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

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6058 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 6058

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 29, 2010

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, 
                           and Urban Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
  To ensure that the housing assistance programs of the Department of 
 Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Veterans Affairs 
  are available to veterans and members of the Armed Forces who have 
service-connected injuries and to survivors and dependents of veterans 
                    and members of the Armed Forces.

    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 ``Wounded Warrior and Military 
Survivor Housing Assistance Act of 2010''.

SEC. 2. AVAILABILITY OF HOUSING PROGRAMS.

    The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and the Secretary of 
Veterans Affairs shall take such actions as may be necessary to ensure 
that the housing assistance programs administered by such Secretaries, 
including mortgage insurance and home loan programs, are accessible by 
and available to, and address the particular needs and circumstances 
of, veterans and members of the Armed Forces who have service-connected 
injuries and survivors and dependents of veterans and members of the 
Armed Forces.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 28, 2010.

            Attest:

                                            LORRAINE C. MILLER,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
<PAGE>

                                                                 Exhibit 4.(A)10



                                                               10 February, 2002
Bank Hapoulim B.M.
Head Office
45 Rothschild Boulevard
Tel-Aviv

To

ViryaNet Ltd.

                  Re: Intention Letter for granting Credit

Pursuant to our letter dated April 11, 2001 (the "Letter") and according to your
request we hereby agree to extend the Availability Period of the credit until
January 31, 2003 provided that at all times you will maintain in your financial
statements the following financial ratios:

(1)  Your shareholders equity will not be less than 30% from the total
     balance sheet.


(2)  Your annual EBIT as from the annual financial statements for the year
     2002 will be greater than 0 (zero) and as from the first quarter of
     2002 your EBIT will not show loss higher than $1,000,000 (One Million
     U.S. Dollars).

The above shall be interpreted according to general acceptable accounting
principles in Israel.

If you will not maintain any of the above financial ratios then we will be
entitled to take any measures as we see fit against you, including and not
limited to, requesting immediately repayment of all your debts, this being in
addition to any other relief and/or measure that we are entitled to, pursuant to
various documents that you have signed and/or shall be signed in our favor.

All other terms and conditions of the Letter will remain in full force.

Nothing in the above shall derogate from our rights according to the documents
you have and/or will sign in our favor.

                               Very truly yours,

                               Bank Hapoulim B.M.

                    M. Alterman                 U. Rosenberg
                    /s/ M. Alterman             /s/ U. Rosenberg
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE

PURSUANT TO 18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Transgenomic, Inc. for the
quarter ended September 30, 2009, I, Craig J. Tuttle, Chief Executive Officer of Transgenomic, Inc., hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my
knowledge, that:



|(1) | Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Transgenomic, Inc. for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Transgenomic, Inc. for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Transgenomic, Inc.
|--- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ CRAIG J. TUTTLECraig J. Tuttle President and Chief Executive Officer


Date: November 5, 2009

A signed original of the certification required by Section 906 has been provided to Transgenomic, Inc. and will be retained by
Transgenomic, Inc and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS

NO. 04-0702

RONALD J. DOMINO, APPELLANT,

V.

R. JAMES NICHOLSON,

SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, APPELLEE.

Before GREENE, Chief Judge, and KASOLD, HAGEL, MOORMAN,

LANCE, DAVIS, and SCHOELEN, Judges.

O R D E R

Pending before the Court is the appeal of a February 10, 2004, Board of Veterans' Appeals

(Board) decision denying the appellant entitlement to service connection for a spastic stomach,

claimed as ulcers. The Board denied the appellant's claim based upon its finding that there was clear

and unmistakable evidence of record showing that the appellant's condition "preexisted service and

was not permanently aggravated therein." Record (R.) at 2. The appellant argues that the Board

decision on appeal should be reversed because the Board erred in determining that there was clear

and unmistakable evidence of record to rebut the presumption of soundness. The Secretary concedes

that remand, but not reversal, is warranted because the Board did not provide an adequate statement

of reasons or bases to support its decision and because the medical opinion of record on which the

Board relied is not sufficient to rebut the presumption of soundness.

