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

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1369 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1369

To authorize the Secretary of Defense to make military helicopters and 
 other equipment available to State and local governments to assist in 
            emergency law enforcement and rescue operations.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 12, 1999

     Ms. Kilpatrick (for herself, Mr. Frost, Mrs. Christensen, Ms. 
 Millender-McDonald, Mr. Davis of Illinois, Mr. Shows, Ms. Jackson-Lee 
 of Texas, Mrs. Jones of Ohio, Mr. Rangel, Mr. Luther, Mr. Thompson of 
Mississippi, and Mr. Capuano) introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To authorize the Secretary of Defense to make military helicopters and 
 other equipment available to State and local governments to assist in 
            emergency law enforcement and rescue operations.

    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 ``Police Pursuit and Rescue Support 
Act''.

SEC. 2. AVAILABILITY OF MILITARY HELICOPTERS AND OTHER EQUIPMENT FOR 
              EMERGENCY LAW ENFORCEMENT AND RESCUE OPERATIONS.

    (a) Authority To Provide Equipment.--To improve the safety and 
success of police pursuits of suspected criminals and police and fire 
rescue operations, the Secretary of Defense is authorized and 
encouraged to use the authority provided in section 372 of title 10, 
United States Code, to make military helicopters and other equipment of 
the Department of Defense available to assist State and local 
governments to perform such law enforcement and rescue operations. 
Sections 375, 376, and 377 of that title shall apply with respect to 
the provision of equipment under this section.
    (b) Submission of Guidelines for Pursuit and Rescue.--As a 
condition on the provision of Department of Defense equipment under 
this section to assist in police pursuits or police and fire rescue 
operations, the Secretary of Defense shall require a State or local 
government requesting assistance under this section for either purpose 
to submit to the Secretary in advance the guidelines prepared by the 
government regarding the circumstances and procedures under which 
vehicles and helicopters are used to pursue suspected criminals or 
equipment is used to conduct rescue operations, whichever applies.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit
          99.2**
 
 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-KSB of Stanford
          Management Limited (the “Company”) for the year ended August 31, 2006, as filed
          with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, Glen Macdonald,
          Chief Executive Officer, President 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: November
          30, 2006
 Glen
          Macdonald
 Chief
          Executive Officer,
 President
          and Director








-1-
Randy DEMPSEY, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-7723.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 18, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Kim KERRIGAN, petitioner, v. QUALSTAR CREDIT UNION, et al.

No. 18-1118.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 29, 2019.

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

<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                       5,252,956
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                       3,321,172
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                          0
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                      93,988,287
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                        92,609,000
<LOANS>                                    286,021,910
<ALLOWANCE>                                  1,126,961
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             399,720,851
<DEPOSITS>                                 305,053,680
<SHORT-TERM>                                33,549,808
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          8,507,836
<LONG-TERM>                                  9,114,614
<COMMON>                                    11,888,748
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                  31,606,165
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             399,720,851
<INTEREST-LOAN>                             16,377,288
<INTEREST-INVEST>                            4,354,182
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               481,119
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                            21,212,589
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                          11,252,496
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          12,383,392
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        8,829,197
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   63,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              8,145,896
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,317,455
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   2,317,455
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,507,774
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .45
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .45
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                       0
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                     0
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                    0
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME FILED AS
PART OF THE QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-02-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-03-1997
<CASH>                                          20,202
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   48,573
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,632
<INVENTORY>                                    127,456
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               228,160
<PP&E>                                         218,422
<DEPRECIATION>                                 107,089
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 534,899
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          227,690
<BONDS>                                        314,363
<COMMON>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                    (34,110)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   534,899
<SALES>                                        248,542
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               248,542
<CGS>                                           85,770
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  235,942
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,313
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,287
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,886
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,401
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,401
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          20,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                20,000
<PP&E>                                      22,301,221
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              22,321,221
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           17,990
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                22,321,221
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  531,122
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (531,122)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (531,122)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (531,122)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Elloyd JOHNSON, petitioner, v. Lorie DAVIS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

No. 18-7724.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 1, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Walter Raynard LINGARD, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-8299.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
Lisa J. GILLARD, petitioner, v. ILLINOIS.

No. 18-6947.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2019.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Phillip E. LaPOINTE, petitioner, v. ILLINOIS.

No. 18-7467.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 19, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Court of Illinois, Second District denied.
Michael E. BARGO, Jr., petitioner, v. PORTER COUNTY, INDIANA, et al.

No. 18-7685.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 1, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
**Exhibit      32.1**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

**18      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|   | 1. | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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. |
|--------|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Dated:** **April              17, 2007                        |   |   |   |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|
|                                                               |   |   |   |
|                                                               |   |   |   |
| /s/ Jeffrey              W. Flannery                          |   |   |   |
| Jeffrey              W. Flannery, Chief                            |   |   |        |
| Chief                Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer |   |   |   |

----
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

GABINO VEGA-JIMENEZ,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 12-70223

Agency No. A073-915-578

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted September 24, 2013** 

Before: RAWLINSON, N.R. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.

Gabino Vega-Jimenez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review

of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an

immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his request for a continuance and

denying his motion to remand. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. 

FILED

OCT 02 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 12-70223

We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a continuance. Ahmed v. Holder,

569 F.3d 1009, 1012 (9th Cir. 2009). We deny in part and dismiss in part the

petition for review.

