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

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 114

To amend the Federal Deposit Insurance Act and the Federal Credit Union

Act to prohibit fees for using teller windows at depository institutions,

and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 6, 1999

Ms. DELAURO (for herself, Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California, Mr. OLVER,

Mr. FILNER, Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD, Mr. LUTHER, and Ms. LEE)

introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on

Banking and Financial Services

A BILL

To amend the Federal Deposit Insurance Act and the Federal Credit Union Act to prohibit fees for using teller

windows at depository institutions, 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 ‘‘Teller Fee Relief Act’’.

5 SEC. 2. FEES FOR USING TELLER WINDOWS PROHIBITED.

6 (a) FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE ACT.—Section

7 18 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1828)
2

•HR 114 IH

1 is amended by adding at the end the following new sub2 section:

3 ‘‘(t) PROHIBITION ON FEES FOR USING TELLER

4 WINDOWS.—

5 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—No fee may be imposed, di6 rectly or indirectly, on a customer of an insured de7 pository institution for using the services, in person,

8 of any individual employed by the depository institu9 tion at a domestic branch of the institution.

10 ‘‘(2) REGULATIONS.—Each Federal banking

11 agency shall prescribe such regulations as the agen12 cy determines to be appropriate to ensure compli13 ance by insured depository institutions with the re14 quirements of this subsection.’’.

15 (b) FEDERAL CREDIT UNION ACT.—Section 205 of

16 the Federal Credit Union Act (12 U.S.C. 1785) is amend17 ed by adding at the end the following new subsection:

18 ‘‘(h) PROHIBITION ON FEES FOR USING TELLER

19 WINDOWS.—

20 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—No fee may be imposed, di21 rectly or indirectly, on a member of an insured cred22 it union for using the services, in person, of any in23 dividual employed by the credit union at an office of

24 the credit union where deposits are accepted or

25 checks are paid or money lent.
3

•HR 114 IH

1 ‘‘(2) REGULATIONS.—The Board shall prescribe

2 such regulations as the Board determines to be ap3 propriate to ensure compliance by insured credit

4 unions with the requirements of this subsection.’’.

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

6 this section shall apply after the end of the 6-month period

7 beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-40895

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JOSE REFUGIO PACHECO, also known as Refugio,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:13-CR-281-28

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, PRADO, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Jose Refugio Pacheco has moved for 

leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 

386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011).

Refugio Pacheco has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and 

the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Refugio 

Pacheco’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 13, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-40895 Document: 00513908350 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/13/2017
No. 15-40895

2

presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s 

motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further 

responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 15-40895 Document: 00513908350 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/13/2017
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of
Section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of IPC Holdings, Ltd. (the Company), hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that:

The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2008 (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.



|                        |  |  |  |                |  |                        
|----------------------- |  |  |  | -------------- |  | -----------------------
|Dated: November 3, 2008 |  |  |  | /s/ John Weale
|                        |  |  |  | Name:          |  | John R. Weale          
|                        |  |  |  | Title:         |  | Chief Financial Officer

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Report.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-7263

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

LORENZO GRODE MARTIN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T.S. Ellis, III, Senior

District Judge. (1:00-cr-00226-TSE-1)

Submitted: December 20, 2007 Decided: December 28, 2007

Before MICHAEL and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lorenzo Grode Martin, Appellant Pro Se. William Neil Hammerstrom,

Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia,

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Lorenzo Grode Martin seeks to appeal the district court’s

order treating his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion as a successive 28

U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion, and dismissing it on that basis. The

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000); Reid

v. Angelone, 369 F.3d 363, 369 (4th Cir. 2004). 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) (2000).

A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable

jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims

by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any

dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise

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

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d

676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the

record and conclude that Martin has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the

appeal.

