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

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 282 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 282

   To authorize testimony in Kanelos v. County of Mohave, et al. and 
                 Zanna, et al. v. Mohave County, et al.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 23, 2011

   Mr. Reid (for himself and Mr. McConnell) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
   To authorize testimony in Kanelos v. County of Mohave, et al. and 
                 Zanna, et al. v. Mohave County, et al.

Whereas, in the cases of Kanelos v. County of Mohave, et al., Civ. No. 10-8099 
        (D. Ariz.) and Zanna, et al. v. Mohave County, et al., Civ. No. 10-8149 
        (D. Ariz.), pending in federal district court in Arizona, the defendants 
        have requested that a declaration be submitted by Gina Gormley, an 
        employee of Senator John McCain;
Whereas, by the privileges of the Senate of the United States and Rule XI of the 
        Standing Rules of the Senate, no evidence under the control or in the 
        possession of the Senate may, by the judicial or administrative process, 
        be taken from such control or possession but by permission of the 
        Senate; and
Whereas, when it appears that evidence under the control or in the possession of 
        the Senate may promote the administration of justice, the Senate will 
        take such action as will promote the ends of justice consistent with the 
        privileges of the Senate: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That Gina Gormley is authorized to testify in the cases 
of Kanelos v. County of Mohave, et al. and Zanna, et al. v. Mohave 
County et al., except concerning matters for which a privilege should 
be asserted.
                                 <all>
```
#### The TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY, et al., petitioners, v. Pearlie BAILEY, et al.

No. 08-295.

March 20, 2009.

Motion of Future Claimants Representatives for leave to participate in oral argument as *amici curiae*and for divided argument denied.
Exhibit 99.1




                              Visual Networks, Inc.
                              2092 Gaither Road
                              Rockville, MD 20850







Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, DC  20549

Dear Sir or Madam:

         We hereby submit this letter in accordance with recent orders and rules
issued by your office regarding the financial statements audited by Arthur
Andersen LLP ("Andersen"). Andersen serves as Visual Networks, Inc.'s ("Visual
Networks'") independent public accountant.

         Andersen has represented to Visual Networks that its 2001 annual audit
was subject to Andersen's quality control system for the U.S. accounting and
auditing practice, it provided reasonable assurance that the engagement was
conducted in compliance with professional standards, that there was appropriate
continuity of Andersen personnel working on audits, and availability of national
office consultation. According to Andersen, availability of personnel at foreign
affiliates of Andersen was not relevant to this audit.


Sincerely

  /s/  John H. Saunders
---------------------------
John H. Saunders
Chief Financial Officer
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
 Columbia Plateau Conservation Research Center: Pendleton, OR
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Related TopicsSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Pacific West Area Pendleton, Oregon Columbia Plateau Conservation Research Center Docs





- ARS National Programs
- Search for a scientific manuscript
- Search for a research project
- ARS Software
- Programs and Projects
- Collaborations
- Subjects of Investigation
- Publications
- Agronomy
- CQESTR
- Hydrology
- NWR Biomass Research Center
- Soil Chemistry
- Soil Ecology
- Soil Microbiology

Collaboratorsheadline bar Dan Long, Agronomist Research Program: Agronomy


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
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Mark A. Harrison, Appellant.

—Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Cacciabaudo, J.), rendered June 14, 1984, convicting him of attempted robbery in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf. People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Mollen, P. J., Gibbons, Brown, Niehoff and Eiber, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>
                                                                  EXHIBIT 99.1



                            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 Valley National Gases
Incorporated (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2002
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Michael L. Tyler, Chief Executive Officer and President of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my
knowledge:

                  (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
         13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

                  (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents,
         in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
         operations of the Company.



                                    /s/ Michael L. Tyler
                                    -----------------------------------------
                                    Michael L. Tyler
                                    Chief Executive Officer and President
                                    February 13, 2003
# Official Journal L 96/2018

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 96 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6116 April 2018 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 96

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6116 April 2018

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/573 of 15 December 2017 on key elements of data storage contracts to be concluded as part of a traceability system for tobacco products (
  1
  ) | 1 |
| | * | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/574 of 15 December 2017 on technical standards for the establishment and operation of a traceability system for tobacco products (
  1
  ) | 7 |
| | | DECISIONS |
| | * | Council Decision (EU) 2018/575 of 12 April 2018 appointing an alternate member, proposed by Malta, of the Committee of the Regions | 56 |
| | * | Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/576 of 15 December 2017 on technical standards for security features applied to tobacco products
  (notified under document C(2017) 8435)

   (
  1
  ) | 57 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/573 of 15 December 2017 on key elements of data storage contracts to be concluded as part of a traceability system for tobacco products (
  1
  )

1

1

*

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/574 of 15 December 2017 on technical standards for the establishment and operation of a traceability system for tobacco products (
  1
  )

1

7

DECISIONS

*

Council Decision (EU) 2018/575 of 12 April 2018 appointing an alternate member, proposed by Malta, of the Committee of the Regions

56

*

Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/576 of 15 December 2017 on technical standards for security features applied to tobacco products
  (notified under document C(2017) 8435)

   (
  1
  )

(notified under document C(2017) 8435)

1

57

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
# C_2019182EN.01004001.xml

| 27.5.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 182/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.5.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 182/40

---

Action brought on 8 April 2019 — Fleximed v EUIPO — docPrice (Fleximed)

(Case T-214/19)

(2019/C 182/45)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: Fleximed AG (Triesen, Liechtenstein) (represented by: M. Gail, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: docPrice GmbH (Koblenz, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark Fleximed — EU trade mark No 12 025 771

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 February 2019 in Case R 1121/2018-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 60(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 60(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
