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

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1094 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1094

   To authorize the use of certain public housing operating funds to 
      provide tenant-based assistance to public housing residents.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 31, 1997

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To authorize the use of certain public housing operating funds to 
      provide tenant-based assistance to public housing residents.

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

SECTION 1. USE OF OPERATING FUNDS FOR TENANT-BASED ASSISTANCE.

    Title I of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437 et 
seq.) is amended--
            (1) by designating the second section designated as section 
        27 (as added by section 903(b) of Public Law 104-193 (110 Stat. 
        2348)) as section 28; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:

``SEC. 29. USE OF OPERATING FUNDS FOR TENANT-BASED ASSISTANCE.

    ``(a) In General.--In each fiscal year, a public housing agency 
shall set aside 10 percent of the operating funds of the public housing 
agency to provide tenant-based assistance in accordance with section 8, 
upon request, to any resident of a public housing project seeking to 
receive tenant-based assistance in lieu of public housing assistance.
    ``(b) Preference for Victims of Certain Crimes.--In providing 
tenant-based assistance under this section, a public housing agency 
shall give preference to public housing residents who are victims of a 
crime of violence (as that term is defined in section 16 of title 18, 
United States Code) that has been reported to an appropriate law 
enforcement agency.
    ``(c) Unexpended Amounts.--Amounts set aside by a public housing 
agency under this section in any fiscal year that remain unobligated at 
the end of that fiscal year, shall be used for the operation and 
management of the public housing projects of the public housing agency 
in accordance with this title.
    ``(d) Notice to Public Housing Residents.--In each fiscal year, the 
Secretary shall provide written notice to each public housing resident 
of the opportunity to receive tenant-based assistance in lieu of public 
housing assistance with amounts set aside under this section.''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 13.1





Credicorp Ltd.
 Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)
  Pursuant to the requirements of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Sections 1350(a) and (b)), the undersigned hereby certifies as follows:
  1.           I am the Chief Executive Officer of Credicorp Ltd. (the “Company”).
  2.           To my knowledge:
  (A)        The Company’s Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2009 accompanying this Certification, in the form filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
  (B)         The information in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





By: /s/ DIONISIO ROMERO P.Name:  Dionisio RomeroTitle:  Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 32.1

CEO/CFO Certification Pursuant to § 906 of the

Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.
§1350)

The undersigned, as the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Pinnacle Bankshares Corporation, respectively,
certify that, to the best of their knowledge and belief, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009, which accompanies this certification, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Pinnacle Bankshares Corporation and subsidiary
at the dates and for the periods indicated.

The foregoing certification is made pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. §
1350) and shall not be relied upon for any other purpose. The undersigned expressly disclaim any obligation to update the foregoing certification except as required by law.



|             |  |  |  |                                      
|------------ |  |  |  | -------------------------------------
|May 13, 2009 |  |  |  | /s/ Robert H. Gilliam, Jr.           
|Date         |  |  |  | Robert H. Gilliam, Jr.,              
|             |  |  |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
|             |  | 
|May 13, 2009 |  |  |  | /s/ Bryan M. Lemley                  
|Date         |  |  |  | Bryan M. Lemley, Secretary,          
|             |  |  |  | Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer
Case: 1:01-cv-07716 Document #: 4 Filed: 09/03/02 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:11
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20-7658

ANTWYN GIBBS,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

GORDON B. JOHNSON, SR., Judge; GARRETT LOMINACK; ROBERT 

DENNIS; MICHAEL STRIBBLE,

 Defendants - Appellees,

and

SOUTH CAROLINA COURTHOUSE,

 Defendant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at 

Anderson. Donald C. Coggins, Jr., District Judge. (8:20-cv-00716-DCC)

Submitted: March 18, 2021 Decided: March 23, 2021

Before WILKINSON and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
2

Antwyn Gibbs, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

Antwyn Gibbs appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of 

the magistrate judge and denying relief on Gibbs’ 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. We have 

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons 

stated by the district court. Gibbs v. Johnson, No. 8:20-cv-00716-DCC (D.S.C. Oct. 16, 

2020). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

AFFIRMED
# C_2020348EN.01001401.xml

| 19.10.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 348/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.10.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 348/14

---

Order of the General Court of 10 July 2020 — Katjes Fassin v EUIPO — Haribo The Netherlands & Belgium (WONDERLAND)

(Case T-616/19) (1)