The Court requires that the parties file supplemental memoranda of law, not to exceed 10

pages in length, addressing the appropriate remedy in this case. Specifically, the parties are directed

to address VA's ability to develop additional evidence to meet its burden in rebutting the

presumption of soundness, especially in light of the Board's finding in this case that the VA regional

office has "fully developed all evidence necessary for the equitable disposition of this claim" (R. at

2) and the Secretary's apparent concession that the evidence presently of record is not sufficient to

rebut the presumption of soundness. The parties are further directed to discuss or distinguish, as

appropriate, specific statutory, regulatory, and other authorities in support of their arguments

including, but not limited to, Adams v. Principi, 256 F.3d 1318, 1321-22 (Fed. Cir. 2001) (and

authorities cited therein); Mariano v. Principi, 17 Vet.App. 305, 312 (2003); Meister v. Derwinski,

1 Vet.App. 472, 473 (1991) (per curiam); and 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(c) (2007).

Furthermore, the matter will be set for oral argument on September 27, 2007, at 10:00 a.m.

Therefore, the Court does not anticipate granting any motions for extensions of time to file the briefs

required by this order, absent extraordinary circumstances.

Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is
2

ORDERED that, not later than 14 days after the date of this order, the parties file

supplemental memoranda of law, not to exceed 10 pages, addressing the above issues. It is further

ORDERED that this matter is set for oral argument on Thursday, September 27, 2007, at

10:00 a.m. in the Courtroom at Suite 900, 625 Indiana Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20004.

Counsel for the parties will be allotted 30 minutes each for presentation of argument.

DATED: August 22, 2007 PER CURIAM.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5872 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5872

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 29, 2010

                                Received

                             August 2, 2010

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban 
                                Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
   To provide adequate commitment authority for fiscal year 2010 for 
 guaranteed loans that are obligations of the General and Special Risk 
  Insurance Funds of the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

    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 ``General and Special Risk Insurance 
Funds Availability Act of 2010''.

SEC. 2. ADEQUATE COMMITMENT AUTHORITY.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for fiscal year 2010 
the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development may enter into 
commitments to guarantee loans, as authorized by sections 238 and 519 
of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715z-3 and 1735c), in an amount 
not exceeding $20,000,000,000 in total loan principal, any part of 
which is to be guaranteed.

SEC. 3. BUDGETARY EFFECTS.

    The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of complying 
with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, shall be determined by 
reference to the latest statement titled ``Budgetary Effects of PAYGO 
Legislation'' for this Act, submitted for printing in the Congressional 
Record by the Chairman of the House Budget Committee, provided that 
such statement has been submitted prior to the vote on passage.

            Passed the House of Representatives July 28, 2010.

            Attest:

                                            LORRAINE C. MILLER,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
DENY and Opinion Filed September 20, 2022 

# S

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-22-00787-CV IN RE GAIL CORDER FISCHER, Relator Original Proceeding from the 68th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC-19-17340 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Myers, Nowell, and Goldstein Opinion by Justice Goldstein In this original proceeding, relato r Gail Fischer seeks mandamus relief from the trial court’s order (1) granting real pa rty in interest’s motion to strike her exceptions to the auditor’s report and (2 ) denying her motion for leave to file the exceptions. Entitlement to mandamus relief re quires relator to show that the trial court clearly abused its discretion and that she lacks an adequate remedy by appeal. In re Prudential Ins. Co

. of Am. , 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). After reviewing the ame nded petition and the record before us, we conclude that relator has failed to demonstrate th at the trial court abused its discretion.–2– Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 52.8(a). Having denied the petition, we also de ny relator’s stay motion as moot.

220787F.P05 /Bonnie Lee Goldstein / BONNIE LEE GOLDSTEIN JUSTICE
* 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. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED February 23, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-51264 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JORGE FLORES-VELASQUEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:03-CR-2264-ALL-KC

-------------------- Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Jorge Flores-Velasquez (Flores) appeals from a guilty-plea conviction for being an alien unlawfully present in the United States after deportation. See 8 U.S.C. § 1326. For the first time on appeal, Flores argues that the district court violated the holding in United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220 (2005), by increasing his criminal history score based upon facts not admitted by him or found by a jury and byNo. 04-51264 -2- sentencing him under an unconstitutional sentencing guideline scheme. Flores’s arguments are reviewed for plain error.
See United States v. Mares , 402 F.3d 511, 520 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 126 S. Ct. 43 (2005). Flores does not demonstrate that the district court would have imposed a different sentence under an advisory guideline scheme. See id. at 521-22. Accordingly, Flores cannot establish that his substantial rights were affected. See id. Flores also challenges the constitutionality of § 1326(b). His constitutional challenge is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998). Although Flores contends that Almendarez-Torres was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule Almendarez-Torres in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000), we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that Almendarez-Torres remains binding. See United States v. Garza-Lopez , 410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 126 S. Ct. 298 (2005). Flores properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of Almendarez-Torres and circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further review.
AFFIRMED.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

