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

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 789 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 789

    To express the sense of the Senate that Medicare should not be 
             dismantled and turned into a voucher program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 12, 2011

   Mr. Baucus (for himself and Mr. Nelson of Florida) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                                Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To express the sense of the Senate that Medicare should not be 
             dismantled and turned into a voucher program.

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

SECTION 1. SENSE OF THE SENATE THAT MEDICARE SHOULD NOT BE DISMANTLED 
              AND TURNED INTO A VOUCHER PROGRAM.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate makes the following findings:
            (1) The Medicare program has been providing affordable 
        health care for elderly and disabled Americans for decades.
            (2) Forty-seven million Americans currently rely on the 
        Medicare program for their health care.
            (3) The Congressional Budget Office has stated that under 
        the House Budget Committee fiscal year 2012 budget resolution 
        ``most elderly people would pay more for their health care than 
        they would pay under the current Medicare system''.
    (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that--
            (1) Medicare should not be dismantled and turned into a 
        voucher or premium-support program;
            (2) deficit reduction should not be achieved by simply 
        passing on the costs of health care to Medicare beneficiaries;
            (3) guaranteed Medicare benefits should be preserved;
            (4) medical decisions should be made by seniors and their 
        doctors, not insurance companies; and
            (5) deficit reduction should be achieved by lowering health 
        care costs through delivery system reforms.
                                 <all>
```
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 Oak Hill Financial, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-K for the period  ending  December  31, 2004 as filed with the SEC on
the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, Ron J.  Copher,  Chief  Financial  Officer,
Secretary and Treasurer Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss.  1350,  as adopted  pursuant to ss. 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,
that:

      (2) 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/ Ron J. Copher

Ron J. Copher
Chief Financial Officer, Secretary and Treasurer
July 13, 2005


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


                                       82
##### 



Exhibit 1.3 Vale Overseas Limited
(the Company) Written Resolutions of
the Sole Shareholder of the Company dated 6th March 2002
made in accordance with the Articles of Association of the Company The undersigned, being the sole Shareholder of the Company, does hereby RESOLVE
AS A SPECIAL RESOLUTIONthat the existing Memorandum and Articles of
Association of the Company will be and are hereby replaced in their entirety
with a new Memorandum and Articles of Association, a copy of which is annexed
hereto in order to restrict the object of the Company. As a consequence,
provision 3 of the Memorandum of Association, shall be changed to be read, as
follows: 3. The objects for which the Company is established are restricted to:  (i)
    
    the issue and sale of its US$300,000,000
principal amount of Enhanced Guaranteed Notes due 2007 (the
Notes) and the issue of 1,000 Ordinary Shares of US$1.00
par value each in the Company to Companhia Vale de Rio Doce
(CVRD);(ii)
    
    the entering into and performance of its
obligations under, and the undertaking of all actions
permitted or contemplated under:  (a)
    
    the Purchase Agreement (the Purchase Agreement) to be made
by and among the Company, CVRD and J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., for
itself and as Representative on behalf of the Initial Purchasers
specified therein (the Initial Purchasers);(b)
    
    the Indenture to be made between the Company and JPMorgan
Chase Bank as Trustee;(c)
    
    the Supplemental Indenture to be made between the Company and
JPMorgan Chase Bank as Trustee;(d)
    
    the Registration Rights Agreement (the Registration Rights
Agreement) to be made between the Company, CVRD and the Initial
Purchasers specified therein; and(e)
    
    the Account Control Agreement to be made between the Company
as Pledgor, and JPMorgan Chase Bank as Secured Party, Bank and
Securities Intermediary,  (iii)
    
    the preparation and publication of an offering
memorandum in respect of the listing of the Notes on the
Luxembourg Stock Exchange;(iv)
    