(Action for annulment - EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark WONDERLAND - Earlier Benelux word mark WONDERMIX - Relative grounds for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)

(2020/C 348/20)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Katjes Fassin GmbH & Co. KG (Emmerich am Rhein, Germany) (represented by: T. Schmitz and M. Breuer, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Söder, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO intervening before the General Court: Haribo The Netherlands & Belgium BV (Breda, Netherlands) (represented by: A. Tiemann and C. Elkemann, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 July 2019 (Case R 2164/2018-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Haribo The Netherlands & Belgium and Katjes Fassin.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as manifestly lacking any foundation in law. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as manifestly lacking any foundation in law.

| 2. | Katjes Fassin GmbH & Co. KG shall pay its own costs and those incurred, in connection with the present proceedings, by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Haribo The Netherlands & Belgium BV. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Katjes Fassin GmbH & Co. KG shall pay its own costs and those incurred, in connection with the present proceedings, by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Haribo The Netherlands & Belgium BV.

---

(1)  OJ C 363, 28.10.2019.

---
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:* National Institute on Aging Special Emphasis Panel; Alzheimer's Disease Genomics.

*Date:* October 18, 2021.

*Time:* 3:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.

*Agenda:* To review and evaluate grant applications.

*Place:* National Institute on Aging, Gateway Building, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Video Meeting).

*Contact Person:* Alexander Parsadanian, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health, Gateway Building 2C/212, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-9666, *parsadaniana@nia.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.866, Aging Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: July 29, 2021.

Miguelina Perez,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2021-16536 Filed 8-3-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
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
 Agroecosystem Management Research: Lincoln, NE
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Plains Area Lincoln, Nebraska Agroecosystem Management Research People





- Find a person
- Find a location
- ARS Organizational Chart
- People
- Contact Information
- Publications
- Research Projects

John E Gilley    Agricultural Engineer **Research Objectives** Identify sustainable cropping, management, and conservation practices that utilize manure as a valuable nutrient source for crop production while minimizing adverse environmental impacts.
Lead efforts to describe and quantify the hydrologic characteristics of agricultural production systems that sustain productivity, conserve natural resources, and minimize environmental degradation.
Assess and manage antibiotic resistance, nutrients, and pathogens in animal-impacted agroecosystems.
Conduct field studies to determine the effects of varying setback distance on the concentrations and mass transport rates of selected water quality constituents following land application of beef cattle and swine manure. /ARSUserFiles/1997/jeg1.jpgMeasure Water Quality Characteristics of Runoff from Cropland Areas  /ARSUserFiles/1997/jeg2.pngAssess the Effects of Vegetative Filters on Runoff Water Quality  /ARSUserFiles/1997/jeg3.jpgEvaluate the Effectiveness of Varying Setback Distances on Water Quality Characteristics


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
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
 Chemistry Research: Gainesville, FL
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    CMAVESearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Southeast Area Gainesville, Florida Center for Medical, Agricultural and Veterinary Entomology Chemistry Research People & Locations





- Find a person
- Find a location
- ARS Organizational Chart
- People
- Hans Alborn
- John Beck
- Anna Block
- Charles Hunter
- Caitlin Rering
- Charles Stuhl
- About John Beck
- Research Projects
- ARS News

John J Beck
                     

                     Research Leader
                     


                     ARS News Articles


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 Ephraim Evans, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rubin, J.), rendered June 17, 1982, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, and burglary in the second degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment reversed, on the law and as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, and new trial ordered.

The errors at trial were so fundamental that they cumulatively operated to deprive defendant of a fair trial.

The foundation of the defense strategy at trial was to show that defendant’s confession was involuntary. Discovery prior to trial revealed no other evidence linking defendant directly with the commission of the crime. This defense was effectively negated by the belated notice during the People’s case-in-chief that they were prepared to introduce evidence that defendant’s palm-print was found in the victim’s apartment, and not, as had been earlier believed, on a shopping cart taken from the victim and recovered alongside of the garbage outside defendant’s apartment building. Defendant moved for a mistrial after introduction of the evidence, claiming prejudicial surprise, the inference being that different trial tactics would have been adopted had counsel known of the damaging testimony from the outset *(cf. People v Byrne,*17 NY2d 209,216). We find the failure to declare a mistrial under these circumstances was an improvident exercise of discretion (CPL 280.10 [1]).