Additionally, we construe Martin’s notice of appeal and

informal brief as an application to file a second or successive

motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. United States v. Winestock, 340

F.3d 200, 208 (4th Cir. 2003). In order to obtain authorization to

file a successive § 2255 motion, a prisoner must assert claims
- 3 -

based on either: (1) a new rule of constitutional law, previously

unavailable, made retroactive by the Supreme Court to cases on

collateral review; or (2) newly discovered evidence, not previously

discoverable by due diligence, that would be sufficient to

establish by clear and convincing evidence that, but for

constitutional error, no reasonable factfinder would have found the

movant guilty of the offense. 28 U.S.C. §§ 2244(b)(2), 2255

(2000). Martin’s claims do not satisfy either of these criteria.

Therefore, we deny authorization to file a successive § 2255

motion. 

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before

the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                  MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                        2,402,260
<SECURITIES>                                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 4,605,475
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (200,000)
<INVENTORY>                                     917,125
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             19,991,213
<PP&E>                                        6,465,739
<DEPRECIATION>                               (3,837,993)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               27,546,143
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         8,655,730
<BONDS>                                               0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                   2,180,137
<COMMON>                                          9,603
<OTHER-SE>                                   15,666,190
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 27,546,143
<SALES>                                       8,264,964
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              8,264,964
<CGS>                                         4,276,184
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 4,276,184
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              2,323,713
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              (57,244)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               1,722,311
<INCOME-TAX>                                    300,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           1,422,311
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                  1,105,544
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       .12
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       .12
        


</TABLE>
CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002:

I, Matthew Markin, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Anglotajik Minerals
Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:

     a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
     information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
     subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
     particularly during the period in which this annual report is being
     prepared;

     b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
     procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
     annual report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

     c) presented in this annual report our conclusions about the
     effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
     evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
annual report whether or not there were significant changes in internal
controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: April 11, 2005

/s/ Matthew Markin
------------------------------
President, CEO, and
Acting Chief Financial Officer
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

JAVARUSE RAYMONE HARDY,

 Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

 Appellee.

§

§

§

§

§

§ 

No. 08-14-00044-CR

 

Appeal from the

Criminal District Court No. 2

of Dallas County, Texas 

(TC# F-1314092-I)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was no error in the 

judgment. We therefore affirm the judgment of the court below. This decision shall be certified 

below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 4TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2015.

STEVEN L. HUGHES, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Hughes, JJ.
**Exhibit 32.2****CERTIFICATION**Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350,chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of IPC Holdings, Ltd. (the“Company”), hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that:The Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2007 (the“Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.        Dated:  April 27, 2007 /s/ John Weale   Name:  John R. Weale   Title:  Chief Financial Officer   The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code)and is not being filed as part of the Report.
Michael Steven WRIGHT, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-9305.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
EXHIBIT 32.1





SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION





In connection with the Annual Report of BioPharm Asia, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Wenzhong Qin, acting Chief Executive 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.







Dated: May 11, 2010
/s/ Wenzhong QinWenzhong Qin

Acting Chief Executive Officer

(principal executive officer)
EX-10.20





 Exhibit 10.20 

August 2, 2018 
 James A. Garman 

[***] 
 Dear James: 

I am pleased to confirm our offer for you to join AHS Management Company, Inc., part of the Ardent Health Services, (“Ardent”) family, as EVP, Human
Resources & Administration with a start date of August 27, 2018. Congratulations and welcome to Ardent. 
 We are offering you an annual base
salary of $425,000 per year and 500,000 Profit Interest Units. This grant is effective at the beginning of the quarter following your start date. Profits Interest are administered by Ardent’s legal department whom will draft formal
documentation for your signature and execution. 
 You will also participate in Ardent’s Incentive Compensation Program with a target incentive payout
of 75% of your base salary. The program provides for the payment of additional compensation if certain financial and operational targets are obtained and runs concurrent with our January 1 fiscal year. Your potential award will be prorated
according to the portion of the fiscal year that you are employed by Ardent. 
 You will become eligible to participate in the Ardent benefits programs on
the first day of the month following your completion of 30 days of service. With a start date of August 27, 2018, your eligibility date is October 1, 2018. Benefits information is enclosed. 

We will provide relocation benefits as outlined in the attached summary with a miscellaneous expense allowance in the amount of $14,000 (grossed up 40%). All non-qualified relocation expenses/reimbursements are considered taxable income to the recipient and are subject to normal payroll tax withholding. As a result, the net pay of this relocation benefit will not be the
exact amount, as stated above. All relocation expenses are subject to the reimbursement provision as described in the attached Relocation Expense Reimbursement Agreement. 

