alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2329

AN ACT

To permit eligibility in certain circumstances for an officer 

or employee of a foreign government to receive a reward 

under the Department of State Rewards Program.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2

•HR 2329 EH 

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Terrorist Rewards En3 hancement Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. ELIGIBILITY IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES FOR AN 

5 AGENCY OF A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT TO RE6 CEIVE A REWARD UNDER THE DEPARTMENT 

7 OF STATE REWARDS PROGRAM. 

8 (a) ELIGIBILITY.—Subsection (f) of section 36 of the 

9 State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956 (22 

10 U.S.C. 2708(f)) is amended—

11 (1) by striking ‘‘(f) INELIGIBILITY.—An offi12 cer’’ and inserting the following: 

13 ‘‘(f) INELIGIBILITY.—

14 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in para15 graph (2), an officer’’; and 

16 (2) by adding at the end the following new 

17 paragraph: 

18 ‘‘(2) EXCEPTION IN CERTAIN CIR19 CUMSTANCES.—The Secretary may pay a reward to 

20 an officer or employee of a foreign government (or 

21 any entity thereof) who, while in the performance of 

22 his or her official duties, furnishes information de23 scribed in such subsection, if the Secretary deter24 mines that such payment satisfies the following con25 ditions: 
3

•HR 2329 EH 

1 ‘‘(A) Such payment is appropriate in light 

2 of the exceptional or high-profile nature of the 

3 information furnished pursuant to such sub4 section. 

5 ‘‘(B) Such payment may aid in furnishing 

6 further information described in such sub7 section. 

8 ‘‘(C) Such payment is formally requested 

9 by such agency.’’. 

10 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Subsection (b) of 

11 such section (22 U.S.C. 2708(b)) is amended in the mat12 ter preceding paragraph (1) by inserting ‘‘or to an officer 

13 or employee of a foreign government in accordance with 

14 subsection (f)(2)’’ after ‘‘individual’’.

Passed the House of Representatives December 18, 

2005. 

Attest:

Clerk. 
109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2329

AN ACT

To permit eligibility in certain circumstances for an 

Rewards Program.receive a reward under the Department of State officer or employee of a foreign government to
Anne B. SANDERS, petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, et al.

No. 12-9964.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 2, 2013.

Petition for rehearing denied.
# L_2008070EN.01000501.xml

| 14.3.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 70/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.3.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 70/5

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 226/2008

of 13 March 2008

fixing the maximum export refund for white sugar in the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 900/2007

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 of 20 February 2006 on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector (1), and in particular the second subparagraph and point (b) of the third subparagraph of Article 33(2) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 900/2007 of 27 July 2007 on a standing invitation to tender to determine refunds on exports of white sugar for the 2007/08 marketing year (2) requires the issuing of partial invitations to tender. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 900/2007 of 27 July 2007 on a standing invitation to tender to determine refunds on exports of white sugar for the 2007/08 marketing year (2) requires the issuing of partial invitations to tender.

| (2) | Pursuant to Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) No 900/2007 and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the partial invitation to tender ending on 13 March 2008, it is appropriate to fix a maximum export refund for that partial invitation to tender. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Pursuant to Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) No 900/2007 and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the partial invitation to tender ending on 13 March 2008, it is appropriate to fix a maximum export refund for that partial invitation to tender.

| (3) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Sugar, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Sugar,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the partial invitation to tender ending on 13 March 2008, the maximum export refund for the product referred to in Article 1(1) of Regulation (EC) No 900/2007 shall be 32,947 EUR/100 kg.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 14 March 2008.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 13 March 2008.

For the Commission

Jean-Luc DEMARTY

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 58, 28.2.2006, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1260/2007 (OJ L 283, 27.10.2007, p. 1). Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 will be replaced by Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 (OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1) as from 1 October 2008.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 196, 28.7.2007, p. 26. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 148/2008 by Commission Regulation (OJ L 46, 21.2.2008, p. 9).

2

---
# C_2008039EN.01000501.xml

| 13.2.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 39/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.2.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 39/5

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4940 — Crédit Suisse/General Electric/Mubadala)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2008/C 39/02)

On 29 January 2008, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M4940. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu). |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M4940. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).