The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying Vega-Jimenez’s request

for a continuance where he failed to show good cause. See id. at 1012. 

To the extent Vega-Jimenez challenges the agency’s determination that he

did not merit voluntary departure as a matter of discretion, we lack jurisdiction to

review this determination. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i); Gil v. Holder, 651

F.3d 1000, 1006 (9th Cir. 2011).

We also lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s determination that the

evidence Vega-Jimenez submitted with his motion to remand would not alter the

prior discretionary determination denying voluntary departure. See Fernandez v.

Gonzales, 439 F.3d 592, 600 (9th Cir. 2006) (holding that 8 U.S.C.

§ 1252(a)(2)(B)(i) bars this court from reviewing the denial of a motion to reopen

where “the only question presented is whether [the] new evidence altered the prior,

underlying discretionary determination that [the petitioner] had not met the

hardship standard.” (internal quotations and brackets omitted)); see also Movsisian

v. Ashcroft, 395 F.3d 1095, 1097 (9th Cir. 2005) (A motion to reopen filed while
3 12-70223

an appeal is pending before the BIA is treated as a motion to remand to the IJ for

further proceedings).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
I

★

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1287

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to grant relief to participants

in multiemployer plans from certain section 415 limits on retirement plans.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 25, 1999

Mr. WELLER (for himself, Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut, Mr. HOUGHTON,

Mr. PORTMAN, Mr. ENGLISH, Mr. QUINN, Mr. LAHOOD, Mrs. KELLY,

Mr. LOBIONDO, and Mr. METCALF) 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 grant

relief to participants in multiemployer plans from certain

section 415 limits on retirement plans.

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

3 SECTION 1. TREATMENT OF MULTIEMPLOYER PLANS

4 UNDER SECTION 415 LIMIT ON RETIREMENT

5 PLAN BENEFITS.

6 (a) DOLLAR LIMIT REDUCTION.—Subparagraph (F)

7 of section 415(b)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986

8 (relating to plans maintained by governments and tax-ex9 empt organizations) is amended—
2

HR 1287 IH1S

1 (1) by striking ‘‘AND TAX-EXEMPT ORGANIZA2 TIONS’’ in the heading and inserting ‘‘, TAX-EXEMPT

3 ORGANIZATIONS, AND MULTIEMPLOYER PLANS’’, and

4 (2) by inserting in the first sentence ‘‘a multi5 employer plan (as defined in section 414(f)),’’ after

6 ‘‘subtitle,’’.

7 (b) AVERAGE COMPENSATION LIMIT.—Paragraph

8 (11) of section 415(b) of such Code (relating to a special

9 limitation rule for governmental plans) is amended to read

10 as follows:

11 ‘‘(11) SPECIAL LIMITATION RULE FOR GOVERN12 MENTAL AND MULTIEMPLOYER PLANS.—In the case

13 of a governmental plan (as defined in section

14 414(d)) or a multiemployer plan (as defined in sec15 tion 414(f)), subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1)

16 shall not apply.’’.

17 (c) MULTIEMPLOYER PLANS NOT COMBINED OR AG18 GREGATED WITH OTHER PLANS.—

19 (1) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (f) of section 415

20 of such Code (relating to combining of plans) is

21 amended by adding at the end the following new

22 paragraph:

23 ‘‘(3) EXCEPTION FOR MULTIEMPLOYER

24 PLAN.—Notwithstanding paragraph (1) and sub25 section (g), a multiemployer plan (as defined in sec-
3

HR 1287 IH1S

1 tion 414(f)) shall not be combined or aggregated

2 with any other plan maintained by an employer for

3 purposes of applying the limitations established in

4 this section.’’.

5 (2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Subsection (g)

6 of section 415 of such Code (relating to aggregation

7 of plans) is amended by striking ‘‘The Secretary’’

8 and inserting ‘‘Except as provided in subsection

9 (f)(3), the Secretary’’.

10 (d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

11 this section shall apply to years beginning after December

12 31, 1999.

Æ
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

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

###### National Institutes of Health

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

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

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute on Aging Special Emphasis Panel; Models AD.                    

*Date:*                         June 28, 2022.                    

*Time:*                         12:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

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

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

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

Dated: April 27, 2022.

Miguelina Perez,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2022-09396 Filed 5-2-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
Order entered January 14, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-13-00874-CR

DAMON JAMES WILSON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 291st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F13-30651-U

ORDER

The Court ORDERS the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine why appellant’s 

brief has not been filed. In this regard, the trial court shall make appropriate findings and 

recommendations and determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal, whether 

appellant is indigent, or if not indigent, whether retained counsel has abandoned the appeal. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(b). If the trial court cannot obtain appellant’s presence at the hearing, the 

trial court shall conduct the hearing in appellant’s absence. See Meza v. State, 742 S.W.2d 708 

(Tex. App.–Corpus Christi 1987, no pet.) (per curiam). If appellant is indigent, the trial court is 

ORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective representation, which 

may include appointment of new counsel.
We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record of the proceedings, which shall include 

written findings and recommendations, to this Court within THIRTY DAYS of the date of this 

order.

This appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with the above order. The 

appeal shall be reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the findings are 

received, whichever is earlier.

/s/ LANA MYERS 

JUSTICE
Emond Durea LOGAN, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-8433.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2019.

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