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

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1251 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

  1st Session
                                H. R. 1251

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 27, 1999

  Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental 
                                Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To designate the United States Postal Service building located at 8850 
South 700 East, Sandy, Utah, as the ``Noal Cushing Bateman Post Office 
                              Building''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The United States Postal Service building located at 8850 South 700 
East, in Sandy, Utah, shall be known and designated as the ``Noal 
Cushing Bateman Post Office Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the building referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Noal Cushing Bateman Post 
Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives May 24, 1999.

            Attest:

                                                 JEFF TRANDAHL,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
<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 Philadelphia Consolidated Holding
Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Craig P. Keller, 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:

(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.

Craig P. Keller
------------------------------------
Craig P. Keller
Chief Financial Officer
August 9, 2004
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

IN THE INTEREST OF: C.E.L.M.P., A 

MINOR

PETITION OF: T.T., MOTHER

:

:

:

:

:

No. 254 EAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 31st day of July, 2017, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19
- 7509

TERRENCE WELLS , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. MATTHEW LOWERY, Commonwealth Attorney Prosecutor Circuit Court , Defendant

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Alexandria

. T. S. Ellis, III, Senior District Judge. ( 1:19

- cv
- 00966

- TSE

- MSN )

Submitted : March 10, 2020 Decided: March 13, 2020

Before NIEMEYER and AGEE , Circuit Judges , and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Terrence Wells , Appellant Pro Se. John P. O ’ Herron , THOMPSON M C MULLAN PC , Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in t his circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Terrence Wells appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2018) complaint without prejudice under Younger v. Harris , 401 U.S. 37 (1971) , and Heck v. Humphrey , 512 U.S. 477 (1994)

. * On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Wells’ informal brief does not challenge the bas e s for the district court’s disposition, Wells has forfeited appellate review
of the court’s order. See Jackson v. L ightsey , 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues preserved in that brief.”). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. We further deny Wells’ motion for transcript at government expense. 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

* Because the district court dismissed Wells’ action “for procedural reasons unrelated to the contents of the pleadings,” we have jurisdiction over this appeal. Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, In c., 807 F.3d 619, 624 (4th Cir. 2015).
Henry JOHNSON, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-6423.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 27, 2017.

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

Justice KAGAN took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
Exhibit 15


May 9, 2001
Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20549

Commissioners:

We are aware that our report dated May 8, 2001 on our review of interim
financial information of NB&T Financial Group, Inc. and subsidiaries (the
"Company") as of and for the period ended March 31, 2001 and 2000 and
included in the Company's quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter then
ended is incorporated by reference in the Registration Statement of the
Company on Form S-8, filed on March 23, 1995.

Very truly yours,



/s/ J.D. Cloud & Co. L.L.P.
Cincinnati, Ohio
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 15

- 00392

- CR

James Dewayne Hollis

v.

The State of Texas §

§

§

§

§ From the 213th District Court

of Tarrant County (1363635D)

December 3, 2015

Opinion by Justice Gabriel

(nfp)



### JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that

the appeal should be dismissed. It is ordere d that the appeal is dismissed for

want of jurisdiction.

SECOND DIST RICT COURT OF APPEALS

By /s/ Lee Gabriel

Justice Lee Gabriel
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

September 10, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
133614 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 133614 COA: 266550 Wayne CC: 05-005310-01 KEWAYNE HERSEL CARTER, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal th e February 13, 2007 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

t0830 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

September 10, 2007

Clerk
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17
- 7412

CHRISTOPHER LANCASTER , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. J. TODD, Officer; OFFICER ARTRIP; B. KUNKLE, Officer; OFFICER FERELL; M. DOYLE, Lieutenant; NURSE MYERS; NURSE FOWLER; NURSE HILEMAN; LIEUTENANT HARRISON; WARDEN TERRY O’BRIEN; ASSOCIATE WARDEN ODOM; EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT THOMPSON; NURSE DAWSON; CAPTAIN GILLY; D. JONES, Counselor; SHERK; C. TROOPMAN, Position Officer; C. BENNET, Position Counselor; B. MICHAELS, Posit ion Officer; MERKERGO; BRADLY, Position Officer; ALLISON, Position Officer; ANDREWS, Position Officer; BOYARD, Position Officer; AND ALL UNKNOWN NOT LISTED IN COMPLAINT , Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia , at Clarksburg

