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

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1887 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1887

            To suspend temporarily the duty on Spiroxamine.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 27, 2005

 Mr. Cleaver introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
            To suspend temporarily the duty on Spiroxamine.

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

SECTION 1. SPIROXAMINE.

    (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:

``      9902.05.81      8-(1,1-             Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         dimethylethyl)-N-                                                  31/2008
                         ethyl-N-propyl-
                         1,4-
                         diozaspiro[4,5]de
                         cane-2-
                         methanamine (CAS
                         No. 118134-30-8)
                         (provided for in
                         subheading
                         2932.99.90)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### BURLINGAME, Respondent, v. DYKEMAN, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

October 4, 1907.)

Appeal from Trial Term, Orange County. Action by Earl Burlingame against James H. Dykeman. From a judgment for plaintiff, and an order denying his motion for a new trial, defendant appeals. Judgment and order affirmed. Hugo Hirsh (Ferd. W. Buermeyer and Edwin A. Jones, on the brief), for appellant. Phillip V. Fennelly, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs,

RICH, J.

(dissenting). This is an appeal from a judgment entered upon the verdict of a jury in favor of plaintiff in an action brought to recover damages for personal injuries. The accident and consequent injury to plaintiff was caused by his backing into an elevator shaft. Defendant was the owner of the building which was occupied by several different tenants. Plaintiff’s employer was a brass goods company occupying the top floor, while defendant’s place of business was in the basement. Plaintiff testified that just prior to the accident he used the elevator to take a truck to the street; that he wheeled the truck off the elevator into the street, took on some freight from an express wagon, and started to pull the truck back into the elevator walking backward; that before reaching the elevator, and when about nine feet from it, he looked back, and the elevator was where he left it; that he then turned into his former position and “kept pulling the truck backwards. * * * When I got to the door of the elevator, I fell in.” While plaintiff was going nine feet, some one without warning moved the elevator and caused the shaft or opening to be left without protection. There was evidence in the case warranting the conclusion that the elevator was moved by a boy in the employ of defendant There is no claim, however, that defendant had any personal knowledge of this act on the part of his emjfloyé; but this does not relieve him from liability for the negligence of the employs, providing he was acting at the time within the scope of his employment. I have examined the record with care, and am unable to find any evidence tending to show that the boy was engaged in defendant’s work at the time. The jury, cannot be permitted to speculate in order to create a basis for a verdict. Bowden v. Mott Iron Works, 113 App. Div. 738, 99 N. Y. Supp. 209. A master is not an insurer against the negligent act of his employs. He can only be charged with such negligence where the act was done while the person was acting within the scope of his employment. There was some evidence from which it might be inferred that the boy was going to the basement and that the defendant occupied that floor. Suppose he was; that of itself proves nothing. The judgment and order should be reversed, and a new trial granted, costs to abide the event.

GAYNOR, J., concurs.
Exhibit
4-e


 


ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT

OF

RESTATED ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION

OF

ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC.

(a Minnesota Corporation)


 


The undersigned, the President and Secretary,
respectively, of ADC Telecommunications, Inc., a corporation organized under the
laws of the State of Minnesota (the “Company”), hereby certify that:


 


1.                                       The
Board of Directors of the Company adopted the following resolution at a duly
called and held meeting of Directors:


 


RESOLVED, that the first sentence of Article 3 of the
Company’s Restated Articles of Incorporation is hereby amended to read in its
entirety as follows:


 


The aggregate number of shares which this corporation
shall have authority to issue is 2,410,000,000 shares, divided into
2,400,000,000 shares of Common Stock, par value $.20 per share, and 10,000,000
shares of Preferred Stock, no par value.


 


2.                                       The
Shareholders of the Company approved the foregoing amendment at a duly called
and held meeting of shareholders.


 


3.                                       The
foregoing amendment was adopted pursuant to the applicable provisions of
Chapter 302A of the Minnesota Statues, more specifically, Section 302A.135 of
the Minnesota Statues.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, these Articles of Amendment have
been executed by the President and the Secretary of ADC Telecommunications, Inc.
as of this 9th day of March, 2004.


 


	
   

  	
  ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC.

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
  /s/ Robert E. Switz

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Robert E. Switz

  	
  President

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  AND

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
  /s/ Jeffrey D. Pflaum

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Jeffrey D. Pflaum

  	
  Secretary
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1364 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1364

 To amend title 28, United States Code, to enable the Supreme Court to 
  review decisions in which the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces 
                             denied relief.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 17, 2005

   Mrs. Davis of California introduced the following bill; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 28, United States Code, to enable the Supreme Court to 
  review decisions in which the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces 
                             denied relief.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Equal Justice for Our Military 
Act''.