In the event of a no-fault termination within 5 years of your start date you will be eligible for six (6) months base
salary separation pay. This payment is subject to the terms of eligibility as defined in Ardent’s current/active severance policy. 
 Please indicate
your acceptance of this offer by signing and returning this document. I am personally looking forward to working with you as a member of the Ardent team. We look forward to your contributions to the continued success of the company. If you have any
questions in the interim, please do not hesitate to contact me. 
 Sincerely, 

/s/ David Vandewater 
 David Vandewater 

President & CEO 
 I accept this offer as EVP,
HR & Administration with Ardent. 
  

					
	/s/ James A. Garman	 		 	August 3, 2018
	James A. Garman	 		 	Date
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

# TIME AND DATE: 

Tuesday, May 10, 2022 at 11:30 a.m. and its continuation at the conclusion of the open meeting on May 12, 2022.

# PLACE: 

1050 First Street NE, Washington, DC and virtual (this meeting will be a hybrid meeting).

# STATUS: 

This meeting will be closed to the public.

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 

Compliance matters pursuant to 52 U.S.C. 30109. Matters relating to internal personnel decisions, or internal rules and practices. Information the premature disclosure of which would be likely to have a considerable adverse effect on the implementation of a proposed Commission action. Matters concerning participation in civil actions or proceedings or arbitration.

* * * * *

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

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

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

Vicktoria J. Allen,

Acting Deputy Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 2022-09835 Filed 5-3-22; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
Michael HORSLEY, petitioner, v. Julie L. JONES, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, et al.

No. 17-9397.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
CREATIVE VISION RESOURCES, L.L.C., petitioner, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD.

No. 17-1667.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
<PAGE>



                                  EXHIBIT 10.38



                                    AGREEMENT

         This Agreement is entered into effective as of April 13, 2000 by and
between Oppenheimer Convertible Securities Fund ("Oppenheimer") and Hudson
Hotels Corporation ("Hudson").

                                 R E C I T A L S

         Oppenheimer is the Holder of Hudson's 18.75% Convertible Subordinated
Debenture due April 15, 2000 in the amount of $3,000,000 (the "Debenture"). The
Debenture was issued in replacement of a Hudson Hotels Corporation Subordinated
Debenture due July 1, 2000 in the original principal amount of $7,500,000.
Hudson is currently in arrears in the payment of interest on the Debenture. The
Debenture is convertible, at the option of the Holder, at a conversion price of
$1.80 per share, into 1,666,667 shares of common stock of Hudson.

         In contemplation of the impending maturity of the Debenture, the
parties hereto agree as follows:

1.       Hudson shall pay to Oppenheimer all interest due or to become due
         under the Debenture through the maturity date, April 15, 2000, in
         the amount of $117,187.50.

2.       Upon payment of the interest due, Oppenheimer shall take the steps
         required under the Debenture to effect the conversion thereof into
         1,666,667 shares of common stock of Hudson Hotels Corporation.
         Hudson shall instruct its transfer agent to issue the shares as
         directed by Oppenheimer. Hudson agrees that the execution of this
         Agreement shall be effective to extend the time for delivery of the
         Notice of Conversion under the Debenture for a reasonable time
         beyond the Stated Maturity thereof.

3.       Hudson agrees to undertake, as soon as notice of conversion has been
         received by it, to register all of the shares issuable on conversion
         of the Debenture, to secure effectiveness of such registration
         statement, and to take all steps necessary to ensure continued
         effectiveness of such registration statement. It is anticipated that
         the registration of these shares will become effective within sixty
         (60) days following conversion.

<PAGE>




         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement effective
as of April 13, 2000.

                                         Oppenheimer Convertible Securities Fund


                                         /s/ Edward N. Everett
                                         ---------------------------------
                                         Edward N. Everett, Vice President


                                         Hudson Hotels Corporation


                                         /s/ E. Anthony Wilson
                                         ---------------------------------
                                         E. Anthony Wilson, President.