. Irene M. Keeley , Senior District Judge. ( 1:16

- cv
- 00200

- IMK )

Submitted : January 30, 2018 Decided: February 2, 2018

Before MOTZ and KEENAN , Circuit Judges , and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.2 Christopher Lancaster, Appellant Pro Se. Erin K. Reisenweber, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Martinsburg, West Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.3 PER CURIAM: Christopher Lancaster appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of
Narcotics , 403 U.S. 388 (1971). The district c ourt referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2012). The magistrate judge recommended that
relief be denied and advised Lancaster that failure to file timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate rev iew of a district court order based upon the
recommendation. The timely filing of specific objections to a magistrate judge’s recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when the parties have been warned of the consequences of noncompliance. Wright v. Collins , 766 F.2d 841, 845

- 46 (4th Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn , 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Lancaster has waived appellate review by failing to file objections in the district court after receiving
proper notice. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment

. 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
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheets and unaudited condensed
consolidated statements of income found on pages 3 and 4 of the Company's Form
10-QSB for the year to date, and is qualified in its entirety by reference to
such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                             714
<SECURITIES>                                         0      
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   926
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     926
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,168
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                           125
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                        (117)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       926 
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0 
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,204
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (1,204)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (1,204)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0 
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32

SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION

This Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006,
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
Ameriana Bancorp as of and for the period covered by the report.



|                        |  |        |  |                                      
|----------------------- |  | ------ |  | -------------------------------------
|Date: November 13, 2006 |  | By:    |  | /s/ Jerome J. Gassen                 
|                        |  | Name:  |  | Jerome J. Gassen                     
|                        |  | Title: |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
|                        |  |       
|Date: November 13, 2006 |  | By:    |  | /s/ Bradley L. Smith                 
|                        |  | Name:  |  | Bradley L. Smith                     
|                        |  | Title: |  | Senior Vice President  Treasurer and
|                        |  |        |  | Chief Financial Officer
# Delegation of Authority Under Section 506(a)(1) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961

# Memorandum for the Secretary of State

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 621 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (FAA), I hereby delegate to the Secretary of State the authority under section 506(a)(1) of the FAA to direct the drawdown of up to an aggregate value of $800 million in defense articles and services of the Department of Defense, and military education and training, to provide assistance to Ukraine and to make the determinations required under such section to direct such a drawdown.

                        You are authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the                         *Federal Register*.                    

[FR Doc. 2022-09353

Billing code 4710-10-P
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.                  

###### Federal Election Commission

# FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION OF PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT:

87 FR 24162.

# PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED TIME AND DATE OF THE MEETING:

Thursday, April 28, 2022 at 10:00 a.m.

*Hybrid meeting:*                         1050 First Street NE, Washington, DC (12th Floor) and virtual.                    

# CHANGES IN THE MEETING:

*The following matter was also considered:*

Audit Division Recommendation Memorandum on the UtePAC (A19-07).

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

                        Judith Ingram, Press Officer. Telephone: (202) 694-1220.                              ( print page 26355)    

*Authority:*                         Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b.                    

Laura E. Sinram,

Acting Secretary and Clerk of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 2022-09667 Filed 5-2-22; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
Eric Steve ANDERSON, petitioner, v. CALIFORNIA.