SEC. 2. SUPREME COURT REVIEW OF DECISIONS IN WHICH THE COURT OF APPEALS 
              FOR THE ARMED FORCES DENIED RELIEF.

    Section 1259 of title 28, United States Code, is amended in 
paragraph (4) by striking ``granted relief'' and inserting ``granted or 
denied relief''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 99.2





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)





In connection with the Quarterly Report of Flow
International Corporation, a Washington corporation (the Company), on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending October 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Stephen D. Reichenbach, Principal
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350), 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 result of operations of the Company.








/S/  STEPHEN D.
REICHENBACH


Stephen D. Reichenbach


Principal Financial Officer


December 16, 2002
**[Virchow Krause & Company Logo]****Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**We have examined WestLake Settlement Services, LLC's compliance with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of Regulation AB applicable to  WestLake (the "Applicable Servicing Criteria") as of and for the year ended December 31, 2007: 1122(d)(4)(xi) Payments made on behalf of an obligor (such as tax or insurance payments) are  made on or before the related penalty or expiration dates, as indicated on the appropriate bills or notices for such payments, provided that such support has been received by the servicer at least 30 calendar days prior to these dates, or such other number of days specified in the transaction agreements.; 1122(d)(4)(xii) Any late payment penalties in connection with any payment to be made on behalf of an obligor are paid from the servicer's funds and not charged to the obligor, unless the late payment was due to the obligor's error or omission;  Management is responsible for the Company's compliance with these servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertion about the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria based on our examination.  Our examination was conducted in accordance with standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the applicable servicing criteria and performing such other procedures  as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our examination provides a  reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria. In our opinion, WestLake Settlement Services, LLC complied with, in all material respects, the aforementioned servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2007. /s/ Virchow Krause & Company LLP Virchow Krause & Company, LLP March 3, 2008
September 19 2007
Joe DOE, petitioner, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK, et al.

No. 12-8634.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
Exhibit 10.6
 AMENDMENT NO. 1
TO
THE WILLIAMS PIPELINE GP LLC LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN
 This Amendment No. 1 rd
 WHEREAS
 WHEREAS
 WHEREAS
 NOW, THEREFORE
  provided provided further
  provided
 1




---



##### 



provided
    provided
    (h)
    
    Compliance with Section 409A of the Code. Nothwithstanding
any other provision of the Plan to the contrary, the Board intends that any
Award under the Plan shall be made on and contain terms that (i) are designed
to avoid application of Section 409A of the Code to the Award or (ii) satisfy
the requirements of Section 409A of the Code in order to avoid the imposition
of any taxes, including additional income taxes, thereunder. If the
Committee determines
 2




---



##### 



that an Award, Award Agreement, payment, distribution, deferral election,
transaction or any other action or arrangement, including without
limitation any amendment, waiver, acceleration or adjustment of an Award
or terms of an Award, contemplated by the provisions of the Plan would, if
undertaken, result in adverse tax consequences under Section 409A of the
Code to the respective Participant, such Award, Award Agreement, payment,
distribution, deferral election, transaction or other action or
arrangement shall not be undertaken and the related provisions of the Plan
and/or Award Agreement will be deemed modified, or, if necessary,
rescinded in order to either (x) avoid application of Section 409A of the
Code or (y) satisfy the requirements of Section 409A of the Code in order
to avoid the imposition of any taxes, including additional income taxes,
thereunder, to the extent determined by the Committee without the consent
of or notice to the Participant.
       3
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 Annual Report of Witel Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K
for the period ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Gary Tsitron, Chief 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 to the best of
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.





Witel
Corp.




By /s/ Gary
Tsitron


Gary
Tsitron


Chief
Financial officer


April 3,
2009
---

|CERTIFICATION                                
|---------------------------------------------
|PURSUANT TO                                  
|18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,                      
|AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO                       
|SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Jeffrey R. Mason, Chief Financial Officer of Northern
Dynasty Minerals Ltd. (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, to the best of my knowledge:

(1) The Annual Report on Form 40-F of
the Company for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 (the Annual 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
Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of the Company.

| | By:    | /s/ J. Mason           
| | ------ | -----------------------
| |        |                        
| | Name:  | Jeffrey R. Mason       
| | Title: | Chief Financial Officer
| |        |                        
| | Date:  | March 31, 2008         

This written statement is being furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to the Companys Annual Report on Form
40-F. A signed original of this statement 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.

This certification accompanies this Annual Report on Form
40-F pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not,
except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the
Exchange Act). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by
reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the
Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it
by reference.

