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

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1936 

To amend the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 to modify 

the terms of the Jackson Gulch rehabilitation project in Colorado, and 

for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 27, 2019 

Mr. TIPTON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To amend the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 

2009 to modify the terms of the Jackson Gulch rehabilitation project in Colorado, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Jackson Gulch Reha5 bilitation Project Modification Act’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1936 IH

1 SEC. 2. MODIFICATION OF JACKSON GULCH REHABILITA2 TION PROJECT, COLORADO. 

3 Section 9105(b) of the Omnibus Public Land Man4 agement Act of 2009 (Public Law 111–11; 123 Stat. 

5 1303) is amended— 

6 (1) in paragraph (1)— 

7 (A) by striking ‘‘requirement’’ and insert8 ing ‘‘and cost-sharing requirements’’; and 

9 (B) by inserting ‘‘, which shall be not more 

10 than 65 percent of that total cost’’ before the 

11 period at the end; 

12 (2) in paragraph (3)— 

13 (A) in the paragraph heading, by striking 

14 ‘‘REQUIREMENT’’ and inserting ‘‘AND COST15 SHARING REQUIREMENTS’’; 

16 (B) in subparagraph (A), in the matter 

17 preceding clause (i), by striking ‘‘The Secretary 

18 shall recover from the District as reimbursable 

19 expenses’’ and inserting ‘‘Subject to subpara20 graph (C), the District shall be liable under this 

21 subsection for an amount equal to’’; 

22 (C) in subparagraph (B)— 

23 (i) in the matter preceding clause (i), 

24 by striking ‘‘Secretary shall recover reim25 bursable expenses’’ and inserting ‘‘District 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1936 IH

1 shall pay the Project costs for which the 

2 District is liable’’; and 

3 (ii) in clause (ii), by striking ‘‘15’’ 

4 and inserting ‘‘not more than 40’’; and 

5 (D) by striking subparagraph (C) and in6 serting the following: 

7 ‘‘(C) CREDIT.—In determining the exact 

8 amount for which the District is liable under 

9 this paragraph, the Secretary shall— 

10 ‘‘(i) review and approve all final costs 

11 associated with the completion of the 

12 Project; and 

13 ‘‘(ii) credit the district for all amounts 

14 paid by the District for engineering work 

15 and improvements directly associated with 

16 the Project, whether before, on, or after 

17 the date of enactment of this Act.’’; and 

18 (3) in paragraph (7), by striking ‘‘$8,250,000.’’ 

19 and inserting the following: ‘‘the lesser of— 

20 ‘‘(A) not more than 65 percent of the total 

21 cost of carrying out the Project; and 

22 ‘‘(B) $5,350,000.’’. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
December 13, 2019 

Submitted via the CFTC Portal 

Mr. Christopher J. Kirkpatrick 

Secretary of the Commission 

Office of the Secretariat 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

Three Lafayette Centre 

1155 21st Street, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20581 

Re: tpSEF Inc. – Regulation 40.6(a) Rule Certification – Notification of Amendments to 

tpSEF Fee Schedule (tpSEF Submission #19-02F)

To Whom It May Concern: 

Pursuant to Section 5c(c) of the Commodity Exchange Act, as amended (the “Act”), and Section 40.6(a) 

of the regulations of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the “Commission”), tpSEF Inc. 

(“tpSEF”), a registered swap execution facility, hereby notifies the Commission that it wishes to amend 

its fee schedule (“Fee Schedule”) as described in Exhibit A. The amended Fee Schedule will become 

effective on December 30, 2019. 

Pursuant to Commission Regulation 40.6, this submission includes: 

(i) A concise explanation and analysis of the amended Fee Schedule and its compliance with 

applicable provisions of the Act, attached as Exhibit A; 

(ii) A clean copy of the amended Fee Schedule, attached as Exhibit B; and 

(iii) A copy of the amended Fee Schedule marked to show changes to the version that will 

become effective on December 23, 2019 (the “Marked Fee Schedule”), attached as 

Exhibit C. 

tpSEF hereby certifies that (i) the amendment complies with the requirements of the Act and Commission

regulations thereunder, and (ii) a notice and copy of this submission is being concurrently posted on 

tpSEF’s website. tpSEF is not aware of any substantive opposing views expressed with respect to this 

filing. 