Compounding the above error, the trial court erroneously instructed the jury concerning confessions. Rather than advising the jurors that they should disregard defendant’s confession upon a finding that it was involuntarily made (CPL 710.70 [3]), the court advised: “If you find that he was either coerced into making his statement or that he was not properly apprised of his *831Miranda rights or that he did not understand them, you may accord his confession the weight which you believe it is entitled to under the circumstances as you find them to be”.

Notwithstanding that this error was not preserved, we reach it in the interest of justice because taken together, the two errors deprived defendant of a fair trial (CPL 470.15 [6] [a]).

We have considered defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Thompson, J. P., Weinstein, Niehoff and Lawrence, JJ., concur.
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

___________________________

No. 02-19-00113-CV

___________________________

On Appeal from the 348th District Court

Tarrant County, Texas

Trial Court No. 348-303532-18

Before Gabriel, Kerr, and Birdwell, JJ.

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

THE PREMIER COMPANIES, INC., PREMIER RENTAL-PURCHASE, INC.,

TRM VENTURE GROUP, AND RAJ, INC., Appellants

V.

FOUR A’S MESQUITE, LLC., Appellee
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT

We have considered the parties’ “Agreed Motion to Dismiss Appeal.” We 

grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f).

Consequently, appellee’s “Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction,” filed on

June 10, 2019, is denied as moot.

Appellants must pay all costs of this appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(d), 43.4.

Per Curiam

Delivered: October 3, 2019
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-2939

___________

Gelana Amente, *

*

Petitioner, *

* Petition for Review

v. * of an Order of the

* Board of Immigration Appeals.

Alberto Gonzales, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Respondent. *

___________

Submitted: August 21, 2006

Filed: August 24, 2006

___________

Before SMITH, MAGILL, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Gelana Amente, a citizen of Ethiopia, petitions for review of an order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denying his motion to reopen removal

proceedings. Amente entered the United States in 1993, and in 2000 he was charged

with being removable. He conceded removability and an Immigration Judge (IJ)

denied his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the

Convention Against Torture. In February 2003, the BIA summarily affirmed the IJ’s

decision, and a panel of this court denied Amente’s petition for review. See Amente

v. Ashcroft, 89 Fed. Appx. 591, 592 (8th Cir. 2004). 
-2-

In April 2005 Amente moved the BIA to reopen his case on the ground that he

had new evidence: an affidavit and two letters, stating that Oromos were still being

persecuted in Ethiopia; and an American Journal of Public Health article summarizing

the results of a study on torture and associated problems among Somali and Oromo

refugees. Amente argued that this evidence showed it was more likely than not he

would be tortured if returned to Ethiopia. The BIA denied the motion to reopen as

untimely, and added that Amente did not qualify for the asylum-application exception

to the time limitation because he failed to establish changed circumstances in Ethiopia.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Amente’s motion to reopen as

untimely, because it was not filed within 90 days of the final removal order. See 8

U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(6)(C)(i); Kanyi v. Gonzales, 406 F.3d 1087, 1089 (8th Cir. 2005)

(standard of review). The BIA also did not abuse its discretion in finding that Amente

failed to establish changed circumstances in Ethiopia. See 8 U.S.C.

§ 1229a(c)(6)(C)(ii) (time limitation does not apply to motion to reopen in which alien

seeks to apply for asylum or withholding of removal based on changed circumstances

arising in country to which alien is to be removed); Panjwani v. Gonzales, 401 F.3d

626, 632-33 (5th Cir. 2005) (BIA did not abuse its discretion in refusing to reopen

deportation proceedings based on untimely nature of motion and insufficient

evidence--lacking in detail and not different from that presented at removal hearing--

that country conditions had materially changed). 

Accordingly, we deny the petition. We also deny Amente’s motion for

expedited review.

______________________________
Case: 1:03-cv-07069 Document #: 17 Filed: 11/19/03 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:383

Case: 1:03-cv-07069 Document #: 17 Filed: 11/19/03 Page 2 of 5 PageID #:384

Case: 1:03-cv-07069 Document #: 17 Filed: 11/19/03 Page 3 of 5 PageID #:385

Case: 1:03-cv-07069 Document #: 17 Filed: 11/19/03 Page 4 of 5 PageID #:386

Case: 1:03-cv-07069 Document #: 17 Filed: 11/19/03 Page 5 of 5 PageID #:387