#### Wolfe *v.*Wolfe.

February 11, 1915.

Alimony. Before Judge Walker. Wilkes superior court. October 31, 1913.

*J. M. Pitner,*for plaintiff in error.

*JI. J. Quincey, William, Wynne, Colley & Colley,*and *Walter M. Rogers,*contra.

Beck, J.

No errors of law are complained of as having been committed during the trial; and there being sufficient evidence to support the ver- . diet, the judgment refusing a new trial is

*Affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur, except Fish, O. J., absent.*
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 863 

To amend title XVI of the Social Security Act to clarify that the value 

of certain funeral and burial arrangements are not to be considered 

available resources under the supplemental security income program. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 14, 2011 

Ms. SNOWE introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend title XVI of the Social Security Act to clarify 

that the value of certain funeral and burial arrangements 

are not to be considered available resources under the 

supplemental security income program. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN FUNERAL AND BURIAL ARRANGE4 MENTS NOT CONSIDERED RESOURCES. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1613(e)(3) of the Social 

6 Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1382b(e)(3)) is amended by add7 ing at the end the following: 

8 ‘‘(C) If— 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 863 IS

1 ‘‘(i) an individual or the individual’s spouse en2 ters into an irrevocable contract with a provider of 

3 funeral goods and services for a funeral; 

4 ‘‘(ii) the individual or the individual’s spouse 

5 funds the contract by paying for the goods and serv6 ices; and 

7 ‘‘(iii)(I) the funeral provider subsequently 

8 places the funds in a trust or in escrow; or 

9 ‘‘(II) the individual or the individual’s spouse 

10 establishes an irrevocable trust, and the funeral pro11 vider is the named beneficiary of the trust, 

12 then the trust or escrow shall not be considered a resource 

13 available to the individual.’’. 

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

15 subsection (a) shall apply to payments for supplemental 

16 security income benefits under title XVI of the Social Se17 curity Act for months beginning on or after the date of 

18 enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
#### In the Matter of Clifford Aymes, Appellant, v Tax Commission of the City of New York et al., Respondents.

[943 NYS2d 529]-

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Martin Shulman, J.), entered April 28, 2011, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted respondents’ motion to dismiss the petition, and dismissed this proceeding brought pursuant to article 7 of the Real Property Tax Law, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

As a prerequisite to commencing a proceeding under article 7 of the Real Property Tax Law to review an assessment of real property, petitioner was required to “show that a complaint was made in due time to the proper officers to correct such assessment” (RPTL 706 [2]). The court correctly held that the “proper officer” in this case was respondent Tax Commission, as section 153 (b) of the New York City Charter states that the Tax Commission “shall be charged with the duty of reviewing and correcting all assessments of real property” *(see also*NY City Charter § 163 [f]; *Matter of G.A.D. Holding Co. v City of N.Y. Dept. of Fin., Real Prop. Assessment Bur.,*192 AD2d 441, 442 [1993]). Given petitioner’s failure to timely file a complaint with the Tax Commission, the petition was properly dismissed *(Matter of Sterling Estates v Board of Assessors of County of Nassau,*66 NY2d 122, 126 [1985]). We note, however, that dismissal of this proceeding for failure to exhaust administrative *568remedies does not, in and of itself, bar petitioner from seeking corrections relating to the subject property’s square footage, income, and expenses, which he properly sought in a Request for Review filed with the Department of Finance. Concur— Tom, J.E, Andrias, Catterson, Acosta and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.
(91 Hun, 144.)

#### PEOPLE ex rel. HOY v. BULLS et al., Excise Commissioners.

(Supreme Court, General Term, Third Department.

December 28, 1895.)

Intoxicating Liquors—Licenses—Powers of Excise Commissioners.

