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

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 777 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 777

To clarify the authority of the Secretary of Defense to provide for the 
pay of the military of the United States under the Feed and Forage Act 
                                of 1861.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 8, 2011

Mrs. Hutchison introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
              referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To clarify the authority of the Secretary of Defense to provide for the 
pay of the military of the United States under the Feed and Forage Act 
                                of 1861.

    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 ``Temporary Military Pay Act of 
2011''.

SEC. 2. AUTHORITY OF THE SECRETARY.

    (a) In General.--During a funding gap impacting the Armed Forces, 
the Secretary of Defense shall under the authority provided under 
section 3732 of the Revised Statutes (41 U.S.C. 11) provide pay and 
allowances (without interruption) to the following:
            (1) Members of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, and 
        Coast Guard, including reserve components thereof, who perform 
        active service through the funding gap.
            (2) At the discretion of the Secretary of Defense, such 
        civilian personnel of the Department of Defense who are 
        providing support to the members of the Armed Forces described 
        in paragraph (1) as the Secretary considers appropriate.
            (3) At the discretion of the Secretary of Defense, such 
        personnel of contractors of the Department of Defense who are 
        providing direct support to the members of the Armed Forces 
        described in paragraph (1) as the Secretary considers 
        appropriate.
    (b) Funding Gap Defined.--In this Act, the term ``funding gap'' 
means any period of time after the beginning of a fiscal year for which 
interim or full-year appropriations for the personnel accounts of the 
Armed Forces for that fiscal year have not been enacted.
    (c) Expiration.--Authority under this Act expires on September 30, 
2011.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CertificationPursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to**

 

**Section 906of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

I, Joel Boyarski, the Principal FinancialOfficer of WorldGate Communications, Inc., hereby certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that (1) the Form 10-Q/A of WorldGateCommunications, Inc., for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2004(the “Form 10-Q/A”), fully complies with requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and(2) the information contained in the Form 10-Q/A fairly presents, inall material respects, the financial condition and results of operations ofWorldGate Communications, Inc.

 

A signed original of this written statementrequired by Section 906 has been provided to WorldGate and will beretained by WorldGate and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commissionor its staff upon request.

 

 
| Dated: | January  23, 2006 | /s/  JOEL BOYARSKI                            |   |
|--------|-------------------|-----------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |              | Joel  Boyarski                                |
|   |              | Chief  Financial Officer                      |
|   |              | (Principal  Financial and Accounting Officer) |

 

----
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CertificationPursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to**

 

**Section 906of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

 

I, Hal M. Krisbergh, the Principal ExecutiveOfficer of WorldGate Communications, Inc., hereby certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that (1) the Form 10-Q/A of WorldGateCommunications, Inc., for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2004(the “Form 10-Q/A”), fully complies with requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and(2) the information contained in the Form 10-Q/A fairly presents, inall material respects, the financial condition and results of operations ofWorldGate Communications, Inc.

 

A signed original of this written statementrequired by Section 906 has been provided to WorldGate and will beretained by WorldGate and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commissionor its staff upon request.

 

 
| Dated: | January  23, 2006 | /s/  HAL M. KRISBERGH          |   |   |
|--------|-------------------|--------------------------------|--------|--------|
|   |              | Hal  M. Krisbergh              |   |
|   |              | Chief  Executive Officer       |   |
|   |              | (Principal  Executive Officer) |   |

 

----
**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 Med-Emerg International Inc. (the
      "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2005 as filed with
      the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, William
      Danis Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§
1350, as adopted pursuant to §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 result of operations of the Company.