    the issue of and delivery of the Exchange
Securities (as defined in, and pursuant to, the Registration
Rights Agreement referred to above);(v)
    
    the issue of further notes (the New Notes)
having identical terms and conditions as the Notes referred
to above; and the taking of all actions and the execution, performance and delivery of all
documents necessary, incidental or ancillary to any of the aforementioned
objects, including the procurement of letters of credit to support any of the
obligations under the Notes or the New Notes). Signed For and on behalf of Companhia Vale do Rio Doce: /s/ Gabriel Stoliar
    
    /s/ Antonio Miguel Marques
**Exhibit 8**
**List of Subsidiaries**       **Jurisdiction of** **Commonly referred to****Subsidiary** **Organization** **as**1.       Alumina do Norte do Brasil S.A. — Alunorte Brazil Alunorte     2.       Alumínio Brasileio S. A . — Albras Brazil Albras     3.       CADAM S.A. Brazil CADAM     4.       Caemi Mineração e Metalurgia S.A. Brazil Caemi     5.       Companhia Portuária Baia de Sepetiba Brazil CPBS     6.       CVRD Overseas Ltd. Cayman Island CVRD Over     7.       Ferrovia Centro-Atlântica S.A. Brazil FCA     8.       Itabira Rio Doce Company Ltd. — ITACO Bahamas Itaco     9.       Minerações Brasileiras Reunidas S.A. — MBR Brazil MBR     10.     Navegação Vale do Rio Doce S.A. -DOCENAVE Brazil DOCENAVE     11.     Pará Pigmentos S.A. Brazil PPSA     12.     Rio Doce América Inc. EUA RDA     13.     Rio Doce International Finance Ltd. -RDIF Cayman Island RDIF     14.     Rio Doce Limited EUA RDL     15.     Rio Doce Manganês S.A. Brazil RDM     16.     Rio Doce Manganèse Europe — RDME France RDME     17.     Rio Doce Manganese Norway AS — RDMN Norway RDMN     18.     Salobo Metais S.A. Brazil Salobo     19.     TVV — Terminal de Vila Velha S.A. Brazil TVV     20.     Urucum Mineração S.A. Brazil Urucum     21.     Vale Overseas Limited Cayman Island Vale Overseas     22.     DCNDB Overseas S.A. Brazil DCNDB
#### Sharon Altonen et al., Respondents, v Kmart of NY Holdings, Inc., et al., Appellants.

[942 NYS2d 363]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Cohalan, J.), dated March 31, 2010, as denied their cross motion to compel the plaintiffs to produce a settlement agreement from certain prior actions.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in *denying*the defendants’ cross motion to compel production of a confidential settlement agreement from certain prior personal injury actions unrelated to this action, as the settlement agreement is not material and necessary to their defense of this action *(see*CPLR 3101 [a]; *Allstate Ins. Co. v Belt Parkway Imaging, P.C.,*70 AD3d 530 [2010]; *Matter of New York County Data Entry Worker Prod. Liab. Litig.,*222 AD2d 381 [1995]). Rivera, J.P., Leventhal, Roman and Cohen, JJ., concur.
#### LEWY, Appellant, v. NORTH GERMAN LLOYD, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

November Term, 1897.)

Action by Alexander Lewy against the North German Lloyd.

No opinion. Motion granted, with $10 costs.
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 130 (Monday, July 12, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 36590]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-14892]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE: 2:00 p.m. on Thursday, July 15, 2021.

PLACE: The meeting will be held via remote means and/or at the 
Commission's headquarters, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549.

STATUS: This meeting will be closed to the public.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, 
the Secretary to the Commission, and recording secretaries will attend 
the closed meeting. Certain staff members who have an interest in the 
matters also may be present.
    In the event that the time, date, or location of this meeting 
changes, an announcement of the change, along with the new time, date, 
and/or place of the meeting will be posted on the Commission's website 
at https://www.sec.gov.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has 
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth 
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (6), (7), (8), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR 
200.402(a)(3), (a)(5), (a)(6), (a)(7), (a)(8), (a)(9)(ii) and (a)(10), 
permit consideration of the scheduled matters at the closed meeting.
    The subject matter of the closed meeting will consist of the 
following topics:
Institution and settlement of injunctive actions;
Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings;
Resolution of litigation claims; and
Other matters relating to examinations and enforcement proceedings.

    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in 
the scheduling of meeting agenda items that may consist of 
adjudicatory, examination, litigation, or regulatory matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: For further information; please 