ACTIVE 252071482
# C_2019082EN.01005302.xml

| 4.3.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 82/53 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.3.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 82/53

---

Judgment of the General Court of 12 December 2018 — Vitromed v EUIPO — Vitromed Healthcare (VITROMED Germany)

(Case T-821/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark VITROMED Germany - Earlier EU word mark Vitromed - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)))

(2019/C 82/63)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Vitromed GmbH (Jena, Germany) (represented by: M. Linß, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Graul, D. Walicka and M. Fischer, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Vitromed Healthcare (Jaipur, India) (represented by: J. Schmidt, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 September 2017 (Case R 2402/2016-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Vitromed Healthcare and Vitromed.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Vitromed GmbH to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Vitromed GmbH to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 52, 12.2.2018.

---
Exhibit 32



BISON INSTRUMENTS, INC.

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)



The undersigned, Edward G. Lampman, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Bison Instruments, Inc. (the Company), has executed this Certification in connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the Companys annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2006 (the Report).



The undersigned hereby certifies 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.




A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon request.



Date:  January 25, 2007



| | /s/   Edward G. Lampman
| | -----------------------
| | Title:                 

---
Exhibit23.1



CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM



We have issued our report dated June 9, 2006, accompanying the financial statements of Prime Time Equipment, Inc. as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the related statements of operations, stockholders equity and cash flows for the years then ended. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said report in the Form 8-K/A filed as of July 14, 2006 of CapSource Financial, Inc.





/s/ Gordon, Hughes & Banks, LLP

Greenwood Village, Colorado

July 13, 2006

---
**Exhibit 31.4**
**CERTIFICATION**
     I,Ian B. Carter, certify that:
 1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 2 to Annual Report on Form 10-K/A ofCommonwealth Energy Corporation;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows ofthe registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantand have:
 (a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, basedon our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):
 (a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely
 

 

   affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves managementor other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.     Date: March 23, 2004 /s/ IAN B. CARTER     Ian B. Carter
# C_2018328EN.01004802.xml

| 17.9.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 328/48 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.9.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 328/48

---

Order of the General Court of 12 July 2018 — Labiri v EESC

(Case T-256/17) (1)

((Civil service - Officials - Psychological harassment - Amicable settlement - Performance of the agreement - Error in law - Error in assessment - Misuse of powers - Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law))

(2018/C 328/65)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Vassiliki Labiri (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: J.-N. Louis and N. de Montigny, lawyers)

Defendant: European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) (represented by: M. Pascua Mateo, K. Gambino and L. Camarena Januzec, acting as Agents, and M. Troncoso Ferrer and F.-M. Hislaire, lawyers)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 270 TFEU seeking the annulment of EESC’s decision of 23 June 2016‘not to perform one paragraph of the amicable settlement reached by the parties before the Civil Service Tribunal’ in Case F-33/15 and the payment of EUR 250 000 in respect of material and non-material damage.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed.

| 2. | Ms Vassiliki Labiri shall pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Ms Vassiliki Labiri shall pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 213, 3.7.2017.

---
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Annual Report of Electro-Sensors, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Bradley D. Slye, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|(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.
|--- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

March 23, 2007
        /s/ Bradley D. SlyeBradley D. SlyeChief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer


38

---
**Exhibit 10.72**

**AMENDMENT TO**

**CLASS B RESTRICTED SHARE AGREEMENT**

This Amendment to Class B Restricted Share Agreement (this “Amendment”) is entered into as ofDecember 7, 2009, by and between Intelsat Global, Ltd. (the “Company”) and Michael McDonnell (the “Employee”). 

WHEREAS, the Company and the Employee entered into that certain Class B Restricted Share Agreement dated as of May 6, 2009, by and between the Company and the Employee (the “Class BAgreement”); and 

WHEREAS, the Company and the Employee desire to amend certain terms of the Class B Agreement ashereinafter provided. 

