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

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2319 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2319

 To make the American Battle Monuments Commission and the World War II 
 Memorial Advisory Board eligible to use nonprofit standard mail rates 
                              of postage.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 23, 1999

  Mr. McHugh introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To make the American Battle Monuments Commission and the World War II 
 Memorial Advisory Board eligible to use nonprofit standard mail rates 
                              of postage.

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

SECTION 1. ELIGIBILITY FOR NONPROFIT STANDARD MAIL RATES.

    (a) In General.--The American Battle Monuments Commission and the 
World War II Memorial Advisory Board (as referred to in Public Law 103-
32 (40 U.S.C. 1003 note; 107 Stat. 90)) shall each be considered to 
qualify for the rates of postage currently in effect under former 
section 4452 of title 39, United States Code, for third-class mail 
matter mailed by a qualified nonprofit organization.
    (b) Restriction.--Rates of postage afforded by subsection (a) shall 
be available only with respect to official mail sent for the 
furtherance of the purpose of section 2(c)(1) or 3 of Public Law 103-
32, as applicable.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

MARSHALL DIVISION 

 

 ) 

QUALITATIVE DATA SOLUTIONS, LLC, ) 

 )

 Plaintiff, ) Civil Action No. 2:23-cv-00271-JRG-RSP 

 ) 

 v. ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

 ) 

ADT, INC. ) 

 ) 

 Defendant. ) 

 ) 

NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE 

Pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), Plaintiff Qualitative 

Data Solutions, LLC (“Plaintiff”) hereby gives notice that the above-captioned action against 

Defendant ADT, Inc. (“Defendant”) is voluntarily dismissed WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 

Dated: July 6, 2023 Respectfully submitted, 

 /s/ Donald R. McPhail 

 Donald R. McPhail (admitted) 

 OBLON, MCLELLAND, MAIER 

 & NEUSTADT LLP 

 1940 Duke Street 

 Alexandria, VA 22314 

 dmcphail@oblon.com 

 Telephone: 703-413-3000 

 Facsimile: 703-413-2220 

Case 2:23-cv-00271-JRG-RSP Document 5 Filed 07/06/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 30
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on July 6, 2023, I filed the within through the ECF system and that 

notice will be sent electronically to all counsel who are registered participants identified on the 

Mailing Information for C.A. No. 2:23-cv-00271-JRG-RSP. 

/s/ Diana Bowen 

Case 2:23-cv-00271-JRG-RSP Document 5 Filed 07/06/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 31
**EXHIBIT 21.01**

**GAMING PARTNERS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION**

**LIST OFSUBSIDIARIES**

| Name                                             | ** ** | **State/Country of  Incorporation** | ** ** | **Parent**                                 |
|--------------------------------------------------|------------|-------------------------------------|------------|--------------------------------------------|
| Gaming Partners  International SAS (1)           |       | France                              |       | Gaming Partners  International Corporation |
| Gaming Partners International  USA, Inc.(1) |       | Nevada                              |       | Gaming Partners  International Corporation |
| GPI Mexicana, S.A. de  C.V.(2)                   |       | Mexico                              |       | Gaming Partners  International Corporation |

----

(1)          Effective date of namechange was September 1, 2004.

(2)          Effective date of namechange was January 22, 2005.

----
Patricia MORRISON, petitioner, v. QUEST DIAGNOSTICS INC., et al.

No. 17-1537.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 19, 2018.

Petition for rehearing denied.
### IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 17

- 00194

- CV

IN RE KEITH AND SERE NA TINKER

Original Proceeding

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

Intervenors' Motion for Extension of Time filed with this Court on July 10, 2017 is

granted. The Intervenors' response is due on August 15, 2017.

PER CURIAM

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Scoggins

Motion granted

Order delivered and filed July 19, 2017
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 23

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement of
Borror Corporation on Form S-8 (File No. 0-23270) of our report dated February
7, 1997 except for note 9 which is March 18, 1997, on our audits of the
financial statements of Borror Corporation as of December 31, 1996, and 1995 and
for the years ended December 31, 1996, 1995 and 1994, which report is included
in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.








                                                       Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P.

