statement schedule of the Company listed in Item 15. This consolidated financial
statement schedule is the responsibility of the Company's management. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion based on our audits. In our opinion,
such consolidated financial statement schedule, when considered in relation to
the basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly,
in all material respects, the information set forth therein.


/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Atlanta, Georgia
March 13, 2006


                                       36
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.13

                        SECURITY AGREEMENT CONFIRMATION

         Reference is made to that certain Security Agreement (the "Agreement")
dated June 29, 2001 from J. Jill Direct, Inc. to Citizens Bank of Massachusetts
("Citizens") individually and as Agent for the benefit of, and on behalf of, all
Lenders, as such term is defined in that certain Fifth Amended and Restated Loan
Agreement between The J. Jill Group, Inc. on the one hand, and the several
financial institutions from time to time party thereto (Citizens Bank of
Massachusetts being one of them) and Citizens Bank of Massachusetts as Agent on
behalf of the Lenders, on the other hand, dated as of June 29, 2001, as amended
as of August 28, 2001, July 25, 2002, June 26, 2003 and as the same may
hereafter be amended (collectively, the "Security Agreement"). The undersigned
hereby confirms to Citizens individually and as Agent that the Agreement (i)
remains in full force and effect; (ii) is valid, binding and enforceable against
the undersigned and the undersigned's successors and assigns in accordance with
its terms; and (iii) continues to secure all "Obligations" as therein defined.

         Executed as an instrument under seal as of this 26 day of June, 2003.

                             J. JILL DIRECT, INC.

                             By: /s/ Faythe Shortelle-Valenzon
                                 -----------------------------

                             Name: Faythe Shortelle-Valenzon
                                   -------------------------

                             Title: Vice President - Contact Center/Operations
                                    -------------------------------------------
Thaddeus BAXTER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D19-76

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed May 28, 2019

James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Andrew Mich, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Kristen L. Davenport, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

EVANDER, C.J., GROSSHANS and SASSO, JJ., concur.
Case 4:06-cv-00111-A Document 10 Filed 06/30/06 Page 1 of 2 PageID 50
 

 Case 4:06-cv-00111-A Document 10 Filed 06/30/06 Page 2 of 2 PageID 51
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 Ardent Acquisition
Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2005
(the "Report"), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof, I Marc H. Klee, President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 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, as amended; and

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


By: /s/ MARC H. KLEE                                        Dated: May 16, 2005
    ----------------------------------------
        Marc H. Klee
        President and Chief Financial Officer
        (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
M.C., the mother, Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, et al., Respondents.

No. 3D19-553

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed April 3, 2019

Eugene F. Zenobi, Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel, Third Region, and Kevin Coyle Colbert, Assistant Regional Counsel, for petitioner.

Karla Perkins, for the Department of Children and Families; Thomasina F. Moore and Laura Lee (Tallahassee), for the Guardian ad Litem Program, for respondents.

Before LOGUE, SCALES and HENDON, JJ.

ON CONFESSION OF ERROR

HENDON, J.

*1133Based on the State's proper confession of error, we grant the petition for writ of certiorari, quash the trial court's order modifying the Mother's visitation to therapeutic visits, and remand for further proceedings.

Petition for writ of certiorari granted; order quashed; case remanded.
C O U R T O F A P P E A LS EI GHTH D I STRI CT OF TEXAS ELPASO, TEXAS

I N RE: J OSE LUI S MONARREZ,
Relator. § § § § § No . 0 8- 09 -0 01 42 -C R

AN ORI GI

NAL PROCEEDI

NG I N MANDA MUS

MEMORAN DUM OP INION ON P ETIT ION F OR WRIT OF M ANDAM US Relator has f

iled a pr o s e petition for writ of manda mus requestingthis Court t o order the Honora ble David Gua derr ama, Judge of the 243rd Judicial District Court, to rule on his moti ons for DN A testing under Chapte r 64 of the T exas Code of Criminal Procedure and for appointment of c ouns e l. In order to obtain relief thr oug h a wr it of mandamus, a r elator must establish: (1) no other a dequate reme dy

at law is ava ilable; and (2) that the ac t he see ks to compel is minis terial. State ex re l. Y

oung v. Sixth Judic ial Dist. Court of Appeals At Texarkana , 236 S.W .3d 207, 210 (Tex.Crim.App. 2007). An ac t is mi nisterial if it does not involve the exercise of any discretion. State ex re l. Hill v. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Distri ct , 34 S.W .3d 924, 927 (Tex.Crim.App. 20 01 ). B a se d o n th e pe tit ion and re c or d p ro vid e d, Mr . M on are z ha s n ot d e mon str ate d h e is entitled to mandamus relief
. SeeT EX .R.A PP .P. 52 .8 . We the re fo re de ny Re lator ’s re qu e st. J une 30, 2009 DAVI D WEL L I NGTONCHEW, C hief Just ice B e f o r e C h e w , C
. J. , M c C l ur e , a n d R i v e r a , JJ. (Do Not Publish)
Danny L. SMITH v. STATE

2170193

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

November 27, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Transferred to Ct. of Crim. App. for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18
- 7185

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. ARKALGUD LAKSHMINARASIMHA , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh

. James C. Dever III , District Judge. ( 5:18

- mj

- 01029

- D

- 1 )

Submitted : April 25, 2019 Decided: April 29, 2019

Before FLOYD and QUATTLEBAUM , Circuit Judges , and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

. Arkalgud N. Lakshminarasimha , Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Arkalgud N. Lakshminarasimha appeals the distri ct court’s order dismissing his civil action for lack of jurisdiction, or, in the alternative, for failure to state a claim

. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Lakshminarasimha ’s informal briefs do not challenge the bases for the district court’s disposition, Lakshminarasimha has forfeited appellate revie w of the court’s order. See Jackson v. Lightsey , 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues preserved in that brief.”). Accordingly, we grant leave to proce ed in forma pauperis and affirm the district court ’s judgment

. North Carolina v. Lakshminarasimha , No. 5:18

- mj

- 01029

- D

- 1 (E.D.N.C. Aug. 22, 2018) . We deny
Lakshminarasimha ’s motion to expedite decision and self

- styled “Emergency Rule 27 motion” and dispe nse 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
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 16 (Monday, January 27, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Page 8215]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-01845]

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

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE: Thursday, January 30, 2025, 10:00 a.m.

PLACE: Hybrid Meeting: 1050 First Street NE, Washington, DC (12th 
Floor) and Virtual.
    Note: If you would like to virtually access the meeting, see the 
instructions below.

STATUS: This meeting will be open to the public. To access the meeting 
virtually, go to the commission's website www.fec.gov and click on the 
banner to be taken to the meeting page.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 
Proposed Revisions to Directives 10 (Rules of Procedure of the Federal 
Election Commission Pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 437(c)(e)) and 17 (Circulation 
Authority; Agenda Deadline Procedures)
Management and Administrative Matters

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Judith Ingram, Press Officer, 
Telephone: (202) 694-1220
    Individuals who plan to attend in person and who require special 
assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable 
accommodations, should contact Laura E. Sinram, Secretary and Clerk, at 
(202) 694-1040 or [email protected], at least 72 hours prior to the 
meeting date.

(Authority: Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b)

    Submitted: January 23, 2025.
Laura E. Sinram,
Secretary and Clerk of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2025-01845 Filed 1-23-25; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
```
Erron Markese COLEMAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-2697

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 29, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Jennifer THIEN and Gina Nguyen v. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY and Agricultural and Mechanical College, et al.

NO. 2019-CC-0429

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 20, 2019

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI, TO THE COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT, PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE

PER CURIAM

This matter arises from a petition for damages and injunctive relief filed by plaintiffs against the Board of Supervisors of Louisiana State University and Agriculture and Mechanical College ("Board") based on plaintiffs' expulsion from dental school. After trial, the district court granted plaintiffs' request for a permanent injunction and ordered their immediate reinstatement to the dental school. The district court found the procedure employed by *196the Board in handling the allegations against plaintiffs "clearly violated the plaintiffs' rights to procedural and substantive due process under the State and Federal Constitutions."

The Board filed a motion for suspensive appeal pursuant to La. R.S. 13:4441. The district court denied the motion. Upon the Board's application, a majority of the court of appeal reversed and ordered the district court to grant the Board a suspensive appeal over dissents by two judges. Plaintiffs now seek review in this court.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for suspensive appeal filed by the Board of Supervisors. *See* La. Code Civ. P. art. 3612(B). The provisions of La. R.S. 13:4441 are inapplicable under the facts presented. *See, e.g.,**Student Government Association v. Board of Supervisors* , 262 La. 849, 264 So.2d 916 (1972) (explaining that the administrative powers granted to the Board of Supervisors are subject to other provisions of the constitution).

Accordingly, the writ is granted. The judgment of the court of appeal is reversed, and the judgment of the district court is reinstated.

The application for rehearing is granted for the sole purpose of amending our opinion of May 20, 2019 to delete the reference to " La. R.S. 13:4441" and replace it with " La. R.S. 13:4431." In all other respects, the application for rehearing is denied, and our opinion of May 20, 2019 is affirmed as amended.

Johnson, C.J., would deny

Clark, J., would deny.
Jeremiah PATRICK, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-3915

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed April 2, 2019 Rehearing Denied May 8, 2019

**FLORIDA DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION.**

AFFIRMED.
Cause No. 11-08-00238-CV. 1

Cause No. 11-08-00239-CV. 2

Cause No. 11-08-00240-CV. 3

Opinion filed April 16, 2009

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals

____________

Nos. 11-08-00238-CV, 11-08-00239-CV, & 11-08-00240-CV

__________

JERRY LEWIS DEDRICK, Appellant

V.

STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeals from the 142nd District Court

 Midland County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. CR-19,164, CR-13,996, & CR-16,535

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

These are appeals from the trial court’s orders denying Jerry Lewis Dedrick’s pro se motions

to vacate three prior convictions. We affirm.

Procedural Background

Appellant is attempting to expunge or have vacated his 1993 conviction for delivery of

cocaine, the 1990 revocation of his community supervision from his 1987 conviction for possession 1

of cocaine, and his 1990 conviction for delivery of cocaine. Appellant was sentenced to 2 3

confinement for fifteen years for the 1993 conviction and confinement for ten years for the 1990
2

conviction and for the 1990 revocation. Appellant is currently confined in the FCC Beaumont

Medium, a federal correctional complex, as a result of a conviction for a cocaine related offense.

In each case, appellant filed pro se motions to expunge and to vacate his convictions.

Appellant argued in these motions that expunging these convictions was in the best interest of justice

because expunction would increase his chances to be a trustee in the federal system. Appellant also

argued that failure to vacate or expunge would result in double jeopardy violations.

The trial court entered orders denying each of appellant’s motions.

Issue on Appeal

In his pro se briefs, appellant challenges the trial court’s orders on the ground that each of

his guilty pleas were not voluntarily entered. He argues that there is showing or “memory” of proper

waiver or admonishment.

Applicable Law

TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. arts. 55.01-.06 (Vernon 2006 & Supp. 2008) defines the

remedy of expunction and details the procedure. Expunction is only available after conviction if the

defendant has subsequently been pardoned. Article 55.01. The record before this court affirmatively

establishes that appellant has not been pardoned for any of the three convictions.

Holding of this Court

Appellant is attempting to collaterally attack his three final convictions. Expunction is not

the proper remedy. The trial court did not err in denying his motions. All of appellant’s contentions

have been considered, and each is overruled.

The orders of the trial court are affirmed.

PER CURIAM

April 16, 2009

Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

McCall, J., and Strange, J.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements of
West Pointe Bancorp, Inc. and subsidiary on Form S-8 (File No. 333-49990) and
on Form S-3 (File No. 333-68800) of our report dated January 16, 2003, which
report is incorporated by reference in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of West
Pointe Bancorp, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2002.


                                           /s/ Rubin, Brown, Gornstein & Co. LLP
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           RUBIN, BROWN, GORNSTEIN & CO. LLP

St. Louis, Missouri
March 26, 2003
JX0037 

REVISED REDACTED VERSION 

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 1313-7 Filed 01/14/19 Page 1 of 2
CX0846-001

JX0037-001

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 1313-7 Filed 01/14/19 Page 2 of 2
CITY OF ORLANDO and Relation Insurance Services, Appellants, v. John BEST, Appellee.

No. 1D18-2902

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Date of Accident: November 23, 2011 April 15, 2019 Rehearing Denied June 4, 2019

Kristen L. Magana of Broussard, Cullen & Blastic, P.A., Orlando, for Appellants.

Lawrence H. Hornsby of Hornsby Law, Winter Park, and Wendy S. Loquasto of Fox & Loquasto, LLC, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED .

B.L. Thomas, C.J., and Lewis and Roberts, JJ., concur.
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 Quarterly Report of Optionable, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Brad P. O’Sullivan , Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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 and 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.





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







August 20, 2010





/s/ Brad P. O’Sullivan





Chief Executive Officer


(Principal Executive Officer)