contact Vanessa A. Countryman from the Office of the Secretary at (202) 
551-5400.

    Dated: July 8, 2021.
Vanessa A. Countryman,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-14892 Filed 7-8-21; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
#### Louis Tenenbaum, Petitioner, v Jackson Surrey Co. et al., Respondents.

Proceeding pursuant to Executive Law § 298 to review an order of the State Division of Human Rights, *dated*June 17, 1983, which, following a hearing after remand, determined that there was no probable cause to believe that respondent Jackson Surrey Co. was guilty of an unlawful discriminatory practice relating to employment, based on age.

*753Order confirmed and proceeding dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

The determination by the State Division of Human Rights is supported by substantial evidence on the record considered as a whole and was not arbitrary, capricious or an abuse of discretion *(see,*Executive Law § 298; *State Off. of Drug Abuse Servs, v State Human Rights Appeal Bd.,*48 NY2d 276, 284; *Matter of Board of Educ. v New York State Div. of Human Rights [Burns],*56 NY2d 257, 261; *Matter of Hickman v Roslyn Air Natl. Guard,*99 AD2d 837). Mangano, J. P., Gibbons, Bracken and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack, 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

January 25, 2013

s0122

Order 

January 25, 2013

145765

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 145765

COA: 308852

Oakland CC: 2002-184901-FH

BILLY JOE ENGLISH,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 22, 2012 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in lieu of 

granting leave to appeal, we REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for a 

determination of whether that court complied with its own practices regarding the filing 

of certificates stating that a transcript does not exist and deadlines for applications for 

leave to appeal. 

We do not retain jurisdiction.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-51189 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus LISTON RANDOLPH POSEY, II, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. W-93-CR-84-ALL

-------------------- April 9, 2001 Before DAVIS, JONES, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Liston Randolph Posey, II, federal prisoner # 02528-095, appeals the district court’s denial of his “Rule 35 Motion for Correction of Plain Error.” Posey argues that: (1) the forfeiture of his firearms violated his double jeopardy rights; (2) his sentence should be vacated in view of Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000); (3) because the indictment did not allege the quantity of marijuana, his conviction must be vacated with prejudice to subsequent prosecution in view of Apprendi ; and (4) the district court erred in stating that this court affirmedNo. 00-51189 -2- in part and reversed in part in United States v. Posey , 217 F.3d 282 (5th Cir. 2000). The only relief that Posey sought in his motion was an order vacating his conviction and sentence. The district court did not have jurisdiction to grant the relief that Posey sought as it was beyond the scope of this court’s remand for return of Posey’s property. See United States v. Hass , 199 F.3d 749, 752 (5th Cir. 1999). Therefore, the district court did not err in denying Posey’s motion. The Government’s motion to dismiss Posey’s appeal is granted.
APPEAL DISMISSED; MOTION TO DISMISS GRANTED; ALL OTHER OUTSTANDING MOTIONS DENIED.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 887 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 887

To increase the portion of community development block grants that may 
      be used to provide public services, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 4, 2011

  Mr. Nelson of Florida introduced the following bill; which was read 
  twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban 
                                Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To increase the portion of community development block grants that may 
      be used to provide public services, and for other purposes.

    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 ``CDBG Public Services Flexibility Act 
of 2011''.

SEC. 2. INCREASE IN PUBLIC SERVICES CAP.

    Section 105(a)(8) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 
1974 (42 U.S.C. 5305(a)(8)) is amended--
            (1) by striking ``15 per centum'' each place it appears and 
        inserting ``25 percent''; and
            (2) by striking ``amount, except'' and all that follows 
        through the semicolon at the end and inserting ``amount;''.
                                 <all>
```
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 84 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow refunds of Federal 