No. 18-7651.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 1, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of California denied.
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 on Form 10-Q of ONEOK
Partners, L.P. (the Company) for the period ending March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Curtis L. Dinan, 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:

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

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



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ Curtis L. Dinan    
|Curtis L. Dinan        
|Chief Financial Officer

May 2, 2007

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
by Section 906, has been provided to ONEOK Partners, L.P. and will be retained by ONEOK Partners, L.P. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 32.2
 
 
 CERTIFICATE 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 (the “Report”) on the Form 10-K of Stanford Management Limited (the “Company”) for the year ended August 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Reynan Ballan, Chief Financial Officer, Secretary-Treasurer and Director, 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 and belief:
 
 1.    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
 
 2.     The information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.
 
 
 
 
 
 Date: October 29, 2010                                                        REYNAN BALLAN
 Reynan Ballan
 Secretary-Treasurer, Chief
 Financial Officer and Director
 
 
 -1-
Dwight MITCHELL, petitioner, v. Wilson TAYLOR, et al.

No. 18-5886.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 25, 2019.

Petition for rehearing denied.
John C. HOM, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18M103.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 25, 2019.

Motion to direct the Clerk to file a petition for writ of certiorari out of time under Rule 14.5 denied.
### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN NO. 03- 10 -00 099 -CR NO. 03-10-00100- CR Da vid De on P e ar so n , A ppe lla nt

v. The State of Texas, App ellee F ROM THE DISTRICT CO URT OF TRAVIS COUNTY , 390TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. D-1- DC-09 -20 5891 & 2031 57 , HO NORAB LE JULIE H . KO CUREK , JUDGE PRESIDI NG M E M O R

A N D UM O P I N I O N Appellant wa s convicted of two counts of possession of a controlled substance. The tr ia l court ha s ce rt if

ie d that the c a se s are ple a

ba rg a in c a se s a

nd that a pp e lla nt h a s n o r ight t o a

pp e a l. See Tex. R. App. P . 25.2(a) (2). We ther efor e dismiss the appea ls. Tex. R. App. P . 25.2(d) (if trial court doe s not certify

that defe ndant has right to appeal, “ appea l must be dismi ssed”) .

__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ________ David Puryear , J ustice Be fore J ustices Patterson, Puryear and He nson Dismissed for Want of J urisdiction Filed: May

14, 2010 Do No t Pu

bli sh
XIU JIAN SUN, petitioner, v. Eric T. SCHNEIDERMAN, Attorney General of New York, et al.

No. 17-1694.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>




<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS OF BUCKHEAD AMERICA  CORPORATION FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED
SEPTEMBER  30,  1997,  AND IS  QUALIFIED  IN ITS  ENTIRETY BY  REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS. </LEGEND> 

<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

       
<S>                                 <C>

<PERIOD-TYPE>                       9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                   JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                     SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                                 1,821
<SECURITIES>                                             321
<RECEIVABLES>                                          1,321
<ALLOWANCES>                                              92
<INVENTORY>                                                0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                       4,479
<PP&E>                                                37,307
<DEPRECIATION>                                         2,606
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                        44,675
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                  4,469
<BONDS>                                               23,200
<COMMON>                                                  19
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                      0
<PREFERRED>                                            3,000
<OTHER-SE>                                            14,582
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                          44,675
<SALES>                                               10,797
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                      13,467
<CGS>                                                  7,892
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                          8,693
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                       2,488
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                     1,050
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                        1,236
<INCOME-TAX>                                               0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                    1,236
<DISCONTINUED>                                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                            0
<CHANGES>                                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                                           1,236
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                            .64
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            .64

        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.2

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

I, Chien-Fang Wang, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Nano Superlattice Technology, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-KSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Nano Superlattice Technology, Inc.

Pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission, this certification is being furnished and is not deemed filed.

|May 12, 2008 |  |                    
|------------ |  | -------------------
|            
|             |  | /s/ Chien-Fang Wang
|             |  | Chien-Fang Wang    
|             |  | Vice President     

---
Diane S. JONES, petitioner, v. SAMSON RESOURCES CORPORATION, et al.

No. 18-7250.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 25, 2019.

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