Dated:
      November 30, 2005





By:
            /s/
                William
                DanisName:
                William DanisTitle:
                Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 99.1

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

I,
Howard C. Birndorf, 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
Nanogen, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended November 30, 2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations
of Nanogen, Inc.

| |  | By:    | /s/HOWARD C. BIRNDORF
| |  | ------ | ---------------------
| |  | Name:  | Howard C. Birndorf   
| |  | Title: | Executive Chairman   

I,
Gerard A. Wills, 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 Nanogen, Inc.
on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended November 30, 2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and
that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Nanogen, Inc.

| |  | By:    | /s/GERARD A. WILLS     
| |  | ------ | -----------------------
| |  | Name:  | Gerard A. Wills        
| |  | Title: | Chief Financial Officer

---

QuickLinks
#### Roger Lee DEAL, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. G. Robert HICKS, III; Michael W. Casey; John R. Smith, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 11-6507.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: July 28, 2011.

Decided: Aug. 2, 2011.

Roger Lee Deal, Sr., Appellant Pro Se.

Before SHEDD, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

*979Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Roger Lee Deal, Sr., appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *Deal v. Hicks,*No. 5:10-ct-03195-BO (E.D.N.C. Apr. 5, 2011). 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.

*AFFIRMED.*
EXHIBIT 32.1



Certification of Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code,

as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



Pursuant to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United
States Code, the undersigned, Michael T. Kennedy, the President and Chief Executive Officer of Radnor Holdings Corporation (the Company), hereby certifies that:



The Companys quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended July 1, 2005 (the Report) fully complies
with the requirements of Section 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.



|                       |  |                                      
|---------------------- |  | -------------------------------------
|Dated: August 22, 2005 |  | /s/ Michael T. Kennedy               
|                       |  | Michael T. Kennedy                   
|                       |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
|                       |  | (Principal Executive Officer)        



A signed original of this written
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.
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Northeast Area
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        
                Northeast Area Cities

                    Washington, D.C.
                            Newark, Delaware
                            Boston, Massachusetts
                            Beltsville, Maryland (BHNRC)
                            Beltsville, Maryland (BARC)
                            Frederick, Maryland
                            Orono, Maine
                            Geneva, New York
                            Ithaca, New York
                            University Park, Pennsylvania
                            Wyndmoor, Pennsylvania
                            Kearneysville, West Virginia
                            Leetown, West Virginia
                            Burlington, Vermont


                    Civil Rights & EEO Policy StatementsSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Northeast Area Docs Distinguished Lecture





- ARS News & Events
- AgResearch Magazine
- Image Gallery
- News

News (2)headline bar


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
#### YONGJIANG YU, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 04-71101.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 17, 2008.*

Decided Dec. 30, 2008.

John L. Ogletree, Esquire, Ogletree Law Offices, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner.

CAS-District Counsel, Esquire, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Diego, CA, Jonathan B. Klinck, Assistant U.S., Office of U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, OIL, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and TROTT, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. Petr. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Yongjiang Yu, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration *368judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence adverse credibility findings, *Kaur v. Gonzales,*418 F.3d 1061, 1064 (9th Cir.2005), and we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

The BIA denied Yu’s asylum application as time-barred. Yu does not challenge this finding.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination based on the demeanor finding as well as discrepancies regarding Yu’s entry into the United States and the date of his detention in China, because the repeated and significant inconsistencies in Yu’s testimony deprive his claim of the requisite “ring of truth”. *See id.*at 1067; *Don v. Gonzales,*476 F.3d 738, 741-42, 743-44 (9th Cir.2007) (upholding an adverse credibility determination where petitioner demonstrated a lack of consistency about an important date and a propensity for dishonesty); *Singh-Kaur v. INS,*183 F.3d 1147, 1151 (9th Cir.1999) (demeanor-based adverse credibility determinations are entitled to “special deference”). Accordingly, Yu’s withholding of removal claim fails.

Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of Yu’s CAT claim because this claim is based on the same statements that the agency found to be not credible, and Yu points to no other evidence showing he will more likely than not be tortured. *See Farah v. Ashcroft,*348 F.3d 1153,1157 (9th Cir.2003).