Columbus, Ohio
March 18, 1997
Exhibit 31.1 

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEFEXECUTIVE OFFICER 

I, Carl Spana, certifythat: 

1.              I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Palatin Technologies,          Inc.; 

2.              Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly          report; 

3.              Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information          included in this quarterly 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 quarterly report; 

4.              The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for          establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in          Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) 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 quarterly report is being prepared; 

b)              evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and          procedures and presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the          effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the          period covered by this report, based on such evaluation; and 

c)              disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control          over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent          fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to          materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial          reporting. 

5.              The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on          our most recent evaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit          committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the          equivalent function): 

a)              all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls          which could adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,          summarize and report financial data and have identified for the          registrant’s auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and 

b)              any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees          who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls. 

Date: February 17, 2004 

/s/ Carl Spana
EXHIBIT 99.21


CONSENT OF EXPERT
 
 
 March 30, 2012
 
 
 Eldorado Gold Corporation
 
 United States Securities and Exchange Commission
 
 Ladies and Gentlemen:
 
 Re: Eldorado Gold Corporation
 
 
 I, Neil Liddell, do hereby consent to the filing of the written disclosure regarding the technical reports entitled (i) the “Technical Report on the Olympias Project, Au Pb Zn Ag Deposit, Northern Greece” dated July 14, 2011 (ii) the “Technical Report on the Stratoni Project – Pb Zn Ag Deposit, northern Greece” dated September 21, 2010 for European Goldfields prepared in accordance with the requirements of NI43-101and (iii) the “Certej Updated Definitive Feasibility Study” dated February 26, 2009 and the description of all mineral reserves of the Olympias, Stratoni and Certej properties and of extracts from or a summary of  the technical reports and other information pertaining to these projects, and the use of my name in the Annual Information Form and Annual Report on Form 40-F of Eldorado Gold Corporation (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2011 and any amendments thereto and any Registration Statement on Form S-8 incorporating by reference the Company’s Annual Information Form and Annual Report on Form 40-F.
 
 
 By:
/s/ Neil LiddellNeil Liddell, MIMMM
Frederick H. BANKS, Petitioner v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-9720

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
Roy PARKER, petitioner, v. Burl CAIN, Warden.

No. 18-6247.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

JUAN ALVAREZ GOTTWALD and

AXIOM, S.A. DE C.V.,

Appellants,

v.

ROSA DELGADO DOMINGUEZ DE

CANO, LUCIO MARIO CANO

BARRAZA, MARIO SERGIO DELGADO

DOMINGUEZ, BLANCA DELGADO DE

URQUIDI, AND PATRICIA ALVARES

OZUNA,

Appellees. §

§

§

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 16

- 00044

- CV

Appeal from the

171st District Court

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC# 2013DCV4096)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was error in the trial

court’s order granting Appellees’ motion to dismiss for forum non conveniens

. We therefore

reverse the judgment of the court below and remand the case to the tria l court for further

proceedings consistent with this opinion. We further order that Appellants recover from Appellees

all costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue. This decision shall be certified below for

observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 13 TH DAY OF JULY, 2018.

GINA M. PALAFOX, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Palafox, JJ.
CONSENT OF EXPERT

March 30, 2017



Eldorado Gold Corporation



United States Securities and Exchange Commission



Ladies and Gentlemen:



Re: Eldorado Gold Corporation

I, Colm Keogh, do hereby consent to the filing of the written disclosure regarding the description of mineral reserves of Skouries
(underground) properties and of extracts from or a summary of other information pertaining to this project, and the use of my name
in the Annual Information Form and Annual Report on Form 40-F of Eldorado Gold Corporation (the “Company”) for the
year ended December 31, 2016 and any amendments thereto and any Registration Statement on Form S-8 incorporating by reference the
Company’s Annual Information Form and Annual Report on Form 40-F.



| | By: | /s/ Colm Keogh                      
| | --- | ------------------------------------
| |     | Colm Keogh, P. Eng.                 
| |     | AMC Mining Consultants (Canada) Ltd.
| |     |                                     
| |     |
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 465 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 465

 Recognizing that the Governor of the State of Colorado has proclaimed 
                     2012 as the ``Year of Water''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 16, 2012

   Mr. Udall of Colorado (for himself and Mr. Bennet) submitted the 
        following resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Recognizing that the Governor of the State of Colorado has proclaimed 
                     2012 as the ``Year of Water''.

Whereas water is a precious and limited natural resource;
Whereas a clean and sustainable water supply is essential to the high quality of 
        life enjoyed by Coloradans;
Whereas a clean and sustainable water supply is essential to the success of all 
        aspects of the economy of the State of Colorado, including the 
        agricultural, municipal, industrial, and recreational economies;
Whereas as a headwaters State, the health of the water in the State of Colorado 
        has a direct impact on neighboring States;
Whereas the population of the State of Colorado is predicted to double by 2050;
Whereas educating the public about limited water resources will be critical in 
        meeting the increasing demands placed on water in the future;
Whereas 2012 marks the--

    (1) 100th anniversary of the construction of the Rio Grande Reservoir;

    (2) 90th anniversary of the Colorado River Compact of 1922;

    (3) 75th anniversary of the creation of the Colorado Water Conservation 
Board;

    (4) 75th anniversary of the creation of the Colorado River Water 
Conservation District;

    (5) 75th anniversary of the creation of the Northern Colorado Water 
Conservancy District and the Colorado-Big Thompson Project;

    (6) 50th anniversary of the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, administered by 
the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District;

    (7) 10th anniversary of the Colorado Foundation for Water Education; 
and

    (8) 10th anniversary of the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy 
District; and

Whereas the Governor of the State of Colorado has proclaimed 2012 as the ``Year 
        of Water'' in the State of Colorado: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate recognizes that the Governor of the State 
of Colorado has proclaimed 2012 as the ``Year of Water'' in the State 
of Colorado.
                                 <all>
```
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

TERRELL JUSTIN ROGERS, §

§

Movant, §

§

versus § CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:23-CV-160

§

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, §

§

Respondent. §

MEMORANDUM ORDER ADOPTING 

THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Terrell Justin Rogers, proceeding pro se, filed this motion to vacate, set aside or correct

sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255.

The court referred this matter to the Honorable Christine L. Stetson, United States

Magistrate Judge, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws. The magistrate judge has

submitted a Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge concerning this motion

to vacate. The magistrate judge recommends the motion to vacate be dismissed as barred by the

applicable statute of limitations. To date, the parties have not filed objections to the report.

The court has received the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge,

along with the record, pleadings, and all available evidence. After careful review, the court finds

that the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the United States Magistrate Judge are correct. 

ORDER

Accordingly, the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the magistrate judge are correct

and the report of the magistrate judge (#2) is ADOPTED. A final judgment will be entered

dismissing the motion to vacate.

Case 9:23-cv-00160-MAC-CLS Document 4 Filed 06/13/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 10
Furthermore, the court is of the opinion movant is not entitled to a certificate of

appealability. An appeal from a judgment denying post-conviction collateral relief may not

proceed unless a judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253. The standard

for a certificate of appealability requires the movant to make a substantial showing of the denial

of a federal constitutional right. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 483-84 (2000); Elizalde

v. Dretke, 362 F.3d 323, 328 (5th Cir. 2004). To make a substantial showing, the movant need

not establish that he would prevail on the merits. Rather, he must demonstrate that the issues are

subject to debate among jurists of reason, that a court could resolve the issues in a different

manner, or that the questions presented are worthy of encouragement to proceed further. See

Slack, 529 U.S. at 483-84. Any doubt regarding whether to grant a certificate of appealability

should be resolved in favor of the movant, and the severity of the penalty may be considered in

making this determination. See Miller v. Johnson, 200 F.3d 274, 280-81 (5th Cir. 2000).

In this case, the movant has not shown that the issue of whether his motion to vacate is

barred by the applicable statute of limitations is subject to debate among jurists of reason. The

factual and legal questions raised by movant have been consistently resolved adversely to his

position and the questions presented are not worthy of encouragement to proceed further. As a

result, a certificate of appealability shall not issue in this matter. 

2

Signed this date

Jun 13, 2024

Case 9:23-cv-00160-MAC-CLS Document 4 Filed 06/13/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 11
SENJU PHARMACEUTICAL CO., LTD., et al., Petitioners v. AKORN, INC.

No. 18-1418

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied.
AMENDMENT TO THE LIFEPOINT HOSPITALS,
INC.


AMENDED AND RESTATED 1998 LONG-TERM INCENTIVE
PLAN


 


THIS AMENDMENT to the
LifePoint Hospitals, Inc. Amended and Restated 1998 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) is effective as of this 23rd
day of April, 2012.


 


WHEREAS, LifePoint
Hospitals, Inc. (the “Company”) established the Plan in order to provide a proprietary interest in the Company through
stock ownership and other rights.


 


WHEREAS, Section 15.3
of the Plan provides that the Board of Directors of the Company may amend the Plan; and


 


WHEREAS, the Board
of Directors of the Company has authorized the amendment of the Plan to clarify certain provisions;


 


NOW, THEREFORE, the
Plan is hereby amended as follows:


 


		I.	The second sentence of Section 5.4 is deleted and replaced with the following:



 


Such rights include the right
to vote the shares and receive all dividends and other distributions paid or made with respect thereto, provided, however, that
such rights shall be forfeited with respect to any portion of a Performance Share Award that does not vest.


 


		II.	Section 6.8 of the Plan is deleted and replaced with the following:



 


6.8     Restrictions
on Repricing of Options. With respect to an Option that has been granted hereunder, the exercise price may not be lowered,
nor may the Option be replaced (including replacement with cash) or regranted through cancellation without stockholder approval.


 


		III.	The following sentence is added to the end of Section 7.2:



 


Upon the exercise of an SAR,
the number of shares counted against the shares available under the Plan shall be the full number of shares subject to the SAR
multiplied by the percentage of the SAR actually exercised, regardless of the number of shares actually used to settle such SAR
upon exercise.


 


 


Except as otherwise
set forth herein, all other terms and provisions of the Plan shall remain in full force and effect.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
the undersigned officer of the Company has executed this Amendment on the date first written above.


 


	 	LIFEPOINT HOSPITALS, INC.
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	By:	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	Name:	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	Title:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

In the Matter of

ALAN C. KAUFFMAN

PETITION FOR REINSTATEMENT FROM INACTIVE STATUS : : : : : : : No. 97 DB 2014 (No. 63 RST 2014)

Attorney Registration No. 2946

(Out of State)

O R D E R

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 12 th day of September, 2014, the Report and Recommendat ion of Disciplinary Board Member dated September 3, 201 4, is approved and it is ORDERED that Alan C. Kauffman, who has been on Inac tive Status, has never been suspended or disbarred, and has demonstrated that h e has the moral qualifications, competency and learning in law required for admissi on to practice in the Commonwealth, shall be and is, hereby reinstated to active status as a member of the Bar of this Commonwealth. The expenses incurred by the Board in the investigation and processing of this matter shall be paid by the Petitioner.
Solo Page

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SHERMAN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA §

§

v. § Case No. 4:23-cr-225

§

§

KYLE KELLY CARTER §

ORDER ON DR. CARTER’S MOTION TO DISMISS THE INDICTMENT

Before the Court is Defendant Kyle Carter’s Motion to Dismiss the Indictment (Dkt. 

#83). Upon consideration of the motion, relevant filings, and applicable law, the motion is 

hereby DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Case 4:23-cr-00225-ALM-AGD Document 111 Filed 08/14/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 1134
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION

<PAGE>


                                  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


         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Glas-Aire  Industries Group,
Ltd. (the  "Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the period  ending  September 30, 2004
(the "Report") I, Craig Grossman,  Chairman, Chief Executive Officer, President,
and  Secretary  of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 USC 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 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:  August 14, 2006


\s\ Craig Grossman
-------------------------------------------------
Craig Grossman, Chairman, Chief Executive Officer,
President, and Secretary

         This  certification  accompanies  the Report pursuant to Section 906 of
the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by
the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.