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

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3823 

To ensure that health professions opportunity demonstration projects train 

project participants to earn a recognized postsecondary credential, and 

to clarify that community colleges are eligible for grants to conduct 

such a demonstration project. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 18, 2019 

Mr. DOGGETT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To ensure that health professions opportunity demonstration 

projects train project participants to earn a recognized 

postsecondary credential, and to clarify that community 

colleges are eligible for grants to conduct such a demonstration project. 

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 ‘‘Promoting Health Ca5 reers in Community and Technical Colleges Act’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3823 IH

1 SEC. 2. HEALTH PROFESSIONS OPPORTUNITY DEMONSTRA2 TION PROJECT GRANTEES REQUIRED TO 

3 TRAIN PROJECT PARTICIPANTS TO EARN A 

4 RECOGNIZED POSTSECONDARY CREDENTIAL. 

5 Section 2008 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

6 1397g) is amended by redesignating subsections (c) and 

7 (d) as subsections (d) and (e), respectively, and by insert8 ing after subsection (b) the following: 

9 ‘‘(c) GRANTEES REQUIRED TO TRAIN PROJECT PAR10 TICIPANTS TO EARN A RECOGNIZED POSTSECONDARY

11 CREDENTIAL.—An eligible entity awarded a grant to con12 duct a demonstration project under this section shall train 

13 project participants to earn a recognized postsecondary 

14 credential, including an industry-recognized credential.’’. 

15 SEC. 3. ELIGIBILITY OF COMMUNITY COLLEGES FOR 

16 GRANTS TO CONDUCT HEALTH PROFESSIONS 

17 OPPORTUNITY DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS. 

18 Section 2008(a)(4)(D) of the Social Security Act (42 

19 U.S.C. 1397g(a)(4)(D)) is amended by striking ‘‘section 

20 101’’ and inserting ‘‘sections 101 and 102(a)(1)(B)’’. 

21 SEC. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

22 The amendments made by this Act shall take effect 

23 on October 1, 2019. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
Pedro ORELLANO, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-8252.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 30, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
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.                  

###### Securities and Exchange Commission

# TIME AND DATE:

 2:00 p.m. on Thursday, April 14, 2022.

# PLACE:

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

# STATUS:

 This meeting will be closed to the public.

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

 Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the closed meeting. Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters also may be present.

                        In the event that the time, date, or location of this meeting changes, an announcement of the change, along with the new time, date, and/or place of the meeting will be posted on the Commission's website at                         *https://www.sec.gov.*

The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (6), (7), (8), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(3), (a)(5), (a)(6), (a)(7), (a)(8), (a)(9)(ii) and (a)(10), permit consideration of the scheduled matters at the closed meeting.

The subject matter of the closed meeting will consist of the following topics:

Institution and settlement of injunctive actions;

Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings;

Resolution of litigation claims; and

Other matters relating to examinations and enforcement proceedings.

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

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

For further information; please contact Vanessa A. Countryman from the Office of the Secretary at (202) 551-5400.

(Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552b.)

Dated: April 7, 2022.

Vanessa A. Countryman, 

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2022-07814 Filed 4-7-22; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
# C_2011347EN.01000502.xml

| 26.11.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 347/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.11.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 347/5

---

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 6 October 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof (Germany)) — Finanzamt Deggendorf v Markus Stoppelkamp, acting in his capacity as insolvency administrator of the estate of Harald Raab

(Case C-421/10) (1)

1

(VAT - Sixth Directive - Article 21(1)(b) - Determination of the place of reference for tax purposes - Services provided by a supplier residing in the same country as the customer but having established the seat of his economic activity in another country - Concept of ‘taxable person established abroad’)

2011/C 347/07

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Finanzamt Deggendorf

Appellant:

Respondent: Markus Stoppelkamp, acting in his capacity as insolvency administrator of the estate of Harald Raab

Respondent:

Re:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Bundesfinanzhof — Interpretation of Article 21(1)(b) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1) — Determination of the place of reference for tax purposes — Services provided by a supplier residing in the same Member State as the recipients of those services but having established the seat of his economic activity in another Member State — Concept of a ‘taxable person established abroad’

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 21(1)(b) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment, as amended by Council Directive 2000/65/EC of 17 October 2000, must be interpreted as meaning that, in order for him to be considered a ‘taxable person who is not established within the territory of the country’, it is sufficient that the taxable person should have established the seat of his economic activity outside that country.

---

(1)  OJ C 317, 20.11.2010.