July 13, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-51431

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JUAN CARLOS ZACARIAS-AMADOR,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 2:04-CR-668-ALL

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

Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Juan Carlos

Zacarias-Amador raises arguments that are foreclosed by

Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998),

which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and

not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for

summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district

court is AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Transgenomic, Inc. for the quarter ended March 31, 2009, I, Debra A. Schneider, Chief Financial
Officer of Transgenomic, Inc., hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge, that:



|(1) | Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Transgenomic, Inc. for the quarter ended March 31, 2009, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Transgenomic, Inc. for the quarter ended March 31, 2009, fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of Transgenomic, Inc.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ DEBRA A. SCHNEIDERDebra A. SchneiderChief Financial Officer


Date: May 14, 2009

A signed original of the certification required by Section 906 has been provided to Transgenomic, Inc. and will be retained by Transgenomic, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.



26
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned officer of Iron Eagle Group, Inc. (the "Company"),
hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that the Company's
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010
(the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained
in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.

                                 /s/Jason M. Shapiro
                                 ----------------------
                                 Jason M. Shapiro
                                 Chief Executive Officer
                                 Chief Financial Officer

February 15, 2011
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 Covad Communications Group,
Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q/A for the period ending June 30, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Amendment"), I, Mark A. Richman, Chief Financial Officer 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 Amendment 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 Amendment fairly represents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
Company.

                                         COVAD COMMUNICATIONS GROUP, INC.

                                         By:         /s/ MARK A. RICHMAN
                                             ----------------------------------
                                                       Mark A. Richman
                                                Executive Vice President and
                                                   Chief Financial Officer

Date: November 4, 2004
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Steven Douglas, Appellant.

Motion by the defendant for reargument of an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Linakis, J.), dated April 11, 1984, which was determined by a decision and an order of this court, both dated November 24, 1986 *(People v Douglas,*124 AD2d 815).

Ordered that the motion is granted, and upon reargument, the decision of this court dated November 24, 1986, is modified by (1) deleting from page one thereof, the words "who noticed a bulge in the defendant’s sock and removed the screwdriver therefrom”, (2) deleting from page two thereof, the words "and a bulge was observed in the defendant’s sock, which turned out to be a screwdriver, a potential burglar’s tool”, and (3) by adding to page two thereof, after the word "approached” and before the words "the defendant attempted to flee”, the word "and”. In all other respects, the decision and the order, both dated November 24, 1986, are adhered to. Niehoff, J. P., Lawrence, Weinstein and Eiber, JJ., concur.
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5948 

To repeal section 929I of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer 

Protection Act. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 29, 2010 

Mr. CAMPBELL (for himself, Mr. JONES, Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey, and 

Mr. HENSARLING) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To repeal section 929I of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street 

Reform and Consumer Protection Act. 

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

3 SECTION 1. REPEAL OF SECTION 929I. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 929I of the Dodd-Frank 

5 Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act is here6 by repealed and all provisions of law amended by such sec7 tion are restored as if such section had not been enacted. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5948 IH

1 (b) TECHNICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of contents 

2 for such Act is amended by striking the item relating to 

3 section 929I. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 6082 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow an exemption from 

tax for individuals with gross income of not more than $50,000. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

AUGUST 10, 2010 

Mr. STUPAK (for himself and Mr. KAGEN) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow an 

exemption from tax for individuals with gross income 

of not more than $50,000. 

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

3 SECTION 1. $50,000 EXEMPTION FOR CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS 

4 OVER AGE 65. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Part III of subchapter B of chap6 ter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended 

7 by inserting before section 140 the following new section: 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 6082 IH

1 ‘‘SEC. 139E. $50,000 EXEMPTION FOR INDIVIDUALS OVER 

2 AGE 65. 

3 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Gross income of an eligible indi4 vidual shall be treated as zero for purposes of this chapter. 

5 ‘‘(b) ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUAL.—For purposes of this 

6 section, the term ‘eligible individual’ means any indi7 vidual— 

8 ‘‘(1) who (and if married, such taxpayer’s 

9 spouse) has attained the age of 65, and 

10 ‘‘(2) whose gross income (determined without 

11 regard to this section) is not more than $50,000.’’. 

12 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The table of sec13 tions for part III of subchapter B of chapter 1 of such 

14 Code is amended by inserting before the item relating to 

15 section 140 the following new item: 

‘‘Sec. 139E. $50,000 exemption for individuals over age 65.’’. 

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

17 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

18 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS