alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
| **EX-32.1** | **CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF        EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002** |
|-------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|        |                                                                                                         |

|                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 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 Cougar Holdings Inc. (the        "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the        "Report"), I, Terry G. Cook, Chief Executive 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. Dated:  June        14, 2004By:Terry G. CookPresident 
  |
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000701345
<NAME> US AIRWAYS GROUP, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                             655
<SECURITIES>                                       384
<RECEIVABLES>                                      407<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0<F1>
<INVENTORY>                                        230
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 2,263
<PP&E>                                           7,906
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,051
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   8,697
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,900
<BONDS>                                          2,400
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           101
<OTHER-SE>                                        (346)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     8,697
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 4,531
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    4,502
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 122
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    (39)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        (4)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                (35)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                         (103)
<NET-INCOME>                                      (138)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (2.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (2.07)
<FN>
<F1>Receivables are presented net of allowances.
</FN>


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1510 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1510

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to reduce the depreciation 
                   recovery period for roof systems.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 6, 2005

 Mr. Foley (for himself, Mrs. Jones of Ohio, Mr. Shaw, Mr. Nussle, Mr. 
    Lewis of Kentucky, Ms. Hart, Ms. Velazquez, Mr. Wilson of South 
Carolina, Mr. Gary G. Miller of California, Mr. Feeney, and Mr. English 
 of Pennsylvania) introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
                    the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to reduce the depreciation 
                   recovery period for roof systems.

    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 ``Realistic Roofing Tax Treatment Act 
of 2005''.

SEC. 2. DEPRECIATION RECOVERY PERIOD FOR ROOF SYSTEMS.

    (a) 20-Year Recovery Period.--Subparagraph (F) of section 168(e)(3) 
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to classification of 
certain property) is amended to read as follows:
                    ``(F) 20-year property.--The term `20-year 
                property' means--
                            ``(i) initial clearing and grading land 
                        improvements with respect to any electric 
                        utility transmission and distribution plant, 
                        and
                            ``(ii) any roof system.''.
    (b) Requirement to Use Straight Line Method.--Paragraph (3) of 
section 168(b) of such Code is amended by adding at the end the 
following new subparagraph:
                    ``(I) Any roof system.''.
    (c) Alternative System.--The table contained in section 
168(g)(3)(B) of such Code is amended by striking the last item and 
inserting the following new items:

``(F)(i).............................................               25 
(F)(ii)..............................................             20''.
    (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to property placed in service after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```
II 

Calendar No. 409 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 2107 

[Report No. 109–247] 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 17, 2005 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

SEPTEMBER 27, 2005 

Committee discharged; referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources 

APRIL 20, 2006 

Reported under authority of the order of the Senate of April 7, 2006, by Mr. 

DOMENICI, without amendment 

AN ACT 

To amend Public Law 104–329 to modify authorities for 

the use of the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Maintenance Fund, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘National Law Enforce5 ment Officers Memorial Maintenance Fund Act of 2005’’. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMBILLS
2 

•HR 2107 RS

1 SEC. 2. COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH RESPECT TO NA2 TIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT MEMORIAL 

3 MAINTENANCE FUND. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 201 of Public Law 104– 

5 329 is amended by adding at the end the following new 

6 subsection: 

7 ‘‘(d) COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT.— 

8 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Effective on and after the 

9 date of the enactment of the National Law Enforce10 ment Memorial Maintenance Fund Act of 2005, the 

11 following applies, notwithstanding other provisions of 

12 this Act: 

13 ‘‘(A) The Secretary of the Interior, acting 

14 through the National Park Service, shall enter 

15 into a cooperative agreement with the National 

16 Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund, 

17 Inc., a nonprofit corporation incorporated under 

18 the laws of the District of Columbia, to carry 

19 out the purposes of the Fund as described in 

20 subsection (b). 

21 ‘‘(B) In accordance with the terms of such 

22 agreement, the Secretary shall transfer all 

23 amounts in the Fund to the Corporation. 

24 ‘‘(2) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of this sub25 section— 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMBILLS
3 

•HR 2107 RS

1 ‘‘(A) the term ‘Corporation’ means the Na2 tional Law Enforcement Officers Memorial 

3 Fund, Inc; and 

4 ‘‘(B) the term ‘Secretary’ means the Sec5 retary of the Interior.’’. 

6 (b) PURPOSES OF FUND.—Section 201(b) of Public 

7 Law 104–329 is amended— 

8 (1) in paragraph (3), by inserting ‘‘and’’ after 

9 the semicolon; 

10 (2) by striking paragraphs (4), (6), and (7), 

11 and redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (4); 

12 and 

13 (3) in paragraph (4) (as so redesignated), by 

14 striking the semicolon and inserting a period. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMBILLS
Calendar No. 409 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 2107 

[Report No. 109

–247] 

AN ACT 

To amend Public Law 104–329 to modify authoriother purposes. Officers Memorial Maintenance Fund, and for ties for the use of the National Law Enforcement 

APRIL 20, 2006 

Reported without amendment 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMBILLS
EXHIBIT 31.1  RULE 13A-14(A)/15D-14(A) CERTIFICATION  I, John T. ONeill, certify that:  1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of National Energy Services Company, 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 made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly 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 small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) 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)) and the internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) for the small business issuer and 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 small business issuer, 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 small business issuer's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions after 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 small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and  5. The small business issuers other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):  a. All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer'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 small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting.  January 29, 2007 /s/ John T. ONeill John T. ONeill Chief Executive Officer
[No. 21562-4-II.