---
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 102 (Friday, May 26, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 27932-27933]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-12966]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 27933]]

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

28 CFR PART 16

[AAG/A Order No. 104-95]


Exemption of Records System Under the Privacy Act; Extended 
Comment Period

AGENCY: Department of Justice.

ACTION: Extension of time to comment on proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: On April 21, 1995, the Department of Justice, Bureau of 
Prisons, proposed to exempt a Privacy Act system of records, the 
``Telephone Activity Record System (JUSTICE/BOP-011),'' from 
subsections (c)(3) and (4), (d), (e)(2) and (3), (e)(5) and (8), (f) 
and (g) of the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2) and (k)(2). 60 FR 
19871-2. The notice of proposed rulemaking provided for a comment 
period ending May 22, 1995. 60 FR 19871. In response to a request for 
an extension of the comment period, the Department of Justice is hereby 
extending the comment period for an additional 30 days, until June 26, 
1995.

DATE: The comment period is extended to June 26, 1995.

ADDRESS: Address all comments to Patricia E. Neely, Staff Assistant, 
Systems Policy Staff, Justice Management Division, Department of 
Justice, Washington, DC 20530 (Room 850, WCTR Building).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia E. Neely, (202-616-0178).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Department of Justice provided a 
description of the ``Telephone Activity Record System,'' JUSTICE/BOP-
011,'' at 60 FR 19958-59 (April 21, 1995). In the notice section of 
today's Federal Register, the Department of Justice extends the time 
within which to comment on this system until June 26, 1995.

    Dated: May 17, 1995.

Stephen R. Colgate,

Assistant Attorney General for Administration

[FR Doc. 95-12966 Filed 5-25-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-05-M
**Certification      of Chief Executive Officer Regarding Periodic Report Containing**

**Financial      Statements Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of      2002**

|   |        |   |                                                                                                                                     |
|--------|-------------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | **•** |   | fully                complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities                Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|   |        |   |                                                                                                                                     |

|   | **•** |   | the                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the                Company. |
|--------|-------------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |   |   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    |
|--------|--------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |   | /s/                Robert A. Placek                                                                                                                                                                                                                                |
|        |   |   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         |
|   |   |   | **Name:    **Robert              A. Placek****                                                                                                                                                                                                      |
|   |   |   | **Title:     ****Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive                Officer****                (Principal                Executive Officer)** |
|   |   |   | **Date:**                     **January 17, 2006**                                                                                                                                                                                             |

----
Exhibit 99.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVEOFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICERPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, John F. Cole, 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 Hytek Microsystems, Inc. on Form10-QSB for the quarterly period ended March 29, 2003 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 fairly presents in all materialrespects the financial condition and results of operations of Hytek Microsystems, Inc. 

 

|   |   |   |   |
|--------|--------|--------|--------|
|   |   |   |   | By:  | /s/ JOHN F. COLE |
|   |   |   |   |   |  |
|   |   |   |   | **Name:**  | **John F. Cole** |
|   |   |   |   | **Title:**  | **President & Chief Executive Officer** |

 

I, Sally B. Chapman, 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 Hytek Microsystems, Inc. onForm 10-QSB for the quarterly period ended March 29, 2003 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 fairly presents in all materialrespects the financial condition and results of operations of Hytek Microsystems, Inc. 

 

|   |   |   |   |
|--------|--------|--------|--------|
|   |   |   |   | By:  | /s/ SALLY B. CHAPMAN |
|   |   |   |   |   |  |
|   |   |   |   | **Name:**  | **Sally B. Chapman** |
|   |   |   |   | **Title:**  | **Chief Financial Officer & Secretary** |

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Hytek Microsystems, Inc. and will be retained by Hytek Microsystems, Inc. and furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 31.2

Certification 

I, David M. Davis, certify that:

      (1) I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of US Airways, 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 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)) for the registrant 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 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) [paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC release Nos. 33-8238 and 34-47986]

(c) 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

(d) 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(s) 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 functions):

(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.

 

/s/ David M. Davis 

Name: David M. Davis

Title:   Chief Financial Officer

Date:   August 4, 2004
United States District Court

Northern District of Indiana

Hammond Division

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

 

v. Case No. 2:16-CR-95 JVB

MANUEL RAMOS

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the findings and recommendations of the Magistrate

Judge on a plea of guilty by Defendant Manuel Ramos (DE 22). No objections have been filed

to Magistrate Judge Martin’s findings and recommendations. Accordingly, the Court now

ADOPTS those findings and recommendations, ACCEPTS the guilty plea of Defendant Manuel

Ramos, and FINDS the Defendant guilty of the offense charged in Count 1 of the Indictment. 

SO ORDERED on November 14, 2016.

s/ Joseph S. Van Bokkelen 

Joseph S. Van Bokkelen

United States District Judge
Exhibit 106


		
			Exhibit 10.6
		

		
			Director Compensation
		

		
			Effective June 1, 2015, non-employee director compensation is as follows:
		

			
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

				
	
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						Committee Service

				
	
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						Nominating 

				
	
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						Board

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						and

				
	
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						Service

					
					
						 

					
					
						Audit

					
					
						 

					
					
						Compensation

					
					
						 

					
					
						Governance

				
	
					
						Annual retainer 

					
					
						 

					
					
						$

					
58,500 
					
					
						 

					
					
						$

					
					
						  -

					
					
						 

					
					
						$

					
					
						  -

					
					
						 

					
					
						$

					
					
						  -

				
	
					
						Restricted stock (value), one year vesting 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
175,000 
					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						  -

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						  -

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						  -

				
	
					
						Committee chair annual retainer 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						  -

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
25,000 
					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
15,000 
					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
15,000 
				
	
					
						Committee chair restricted stock (value) 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						  -

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
25,000 
					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
15,000 
					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
15,000 
				
	
					
						Committee member annual retainer 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
					
						  -

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
10,000 
					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
5,000 
					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
5,000 
				
	
					
						Meeting fee 

					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
1,500 
					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
1,500 
					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
1,500 
					
					
						 

					
					
						 

					
1,500
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

SOUTH BEND DIVISION

BILL SNIDER,

Petitioner,

v. CAUSE NO.: 3:16-CV-149-TLS

SUPERINTENDENT,

Respondent.

OPINION AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Motion to Alter or Amend Order Denying T.R. 60 

Motion [ECF No. 31], filed on October 12, 2023. Bill Snider, a prisoner without a lawyer, filed 

this motion asking the Court to reconsider the order denying his Rule 60 motion [ECF No. 30]. 

Snider requests relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e), but that rule only applies to 

altering or amending a judgment. Because Snider is proceeding without a lawyer, the Court will 

construe his motion as being made pursuant to Rule 60(b). An order granting relief under Rule 

60(b) is an “extraordinary” remedy reserved for “exceptional circumstances.” O’Brien v. Vill. of 

Lincolnshire, 955 F.3d 616, 629 (7th Cir. 2020). “Reconsideration is not an appropriate forum 

for rehashing previously rejected arguments.” Ahmed v. Ashcroft, 388 F.3d 247, 249 (7th Cir. 

2004) (cleaned up). Here, Snider raises nothing new and provides no basis for finding that the 

Court erred when it denied his Rule 60 motion. 

For these reasons, the Court hereby DENIES the Motion to Alter or Amend Order 

Denying T.R. 60 Motion [ECF No. 31].

SO ORDERED on October 13, 2023.

s/ Theresa L. Springmann

JUDGE THERESA L. SPRINGMANN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

USDC IN/ND case 3:16-cv-00149-TLS document 32 filed 10/13/23 page 1 of 1
[No. 39582-3-I.

Division One.

October 13, 1997.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. David Lyle Ball, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Snohomish County, No. 96-1-00792-1, Thomas J. Wynne, J., entered October 28, 1997. *Reversed*by unpublished per curiam opinion.
[No. 38519-4-I.

Division One.

September 2, 1997.]

#### Farpoint Development, Inc., *Appellant,*v. John D. Lux, Jr., et al., *Respondents.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 95-2-18986-5, Nancy Ann Holman, J., entered April 15, 1996. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Becker, J., concurred in by Kennedy, A.C.J., and Grosse, J.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markm an Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_________________________________________ Clerk September 4, 2012

p0827 

# Order

September 4, 2012

145186

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 14 5186

COA: 303805

Washtenaw CC: 10

- 000799

- FC

MARCUS DIONTE CLAYBRON,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 10, 2012

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.