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, and in consideration of the mutual promisesand covenants set forth below, the Company and the Employee hereby agree as follows: 

1. Capitalized terms used but not otherwise definedherein shall have the meanings assigned to such terms in the Class B Agreement. 

2. The first sentence of Section 8(b) of the Class BAgreement is hereby amended and restated as follows: 

“Shareholders of Class B Restricted Shares shall not be entitled toreceive their percentage interest of all Distributions paid to shareholders until each shareholder of Class A Shares receives Distributions (received after the time of the Company’s migration to Luxembourg) equal to their Paid-in-Capital(as defined below), and, thereafter, the holders of Class B Shares and holders of Class A Shares shall be entitled to receive Distributions ratably based upon the proportionate number of outstanding common shares of the Company held by eachsuch shareholder; at the time of any Distribution of Class A Shares to the holders of Class A Shares (a “Class A Share Distribution”), the Company shall simultaneously make a Class B Share distribution to the holders ofClass B Shares in an amount necessary to maintain the proportion of Class A Shares to Class B Shares in effect as of the date of such Class A Share Distribution.” 

3. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Class B Agreement, and for the avoidance of doubt, the parties acknowledge and agree that (a) any distribution of Class A Shares in connectionwith a stock split or in connection with a stock dividend having the effect of a stock split (including, without limitation, any Class A Shares issued in connection with the recapitalization related to the Company’s migration toLuxembourg) shall not constitute a “Distribution” for purposes of the Class B Agreement, and (b) as of the date hereof, no Distributions have been made to the holders of the Class A Shares. 

4. Except as amended above, the terms, conditions and provisions of the Class B Agreement shall remainunchanged and shall continue in full force and effect. 

5. This Amendment may be executed in several counterparts, each of which shall bedeemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute the same instrument. 

[Signature page follows] 

 

2 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment as of the date first abovewritten. 

 
**INTELSAT GLOBAL, LTD.**By: 
 
 Name: 
 
 Title: 
 
**EMPLOYEE**
 
Michael McDonnell
**[SIGNATURE PAGETO AMENDMENTTO CLASS B RESTRICTED SHARE AGREEMENT]**
**EXHIBIT 31.2**     I, Gregory A. Gould certify that:     1. I have reviewed this annual report of SeraCare Life Sciences, Inc.;     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)):          a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;          b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and          c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s Board of Directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):          a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and          b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant internal control over financial reporting./s/ Gregory A. Gould
EXHIBIT 32.1

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

In connection  with the Quarterly  Report of REVIVE-IT  CORP. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Trina Quan, Chief
Executive  Officer of the  Company,  certify,  pursuant  to 18 U.S.C.  1350,  as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

The Report 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  Report  fairly  presents,  in all  material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


                                           /s/ Trina Quan
                                           ---------------------------------
Date: January 8, 2008                      Trina Quan
                                           Chief Executive Officer
Case 1:07-cv-05564-AKH Document 28 Filed 12/06/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05564-AKH Document 28 Filed 12/06/2007 Page 2 of 2
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6374

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

WILLIAM ANTHONY YOUNG,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Columbia. Cameron McGowan Currie, Senior 

District Judge. (3:02-cr-00216-CMC-1; 3:15-cv-00368-CMC)

Submitted: September 29, 2015 Decided: October 6, 2015

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William Anthony Young, Appellant Pro Se. William Kenneth 

Witherspoon, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South 

Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

William Anthony Young seeks to appeal the district court’s 

orders dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion as 

unauthorized and successive, and denying Young’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 

59(e) motion to alter or amend that judgment. The orders are

not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a 

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). 

A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a 

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies 

relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by 

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the 

district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is 

debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 

(2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). 

When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the 

prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural 

ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable 

claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. 

at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that 

Young has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny 

a certificate of appealability, deny Young’s motions for the 

appointment of counsel, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense 
3

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.

DISMISSED