---
## F I F T H 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
Case No. 5D 2 3

- 2820 LT Case No

. 2023

- CF

- 000190

_____________________________
S AMUEL D AVID P ELHAM ,
Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA ,
Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for St. Johns County

. R. Lee Smith, J udge

.

Matthew Metz, Public Defender, and Zachary Wiseman, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Allison L. Morris, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

M arch 12, 2024

P ER C URIAM

.

A FFIRMED

.

E DWARD S , C.J., and E ISNAUGLE and M AC I VER , JJ., concur

.2 _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, petitioner, v. Noel CANNING, et al.

No. 12-1281.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 24, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit granted. In addition to the questions presented by the *2862petition, the parties are directed to brief and argue the following question: Whether the President's recess-appointment power may be exercised when the Senate is convening every three days in *pro forma* sessions.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Robert McKeever, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Samenga, J.), rendered October 6, 1982, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

We agree with the hearing court’s determination that the photographic identification procedure was not unduly suggestive *(see, People v Rodriguez,*64 NY2d 738). In any event, there was an independent source for the in-court identification. Ti-tone, J. P., Mangano, Weinstein and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.
#### WOLF, Respondent, v. WERTHEIM et al., Appellants.

(Supreme Conrt, Appcllate Division, First Department.

June 20, 1913.)

Action by Isaac L. Wolf against Henry P. Wart-helm aud others. Norbert Heinsheimer, of New York City, for appellants. H. J. Leffert, of New York City, for respondent.

No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Order filed.
EXHIBIT 10.77


 


January 5,
2004


 


A. Curts Cooke


c/o Russ Berrie and Company,
Inc.


111 Bauer Drive


Oakland, New Jersey  07436


 


Dear Curts:


 


As you know,
the Board of Directors of the Company has authorized the exploration of a
possible sale of or other major corporate transaction involving the Company,
although no decision to effect such a transaction has been made and there can
be no assurance that it will occur or as to the timing thereof.


 


The Board of
Directors believes that your continued service as an executive and effective
participation in the exploration of a possible sale is important to the
Company.  Accordingly, the Board of
Directors has determined that if the Company consummates a Change in Control,
as defined in the Company’s Change in Control Severance Plan, on or before         April 30, 2004, and you remain
employed by the Company through the consummation of that Change in Control, you
will be awarded a special bonus of $150,000. 
(If for any reason you are not employed by the Company when the Change
in Control is consummated, you will not be entitled to any payment under this
letter.)


 


The bonus
contemplated above is in addition to any other compensation to which you may be
entitled from the Company.  Nothing in
this letter alters any of the terms of your employment with the Company or
creates any obligation on the part of the Company to retain you as an
employee.  This letter supercedes the
letter to you, dated July 2, 2003, a copy of which is attached hereto, which
letter shall be of no further force or effect.


 


	
   

  	
  Very truly
  yours,

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  /s/ ANGELICA
  BERRIE

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Angelica
  Berrie

  
	
   

  	
  Chief
  Executive Officer
USDC IN/ND case 2:15-cv-00440-WCL-APR   document 19   filed 02/19/16   page 1 of 9

USDC IN/ND case 2:15-cv-00440-WCL-APR   document 19   filed 02/19/16   page 2 of 9

USDC IN/ND case 2:15-cv-00440-WCL-APR   document 19   filed 02/19/16   page 3 of 9

USDC IN/ND case 2:15-cv-00440-WCL-APR   document 19   filed 02/19/16   page 4 of 9

USDC IN/ND case 2:15-cv-00440-WCL-APR   document 19   filed 02/19/16   page 5 of 9

USDC IN/ND case 2:15-cv-00440-WCL-APR   document 19   filed 02/19/16   page 6 of 9

USDC IN/ND case 2:15-cv-00440-WCL-APR   document 19   filed 02/19/16   page 7 of 9

USDC IN/ND case 2:15-cv-00440-WCL-APR   document 19   filed 02/19/16   page 8 of 9

USDC IN/ND case 2:15-cv-00440-WCL-APR   document 19   filed 02/19/16   page 9 of 9
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1857 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on polytetramethylene ether 

glycol. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 26, 2005 

Mr. RANGEL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on 

polytetramethylene ether glycol. 

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

3 SECTION 1. POLYTETRAMETHYLENE ETHER GLYCOL. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subheading 9902.02.98 of the 

5 Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by striking ‘‘12/31/2006’’ and inserting ‘‘12/31/ 

7 2008’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 this section shall apply with respect to goods entered, or 
2 

•HR 1857 IH 

1 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

2 the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