1

---
# C_2011160EN.01002001.xml

| 28.5.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 160/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.5.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 160/20

---

Judgment of the General Court of 13 April 2011 — Bodegas y Viñedos Puerta de Labastida v OHIM — Unión de Cosecheros de Labastida (PUERTA DE LABASTIDA)

(Case T-345/09) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark PUERTA DE LABASTIDA - Earlier national word mark CASTILLO DE LABASTIDA - Earlier Community word marks CASTILLO LABASTIDA - Relative ground for refusal - Genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009)

2011/C 160/29

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Bodegas y Viñedos Puerta de Labastida, SL (Autol, Spain) (represented by: J. Grimau Muñoz and J. Villamor Muguerza, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: J. Crespo Carillo, Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Unión de Cosecheros de Labastida, S. Coop. Ltda (Labastida, Spain) (represented: initially by P. López Ronda and G. Macias Bonilla and subsequently by F. Brandolini Kujman, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 28 May 2009 (Case R 1021/2008-1) concerning opposition proceedings between Unión de Cosecheros de Labastida, S. Coop. Ltda and Bodegas y Viñedos Puerta de Labastida, SL

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Bodegas y Viñedos Puerta de Labastida, SL to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Bodegas y Viñedos Puerta de Labastida, SL to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 256, 24.10.2009.

1

---
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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-41142

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

TRENT BREWER,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:07-CR-246-12

Before REAVLEY, DAVIS, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Trent Brewer seeks to appeal the 360-month sentence he received after he

pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine, in

violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. In his written plea agreement, Brewer waived his

right to appeal his sentence on all grounds, except he reserved the right to

appeal (a) any punishment imposed in excess of the statutory maximum and

(b) a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel that affects the validity of the

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

September 21, 2009

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 08-41142

2

waiver itself. He argues that the appeal waiver is not enforceable because the

Government breached the plea agreement when it recommended at sentencing

that Brewer not be given a three-level reduction for acceptance of responsibility.

This court pretermits the issue whether the Government breached the plea

agreement and finds that Brewer’s challenge to his sentence is unavailing.

Given Brewer’s use of a cell phone in violation of jail rules, the district court did

not clearly err when it denied him a three-level reduction for acceptance of

responsibility. See United States v. Gonzales, 19 F.3d 982, 983 (5th Cir. 1994);

U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1, comment. (n.1(b)). Nor has Brewer rebutted the presumption

that his sentence, at the bottom of the guidelines range of imprisonment, is

reasonable. See United States v. Alonzo, 435 F.2d 551, 554 (5th Cir. 2006).

AFFIRMED.
IV 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 1774 

Recognizing Cuban-Americans in the United States. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 16, 2010 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN (for herself, Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida, Mr. 

MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida, and Mr. SIRES) submitted the following 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing Cuban-Americans in the United States. 

Whereas the presence of Cuban-Americans in North America 

predates the founding of the United States, and their descendants have had a profound and lasting influence on 

the history, values, and culture of the United States; 

Whereas since the arrival of the earliest Cuban settlers more 

than 400 years ago in St. Augustine, Florida, hundreds 

of thousands of Cuban men and women have come to the 

United States, in search of freedom, peace, and opportunity; 

Whereas the bonds of friendship between Cubans and United 

States citizens date back to before the founding of the 

Republic, when Cuban women donated their jewelry to 

help finance the American Revolution; 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 1774 IH 

Whereas the United States Cuban population began its rapid 

growth during the 1960s, as a result of the communist 

takeover of Cuba in 1959; 

Whereas Cuban-Americans have contributed to the prosperity 

and cultural enrichment of the United States; 

Whereas according to the Bureau of the Census, the CubanAmerican population is 1,600,000, comprising nearly 1 

percent of the Nation’s total population; 

Whereas according to the last Census, there are 152,000 

Cuban-American owned business operating in areas including construction, finance, insurance, retail, and 

wholesale trade that generated $74,000,000; 

Whereas Cuban-Americans serve in all branches of the 

United States Armed Forces and have fought honorably 

in many wars; 

Whereas many Cuban-Americans are dedicated public servants, holding posts at the highest levels of government, 

including Cabinet Secretaries, Members of the House of 

Representatives, the Senate, and State and local governments; and 

Whereas Cuban-Americans have a deep commitment to faith, 

family, and community, a vigorous work ethic, and a perseverance to succeed: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives cele2 brates the vast contributions of Cuban-Americans to the 