The commissioners of excise have the power to limit the number of hotel licenses granted in a given territory, as well as to refuse a license on a showing of the unfit character of the applicant.

Appeal from Albany county court.

Certiorari by John Hoy to review the determination of Charles H. Mills and others, commissioners of excise of the city of Albany, in refusing to grant an hotel license to relator. From an order directing the granting of a license, defendants appeal.

Beversed.

*372Argued before MAYHAM, P. J., and PUTNAM and HERRICK, JJ.

Richard O. Bassett, for appellants.

George H. Stevens, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The relator in this case made an application for a saloon license. After the hearing of such application, upon which much testimony was taken, the defendants adopted the following resolution:

> “Resolved, that the application of John Hoy for an hotel license at the-premises 334 Broadway.is hereby rejected, and a license refused, for the reason that considering the rights and interests of the property owners and. residents of the neighborhood, and the number of existing licensed place» in the vicinity of the place for which a license is sought, the commissioner» of excise are satisfied that there is no immediate necessity or convenience to be served in granting such an application at this time, and on the-further ground that said Hoy is not a man of good moral character, approved by the board; that this board is convinced that the premises for which a license is asked has been kept by said Hoy for a long period of time as a place for persons to visit for unlawful sexual intercourse, and as such is a nuisance to the neighborhood and the city.”

We think that the board of excise has the right to limit, the number of places that they will grant a license to in a specified territory, and that a refusal to grant a license, upon the ground that there are a sufficient number of places already licensed within such specified territory, should be sustained, unless the court is satisfied that such ground is a subterfuge, and does not constitute the real reason for their action. The other grounds for the refusal to grant the license,—the immoral character, of the applicant-, and the uses to which he permitted his place to be put during- his occupancy of it,—we think, were sustained by the evidence taken by and before said commissioners, and afford good and valid- reasons for the refusal of the defendants to grant the license asked for.

For these reasons the order of the county court should be reversed, and the decision of the commissioners affirmed, with $50> costs and disbursements.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Antonio Ortiz, Appellant.

[944 NYS2d 628]—

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Hollie, J.), rendered March 6, 2009, convicting him of predatory sexual assault (two counts), criminal sexual act in the first degree, rape in the first degree, attempted rape in the first degree, and burglary in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the law, by vacating the convictions of criminal sexual act in the first degree and *1141rape in the first degree, vacating the sentences imposed thereon, and dismissing those counts of the indictment; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the People’s contention, the defendant’s challenge to the Supreme Court’s *Sandoval*ruling *(see People v Sandoval,*34 NY2d 371 [1974]) is preserved for appellate review *(cf. People v Villanueva,*289 AD2d 425, 425 [2001]; *People v Brito,*179 AD2d 666, 666 [1992]). However, the claim is without merit. In fashioning its *Sandoval*ruling, the Supreme Court “struck an appropriate balance between the probative value of the defendant’s prior crimes and the possible prejudice to the defendant” *(People v Townsend,*70 AD3d 982, 982 [2010]; *see People v Sandoval,*34 NY2d 371 [1974]). A defendant is not insulated from impeachment by the use of past convictions merely because those crimes are similar to the crime charged *(see People v Pavao,*59 NY2d 282, 292 [1983]; *People v Aguayo,*85 AD3d 809, 810 [2011]; *People v Springer,*13 AD3d 657, 658 [2004]).

The defendant’s contention that the persistent violent felony offender sentencing scheme under Penal Law § 70.08 violates the principles articulated by the United States Supreme Court in *Apprendi v New Jersey*(530 US 466 [2000]) is unpreserved for appellate review *(see*CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Mendez,*71 AD3d 696, 696 [2010]; *People v Rodriguez,*51 AD3d 950, 951 [2008]) and, in any event, is without merit *(see People v Bell,*15 NY3d 935, 936 [2010], *cert denied*563 US —, 131 S Ct 2885 [2011]; *People v Leon,*10 NY3d 122, 126 [2008], *cert denied*554 US 926 [2008]; *People v Cardova,*88 AD3d 1008, 1009 [2011]; *People v Wellington,*84 AD3d 984, 985 [2011]; *People v Shaw,*83 AD3d 1101, 1103 [2011]; *People v Amico,*78 AD3d 1190, 1191 [2010]).

As the defendant argues and the People correctly concede, criminal sexual act in the first degree and rape in the first degree are lesser-included offenses of predatory sexual assault *{see*Penal Law § 130.35 [1]; § 130.50 [1]; § 130.95 [1] [b]). Thus, we must vacate the convictions and sentences for criminal sexual act in the first degree and rape in the first degree and dismiss those counts of the indictment *(see*CPL 300.40 [3] [b]; *People v Lee,*39 NY2d 388, 390 [1976]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions, raised in his pro se supplemental brief, are unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, are without merit. Skelos, J.P, Dickerson, Eng and Austin, JJ., concur.