Division Two.

October 10, 1997.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. James William Springfielt, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Clark County, No. 96-1-01079-1, James D. Ladley, J., entered January 9, 1997. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Hunt, J., concurred in by Houghton, C.J., and Bridgewater. J.
In re Gary E. SUTTON, petitioner.

No. 13-5551.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 2, 2013.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Exhibit 99.2

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

In connection with the Annual Report of National Energy Services  Company,  Inc.
(the  "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending October 31, 2002, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
I, Larry A. Shusman,  Chief Financial Officer (or the equivalent thereof) of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  that,  to the best of my knowledge and
belief:

(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/ Larry A. Shusman
-------------------------
Larry A. Shusman
Chief Financial Officer (or the equivalent thereof)
February 13, 2003
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Walter Clancy ROBINSON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 04-20078

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

April 24, 2006.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Richard Mark Frankoff, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before KING, WIENER and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Walter Clancy Robinson pleaded guilty to bank fraud and aiding and abetting and was sentenced to 71 months of imprisonment, five years of supervised release, $43,682 in restitution, and a $100 special assessment.

Robinson argues that under *Blakely v. Washington,*542 U.S. 296, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), and *United States v. Booker,*543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), his Sixth Amendment rights were violated when the district court held him accountable under relevant conduct for three fraudulent checks that were ordered and deposited by others after his arrest based on facts that were not admitted by him or found by a jury. Rob*338inson preserved this issue in the district court. *See United States v. Akpan,*407 F.3d 360, 376 (5th Cir.2005). Therefore, we review Robinson’s claim for harmless error. *See United States v. Pineiro,*410 F.3d 282, 284 (5th Cir.2005).

The district court committed a *Booker*error by increasing Robinson’s sentence based on facts that were neither admitted by him nor found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. *See Booker,*543 U.S. at 244, 125 S.Ct. 738. The Government has not demonstrated that the district court’s error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. *See Pineiro,*410 F.3d at 285. Accordingly, we vacate Robinson’s sentence and remand for resentencing.

Robinson also argues that loss amounts other than the amount to which he pled guilty do not constitute relevant conduct under U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3. However, because we are vacating and remanding Robinson’s entire sentence, we need not address this issue. *See Akpan,*407 F.3d at 377 n. 62.

SENTENCE VACATED; CASE REMANDED.

*

 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.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Tory L. BLAKELY, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 05-7881.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 27, 2006.

Decided: May 4, 2006.

Tory L. Blakely, Appellant Pro Se. Stacey Denise Haynes, Office of the United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Tory L. Blakely, a federal prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the- district court’s assessment of his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. *See Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Blakely has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the.materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED*
Gregory Allen GANT, petitioner, v. NORTH CAROLINA.

No. 12-9002.

Supreme Court of the United States

July 22, 2013.

Petition for rehearing denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2062 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.2062

                       One Hundred Ninth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
            the fourth day of January, two thousand and five

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
 57 West Street in Newville, Pennsylvania, as the ``Randall D. Shughart 
                         Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 57 West 
Street in Newville, Pennsylvania, shall be known and designated as the 
``Randall D. Shughart Post Office Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Randall D. Shughart Post 
Office Building''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ramon DE LEON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 05-40537.

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided April 26, 2006.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Timothy William Crooks, Margaret Christina Ling, Assistant Federal Public Defenders, Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before BARKSDALE, STEWART and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

*359PER CURIAM:*

Ramon De Leon appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for transporting an illegal alien. The sentence was imposed under advisory Sentencing Guidelines pursuant to *United States v. Booker,*543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), and included an upward departure based on guideline factors. *See*U.S.S.G. § 4A1.3.

De Leon contends for the first time on appeal that the court wrongly departed based on conduct that had already been considered as relevant conduct in the calculation of his offense level. Only the number of the previously smuggled aliens was counted as relevant conduct, and De Leon fails to show that it was plain error for the court to base the departure on the frequency and similarity of prior alien-smuggling episodes, indicating that De-Leon is a likely recidivist. *See United States v. McDowell,*109 F.3d 214, 215, 218 (5th Cir.1997).

De Leon also contends that retroactive application of *Booker’s*advisory guideline scheme violates ex post facto and due process principles. Applying the remedial portion of *Booker*to a sentencing hearing where the underlying offense was committed *pre-Booker*does not violate ex post facto or due process principles. *United States v. Austin,*432 F.3d 598, 599-600 (5th Cir.2005). The conviction and sentence are affirmed.

De Leon argues, and the Government concedes, that the case should be remanded for correction of a clerical error in the Statement of Reasons which incorrectly states that the district court departed upward based on “several unadjudicated offenses involving violence.” The case is remanded solely for correction of the clerical error in the Statement of Reason. Fed. R.Crim. P. 36.

CONVICTION AND SENTENCE AFFIRMED; CASE REMANDED FOR CORRECTION OF CLERICAL ERROR.

*

 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.