3 strength and culture of the United States. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
# C_2010100EN.01002301.xml

| 17.4.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 100/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.4.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 100/23

---

Action brought on 28 January 2010 — European Commission v Portuguese Republic

(Case C-44/10)

2010/C 100/33

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: A. Alcover San Pedro and P. Guerra e Andrade, Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Portuguese Republic

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Declare that, by failing to take the measures necessary to ensure, by granting permits in accordance with Articles 6 and 8 of Directive 2008/1/EC (1) and reconsidering and, where necessary, updating permits for existing installations, that those existing installations operated from 30 October 2007 in accordance with Articles 3, 7, 9, 10 and 13, Article 14(a) and (b) and Article 15(2) of Directive 2008/1/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 January 2008 concerning integrated pollution prevention and control (IPPC Directive), the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 5(1) of that directive. |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare that, by failing to take the measures necessary to ensure, by granting permits in accordance with Articles 6 and 8 of Directive 2008/1/EC (1) and reconsidering and, where necessary, updating permits for existing installations, that those existing installations operated from 30 October 2007 in accordance with Articles 3, 7, 9, 10 and 13, Article 14(a) and (b) and Article 15(2) of Directive 2008/1/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 January 2008 concerning integrated pollution prevention and control (IPPC Directive), the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 5(1) of that directive.

1

| — | Order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

It follows from Article 4 of the IPPC Directive, read in conjunction with Article 5(1) thereof, that the Member States had to ensure that permits for new and existing installations were granted in accordance with the requirements of Articles 6 and 8 of the Directive. They also had to reconsider and, where necessary, update the conditions of permits for existing installations by 31 October 2007.

According to information supplied by the Portuguese authorities in 2008, the relevant authorisation was not applied for in respect of a number of installations. In addition, 280 out of a total of 632 installations operated without the relevant permit being granted.

According to updated information, 481 out of a total of 577 installations have permits, with 17 authorisation procedures pending.

---

(1)  OJ 2008 L 24, p. 8.

1

---
Courtney Davis WILSON, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-5067.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
# C_2011370EN.01001502.xml

| 17.12.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 370/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.12.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 370/15

---

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 27 October 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank van eerste aanleg te Antwerpen (Belgium)) — Deli Ostrich NV v Belgische Staat

(Case C-559/10) (1)

1

(Common Customs Tariff - Combined Nomenclature - Tariff classification - Frozen camel meat not from farm-raised animals - Classification under subheading 0208 90 40 (other game meat) or 0208 90 95 (other))

2011/C 370/24

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Referring court

Rechtbank van eerste aanleg te Antwerpen

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Deli Ostrich NV

Applicant:

Defendant: Belgische Staat

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Rechtbank van eerste aanleg te Antwerpen — Common Customs Tariff — Tariff headings — Camel meat not from farm-raised animals — Classification under subheading 0208 90 40 (game) or 0208 90 95 (other)?

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Combined Nomenclature constituting Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1549/2006 of 17 October 2006, must be interpreted as meaning that camel meat must be classified under subheading 0208 90 40 as ‘other game meat’ if the camels from which that meat comes lived in the wild and were hunted.

---

(1)  OJ C 55, 19.2.2011.

1

---
Clyde JORDAN, petitioner, v. MICHIGAN.

No. 17-5106.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Michigan denied.
Exhibit 32.1 - Chief Executive Officer Certification (Section 906)

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


In connection with the Annual Report of RPM Advantage, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2007, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report").

I, David R. Pressler, 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, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

               (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
                     result of operations of the Company.

/s/ David R. Pressler
--------------------------
    David R. Pressler
    CEO President and Director


Date  April 25, 2011
      -----------------
PNC BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, et al., petitioners, v. SECURE AXCESS, LLC.

No. 17-350.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 14, 2018.

On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Petition for writ of certiorari granted. The Judgment is vacated as moot, and the case is remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit with instructions to remand the case to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to vacate the Board's order. See *United States v. Munsingwear, Inc.,*340 U.S. 36, 71 S.Ct. 104, 95 L.Ed. 36 (1950).

Justice ALITO took no part in consideration or decision of this petition.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                           6,150
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,323
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (197)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                11,975
<PP&E>                                           3,259
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (1,163)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  16,002
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,643
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           115
<OTHER-SE>                                      11,244
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    16,002
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 4,068
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      537
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,943
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  59
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,353)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       101
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,454)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,454)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.14)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.14)


</TABLE>