motor fuel excise taxes on fuels used in mobile mammography vehicles. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 25 (legislative day, JANUARY 5), 2011 

Mr. VITTER (for himself and Mr. COCHRAN) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow refunds of Federal motor fuel excise taxes on fuels used 

in mobile mammography vehicles. 

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 ‘‘Mobile Mammography 

5 Promotion Act of 2011’’. 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 84 IS

1 SEC. 2. REFUNDS OF FEDERAL MOTOR FUEL EXCISE TAXES 

2 FOR FUEL USED IN MOBILE MAMMOGRAPHY 

3 VEHICLES. 

4 (a) REFUNDS.—Section 6427 of the Internal Rev5 enue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting after sub6 section (e) the following new subsection: 

7 ‘‘(f) FUELS USED IN MOBILE MAMMOGRAPHY VEHI8 CLES.—Except as provided in subsection (k), if any fuel 

9 on which tax was imposed by section 4041 or 4081 is used 

10 in any highway vehicle designed exclusively to provide mo11 bile mammography services to patients within such vehi12 cle, the Secretary shall pay (without interest) to the ulti13 mate purchaser of such fuel an amount equal to the aggre14 gate amount of the tax imposed on such fuel.’’. 

15 (b) EXEMPTION FROM RETAIL TAX.—Section 4041 

16 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by add17 ing at the end the following new subsection: 

18 ‘‘(n) FUELS USED IN MOBILE MAMMOGRAPHY VEHI19 CLES.—No tax shall be imposed under this section on any 

20 liquid sold for use in, or used in, any highway vehicle de21 signed exclusively to provide mobile mammography serv22 ices to patients within such vehicle.’’. 

23 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

24 this section shall take effect on the date of the enactment 

25 of this Act. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
---

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of New Jersey Mining Company, (the
  "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2004, as filed with
  the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
  Fred W. Brackebusch, President, Treasurer and Director of New Jersey Mining
  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.

Date: May 13, 2004

By /s/ FRED W. BRACKEBUSCH 
  Fred W. Brackebusch, President, Treasurer & Director

---
No. 76-5579.

#### Mitchell *v.*LaVallee, Correctional Superintendent.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

No. 04

- 16

- 00022

- CV

Kenneth H. TARR

, Appellant

v.

TIMBERWOOD PARK OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC.

, Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 3, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014CV02779

Honorable David J. Rodriguez, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE ANGELINI

, JUSTICE BARNARD , AND JUSTICE MARTINEZ

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is modified

to delete those parts of the judgment that grant injunctive r elief. The trial court’s judgment is

AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED. Costs of appeal are taxed against Kenneth H. Tarr.

Kenneth H. Tarr’s Motion to Strike Portions of Appellee’s Brief is DENIED.

SIGNED November 16, 2016.

_____________________________ Karen Angelini, Justice
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 12.2

                           SECTION 906 CERTIFICATIONS

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, John A. Jacobson,
President and Chief Executive Officer of Offshore Systems International Ltd., do
hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that:

      -     the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended November 30, 2004
            of Offshore Systems International Ltd. 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 Form 20-F fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of Offshore Systems International Ltd.

Date: May 30, 2005

                                        /s/ "John A. Jacobson"
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                                   John A. Jacobson
                                         President and Chief Executive Officer

<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 12.2

                           SECTION 906 CERTIFICATIONS

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, John T. Sentjens,
Corporate Controller of Offshore Systems International Ltd., do hereby certify,
based on my knowledge, that:

      -     the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended November 30, 2004
            of Offshore Systems International Ltd. 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 Form 20-F fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of Offshore Systems International Ltd.

Date: May 30, 2005

                                                 /s/ "John T. Sentjens"
                                                 -------------------------------
                                                            John T. Sentjens
                                                          Corporate Controller