We lack jurisdiction to consider Yu’s contention regarding the adequacy of the notice prior to the agency’s frivolous application finding because he did not raise this contention to the BIA. *See Ahir v. Mukasey,*527 F.3d 912, 917 (9th Cir.2008); *Barron v. Ashcroft,*358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir.2004).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
# C_2019182EN.01002701.xml

| 27.5.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 182/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.5.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 182/27

---

Appeal brought on 31 March 2019 by Ethniko Kentro Erevnas kai Technologikis Anaptyxis (EKETA) against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) delivered on 22 January 2019 in Case T-198/17, EKETA v European Commission

(Case C-274/19 P)

(2019/C 182/33)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Appellant: Ethniko Kentro Erevnas kai Technologikis Anaptyxis (EKETA) (represented by: V. Christianos and K. Karagounis, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court of Justice of the European Union should:

| 1. | Set aside the judgment of the General Court of 22 January 2019 in Case Τ-198/17 (1), |
| --- | --- |

1.

Set aside the judgment of the General Court of 22 January 2019 in Case Τ-198/17 (1),

| 2. | Refer the case back to the General Court for a further ruling; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Refer the case back to the General Court for a further ruling;

| 3. | Order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Order the Commission to pay the costs.

Grounds of appeal and main arguments

The appellant claims that the judgment under appeal should be set aside on the following grounds:

| — | First ground of appeal: The General Court failed to give judgment in accordance with the law and did not assess all the arguments and evidence produced by ΕΚΕΤΑ. The General Court also distorted the facts, as they emerged from that evidence, erred in law as to the allocation of the burden of proof and was in breach of the obligation to state reasons for its decision. |
| --- | --- |

—

First ground of appeal: The General Court failed to give judgment in accordance with the law and did not assess all the arguments and evidence produced by ΕΚΕΤΑ. The General Court also distorted the facts, as they emerged from that evidence, erred in law as to the allocation of the burden of proof and was in breach of the obligation to state reasons for its decision.

| — | Second ground of appeal: The General Court erred in law, in that it misinterpreted the issue of whether there was a risk of conflict of interest. |
| --- | --- |

—

Second ground of appeal: The General Court erred in law, in that it misinterpreted the issue of whether there was a risk of conflict of interest.

| — | Third ground of appeal: The General Court erred in law in its interpretation of the principle of proportionality, which it disregarded. |
| --- | --- |

—

Third ground of appeal: The General Court erred in law in its interpretation of the principle of proportionality, which it disregarded.

---

(1)  ECLI:EU:T:2019:27.

---
#### State of Connecticut *v.*George Velez

*Timothy J. Sugrue,*deputy assistant state’s attorney, in support of the petition.

*Brian J. Kornbrath,*in opposition.

Decided November 29, 1989

The state of Connecticut’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 20 Conn. App. 168, is granted, limited to the following issue:

> “Did the Appellate Court err in concluding that the police had an insufficient basis for relying upon the information furnished by the informant and, therefore, lacked probable cause for the arrest and subsequent search of the defendant?”
#### PEOPLE, Respondent, v. BURR, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

February 6, 1898.)

Action by the people of the state of New York against Hollis Burr.

No opinion. Judgment of conviction affirmed, and judgment to be entered pursuant to section 547 of the Code of Criminal Procedure; and, when so entered, it is to be certified and proceedings remitted to the county court of Chautauqua county, with directions to proceed.
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Eastern Regional Research Center: Wyndmoor, PA
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    About ERRC
                        Greetings from the Director
                                    Directions/Lodging
                                    History and Accomplishments
                    Our Work
                        Biomass Pyrolysis Research
                                    IPMP 2013
                                    IPMP Dynamic Prediction
                                    IPMP Global Fit
                                    Pathogen Modeling Program (PMP)
                                    Predictive Microbiology Information Portal (PMIP)
                                    PoultryFARMSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us






Biomass Pyrolysis Research (1)headline bar Biomass Pyrolysis Research
               Our Research
               What is Pyrolysis?
               Bio-Oil
               Researchers
               Facilities
               Our Partners
               Publications
               In The News
               Links


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov