alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

BEAUMONT DIVISION

ANDREW MCMILLAN §

VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:23cv377

DAVID GUIDRY §

MEMORANDUM ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE

JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiff Andrew McMillan, an inmate at the Stiles Unit, proceeding pro se, brought this

civil rights suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

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

Magistrate Judge, at Beaumont, Texas, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders

of this Court. The magistrate judge recommends dismissing this action as frivolous. 

The Court has received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United States

Magistrate Judge filed pursuant to such referral, along with the record, pleadings and all available

evidence. A copy of the Report and Recommendation was mailed to Plaintiff at the address

provided to the Court. No objections to the Report and Recommendation of United States

Magistrate Judge have been filed.

O R D E R

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

correct and the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED. A separate 

Case 1:23-cv-00377-MJT-CLS Document 7 Filed 11/14/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 23
Final Judgment will be entered in this case in accordance with the magistrate judge’s

recommendations.

2

____________________________

Michael J. Truncale

United States District Judge SIGNED this 14th day of November, 2023.

Case 1:23-cv-00377-MJT-CLS Document 7 Filed 11/14/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 24
Archie G. ARMSTRONG, Petitioner, v. PENNSYLVANIA, et al.

No. 19M124.

Supreme Court of the United States.

April 6, 2020

Motion to direct the Clerk to file a petition for writ of certiorari out of time under Rule 14.5 denied.
Exhibit C

Case 2:23-cv-00289-JRG-RSP Document 42-3 Filed 06/11/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 416
1

From: Tanner Laiche <TLaiche@susmangodfrey.com> 

Sent: Friday, April 5, 2024 10:35 AM 

To: Alex Alfano <aalfano@sternekessler.com>; Mikaela Robes <mrobes@sternekessler.com>; andrea@wsfirm.com; 

Bryce T. Barcelo <BBarcelo@susmangodfrey.com>; Meng Xi <MXi@susmangodfrey.com>; Wendy Kelly 

<wkelly@susmangodfrey.com>; Joanna Stanley <jstanley@SusmanGodfrey.com> 

Cc: ELVIE-DAO-HEALTH <ELVIE-DAO-HEALTH@sternekessler.com>; External-Melissa Smith (gillamsmithlaw.com) 

<melissa@gillamsmithlaw.com>; Tom Gorham <Tom@gillamsmithlaw.com>; Diana Arias <Diana@gillamsmithlaw.com> 

Subject: Re: Dao Health v. Chiaro 2:23-cv-00289: Elvie's Identification of Dao Custodians to Know the Size and Date 

Ranges of the Maintained Email Files 

EXTERNAL EMAIL: Use caution before clicking links or attachments.

Alex, 

Thanks for your questions. Dao Health would be happy to answer formal interrogatories pertaining to the issues identified 

below in accordance with the Court’s Discovery Order and the federal rules. 

With respect to Howard Rockman’s emails, Dao Health does not have the legal right to access Mr. Rockman’s email 

inbox, which contains personal emails and privileged conversations between Mr. Rockman and other third-party clients. 

The out-of-circuit opinion Mercy Catholic Medical Center v. Thompson, 380 F.3d 142, 160 (3d Cir. 2004) you cited does 

not hold otherwise. Indeed, for obvious reasons Dao Health is not aware of any opinion holding that an attorney’s 

emails are deemed to be within the possession, custody, or control of a client. Even if it were, given the privileged 

nature of any emails between Mr. Rockman and Dao Health, Elvie has no basis to require Dao Health to search Mr. 

Rockman’s inbox as it would be overly burdensome, not proportional to the needs of the case, and not likely to lead to the 

discovery of admissible evidence.

Regards,

Tanner Laiche

Susman Godfrey LLP

206.505.3816 | tlaiche@susmangodfrey.com

401 Union Street | Suite 3000 | Seattle, WA 98101

HOUSTON • LOS ANGELES • SEATTLE • NEW YORK

This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential information. If you received this message in error, please notify me and delete it 

immediately.

Case 2:23-cv-00289-JRG-RSP Document 42-3 Filed 06/11/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 417
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

MARSHALL DIVISION 

XR COMMUNICATIONS, LLC, dba 

VIVATO TECHNOLOGIES, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

AT&T SERVICES INC., AT&T MOBILITY 

LLC, AND AT&T CORP., 

 Defendants. 

ERICSSON INC. and 

NOKIA OF AMERICA CORPORATION, 

 Intervenors. 

 Case No. 2:23-cv-00468-JRG-RSP 

 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE OF MATTHEW S. YUNGWIRTH 

Notice is hereby given that Matthew S. Yungwirth of the law firm of Duane Morris LLP, 

admitted to practice in this Court, enters his appearance as counsel of record for Intervenor 

Ericsson Inc. and lead counsel of record for Intervenor Nokia of America Corporation. Mr. 

Yungwirth will accept service of all pleadings, discovery, orders, notices, correspondence, and 

other material related to this litigation on their behalf at his contact information below. 

Dated: December 12, 2023 Respectfully submitted, 

/s/ Matthew S. Yungwirth 

Matthew S. Yungwirth 

Email: msyungwirth@duanemorris.com 

DUANE MORRIS LLP 

1075 Peachtree Street NE, Suite 1700 

Atlanta, GA 30309 

Telephone: (404) 253-6900 

Counsel for Intervenors Ericsson Inc. and 

Nokia of America Corporation

 

Case 2:23-cv-00468-JRG-RSP Document 26 Filed 12/12/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 876
 2 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that all counsel of record who are deemed to have consented to 

electronic service are being served with a copy of this document via the Court’s CM/ECF system 

per Local Rule CV-5(a)(3) on December 12, 2023. 

/s/ Matthew S. Yungwirth 

 Matthew S. Yungwirth 

Case 2:23-cv-00468-JRG-RSP Document 26 Filed 12/12/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 877
Jaime VEGA, aka Jimmy Johnson, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-8016.

Supreme Court of the United States.

April 20, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
```
  
 
WHEAT - MINNEAPOLIS GRAIN EXCHANGE                                   Code-001626
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 01/15/13          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:       45,879
COMMITMENTS
   6,755    2,602    2,649   24,607   29,643   34,012   34,894   11,867   10,985

CHANGES FROM 01/08/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:      1,165)
    -562      596      382      405        7      226      985      939      180

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
    14.7      5.7      5.8     53.6     64.6     74.1     76.1     25.9     23.9

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       55)
      11        8       11       34       27       51       41
```

----

Updated January 18, 2013
# C_2017421EN.01002001.xml

| 8.12.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 421/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.12.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 421/20

---

Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries

(2017/C 421/14)

In accordance with Article 35(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Union control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), a decision has been taken to close the fishery as set down in the following table:

1

| Date and time of closure | 10.10.2017 |
| --- | --- |
| Duration | 10.10.2017-31.12.2017 |
| Member State | Belgium |
| Stock or Group of stocks | SOL/8AB. |
| Species | Common sole (solea solea) |
| Zone | VIIIa and VIIIb |
| Type(s) of fishing vessels | — |
| Reference number | 26/TQ127 |

Date and time of closure

10.10.2017

Duration

10.10.2017-31.12.2017

Member State

Belgium

Stock or Group of stocks

SOL/8AB.

Species

Common sole (solea solea)

solea solea

Zone

VIIIa and VIIIb

Type(s) of fishing vessels

—

Reference number

26/TQ127

---

(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.

1

---
Exhibit 23.1

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We consent to the
incorporation by reference in the following Registration Statements:



| | (1) | Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-94640) of ScanSource, Inc. dated July 17, 1995;
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-08884) of ScanSource, Inc. dated April 10, 1998;
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (3) | Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-49879) of ScanSource, Inc. dated April 10, 1998;
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (4) | Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-78281) of ScanSource, Inc. dated May 12, 1999;
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (5) | Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-36766) of ScanSource, Inc. dated May 11, 2000;
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (6) | Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-110220) of ScanSource, Inc. dated November 4, 2003;
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (7) | Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-115534) of ScanSource, Inc. dated May 14, 2004;
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (8) | Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-144121) of ScanSource, Inc. dated June 28, 2007; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (9) | Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-153653) of ScanSource, Inc. dated September 24, 2008
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

of our reports dated August 27, 2009, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of ScanSource, Inc., and the effectiveness of
internal control over financial reporting of ScanSource, Inc., incorporated by reference, included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) of ScanSource, Inc. for the year ended June 30, 2009.

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Greenville, South Carolina

August 27, 2009
Howard LESTER, Petitioner, v. OHIO

No. 19-5178

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Ohio, Cuyahoga County denied.
1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

MARSHALL DIVISION 

HEADWATER PARTNERS II LLC, 

Plaintiff and Counterclaim-Defendant, 

vs. 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§

§ 

Case No. 2:24-cv-00007-JRG-RSP 

(Member Case) 

Jury Trial Demanded CELLCO PARTNERSHIP, D/B/A VERIZON 

WIRELESS, AND VERIZON CORPORATE 

SERVICES GROUP INC., 

Defendants and Counterclaimant-Plaintiffs. 

HEADWATER PARTNERS II LLC, 

Plaintiff and Counterclaim-Defendant, 

vs. 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§

§ 

Case No. 2:24-cv-00015-JRG-RSP 

(Lead Case) 

Jury Trial Demanded 

T-MOBILE USA, INC. AND SPRINT LLC, 

Defendants and Counterclaimant-Plaintiffs. 

HEADWATER PARTNERS II LLC, 

Plaintiff and Counterclaim-Defendant, 

vs. 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§

§ 

Case No. 2:24-cv-00016-JRG-RSP 

(Member Case) 

Jury Trial Demanded AT&T SERVICES, INC., AT&T MOBILITY 

LLC AND AT&T CORP., 

Defendants and Counterclaimant-Plaintiffs. 

ORDER ON JOINT MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE 

Case 2:24-cv-00015-JRG-RSP Document 52-1 Filed 07/01/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 485
2 

Pending before the Court is the parties’ Joint Motion to Consolidate. The Court, having 

considered the joint motion, and for good cause shown, finds that the motion should be 

GRANTED. 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above-captioned cases are to be consolidated for 

all pretrial issues with the LEAD CASE, Case No.. 2:24-cv-00015. All parties are instructed to 

file any future filings in the LEAD CASE. Individual cases remain active for trial. 

The Clerk is instructed to add the consolidated Defendants into the Lead Case and their 

corresponding Lead and Local Counsel only. Additional counsel may file a Notice of 

Appearance in the Lead Case if they wish to continue as counsel of record in the lead 

consolidated action. Counsel who has appeared pro hac vice in any member case may file a 

Notice of Appearance in the Lead Case without filing an additional application to appear pro hac 

vice in the Lead Case. Counsel who have not appeared in a member case at the point when it is 

consolidated into the Lead Case should file a Notice of Appearance only in the Lead Case, and 

such Notice should state the relevant member case. 

Case 2:24-cv-00015-JRG-RSP Document 52-1 Filed 07/01/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 486
Monica BIRCH-MIN, petitioner, v. MIDDLESEX COUNTY BOARD OF SOCIAL SERVICES, et al.

No. 19-6337

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 2, 2020

Petition for rehearing denied.
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14

- 40796 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
WALTER ERNESTO ESCOBAR

- MENDOZA , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:14

- CR

- 112

- 1

Before DAVIS, ELROD, and COSTA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Walter Ernesto Escobar

Mendoza raises an argument that he concedes is foreclosed by United States v. Rodriguez

- Escareno , 700 F .3d 751, 753

- 54 (5th Cir. 2012) , which held that the sentence enhancement provided for in U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(i) applies to a conviction for the federal crime of conspiracy to commit a federal drug

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED February 24 , 2015 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 14-40796 Document: 00512946936 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/24/2015No. 14

- 40796

trafficking offense. The unopposed motion for summary disposition is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

2 Case: 14-40796 Document: 00512946936 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/24/2015
No. 6:23-cv-00319

Paul Sean Gaffney,

Plaintiff,

v.

Bryan Collier et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER

Plaintiff Paul Sean Gaffney, a prisoner of the Texas Department 

of Criminal Justice proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this

civil rights lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge John D. Love pursuant to 

28 U.S.C. § 636(b). Doc. 4. 

On August 24, 2023, the magistrate judge issued a report recommending that the amended complaint be dismissed with prejudice

for failure to state a claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A(b)(1) and 

1915(e)(2)(b). Doc. 15. Plaintiff filed written objections. Doc. 18.

The court reviews the objected-to portions of a magistrate 

judge’s report and recommendation de novo. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 

72(b)(3); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The magistrate judge recommended 

dismissal because the plaintiff’s amended complaint failed to establish any violation of the plaintiff’s federal rights. Doc. 15. Plaintiff’s

objection to the report does not persuade the court otherwise. 

Plaintiff was investigated for wrongdoing for which he was not 

found guilty and received no punishment. He was also moved out of 

a dorm for which he was eligible, but in which he had no constitutional right to be housed. See Humphrey v. Banks, 777 F. App’x 767, 

768 (5th Cir. 2019) (“‘[A] prison inmate does not have a protectable 

liberty or property interest in his custodial classification’ and does 

not have a constitutional right to be housed in a particular facility.”). 

Plaintiff was moved from the dorm after objecting to participation in 

Case 6:23-cv-00319-JCB-JDL Document 21 Filed 10/02/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 152
- 2 -

the veterans program required of residents of that dorm. For the reasons explained by the magistrate judge, plaintiff fails to establish that 

his temporary exposure to a commonplace secular program burdened his ability to practice his religion in any way. Nor do any of the 

facts pertaining to the investigation of plaintiff or his temporary stay 

in or removal from the dorm in question amount to a violation of his 

rights. Plaintiff’s objections rehash his claims but do not establish 

that there is any merit in his amended complaint. And, as the magistrate judge explained, this lack of merit obviates the need to address 

whether the plaintiff’s conclusory allegations of conspiracy would 

support a § 1983 claim against the private parties named as defendants.

Having reviewed the magistrate judge’s report de novo, and being satisfied that it contains no error, the court overrules plaintiff’s 

objection and accepts the report’s findings and recommendation. 

This case is dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim upon 

which relief can be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A(b)(1) and 

1915(e)(2)(b).

So ordered by the court on October 2, 2023.

J. CAMPBELL BARKER

United States District Judge

Case 6:23-cv-00319-JCB-JDL Document 21 Filed 10/02/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 153
Eric BAGGETT, Petitioner, v. ONCOR ELECTRIC DELIVERY COMPANY, LLC.

No. 19-157

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

HEADWATER RESEARCH LLC,

Plaintiff,

 v.

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., 

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, 

INC.,

Defendants.

Civil Action No. 2:23-cv-00641-JRG-RSP

JURY DEMANDED

ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE 

PROPOSED DOCKET CONTROL ORDER AND DISCOVERY ORDER

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Headwater Research, LLC (“Headwater”) and 

Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (collectively, 

“Defendants” or “Samsung”), (collectively, the “Parties”) Joint Motion for Extension of Time to 

File Proposed Docket Control Order and Discovery Order. The Court, having considered the joint

motion, and for good cause shown, finds that the motion should be GRANTED.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the deadline for filing the proposed docket control order 

and discovery order is extended to June 19, 2024. All other deadlines shall remain in place absent 

further leave of Court.

Case 2:23-cv-00641-JRG-RSP Document 35-1 Filed 06/11/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 910
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

                        Consent of Independent Auditors

The Board of Directors
Wave Systems Corp.:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements
Nos. 33-97612, 333-11611 and 333-11609 on Form S-8, of our report dated
March 14, 1997, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of
Wave Systems Corp. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 1996 and 1995,
and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity
(deficiency), and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period
ended December 31, 1996 and for the period from February 12, 1988 (inception)
through December 31, 1996 which report appears in the December 31, 1996 annual
report on Form 10-K of Wave Systems Corp.

Our report dated March 14, 1997 contains an explanatory paragraph that states
that the Company has suffered recurring losses from operations since inception
that raise substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern.
The consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might
result from the outcome of that uncertainty.

                                                           KPMG Peat Marwick LLP

New York, New York
March 20, 1997
Michael Dewayne HEGWOOD, Petitioner v. UNITED STATES

No. 19-5743

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Exhibit 10.6

 

2012-1 AMENDMENT TO HELMERICH & PAYNE, INC.

2005 LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN

 

Pursuant to the authority granted to the Board of Directors of Helmerich & Payne, Inc. in Section 10.1 of the Helmerich & Payne, Inc. 2005 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “Plan”), the Plan is hereby amended as follows:

 

I.

 

Article II of the Plan is hereby amended by adding a Section 2.26 which provides as follows:

 

“2.26      ‘Net-Exercise’ means a procedure by which the Company will reduce the number of shares of Common Stock issued upon exercise by the largest whole number of shares with a Fair Market Value on the date of exercise that does not exceed the aggregate exercise price; provided, however, that the Participant shall pay to the Company any remaining balance of the aggregate exercise price not satisfied by such reduction in the number of whole shares to be issued.”

 

II.

 

Subsection 4.1(c) of the Plan is hereby amended by deleting the last sentence of said Subsection and substituting therefor the following:

 

“Shares of Common Stock which are tendered in payment of an Option, withheld as a result of a Net-Exercise, tendered or withheld in payment of taxes or repurchased using Option proceeds, shall not be added back to the shares authorized under Section 1.3.”

 

III.

 

Subsection 5.2(b) of the Plan is hereby amended by deleting the first sentence of said Subsection and substituting therefor the following:

 

“The exercise price of an Option may be paid (1) in cash or by check, bank draft or money order payable to the order of the Company; (2) by delivering shares of Common Stock having a Fair Market Value on the date of payment equal to the amount of the exercise price; (3) by delivery of a properly executed notice electing a Net-Exercise; or (4) a combination of the foregoing.”

 

Except as otherwise provided in this Amendment, the Helmerich & Payne, Inc. 2005 Long-Term Incentive Plan is ratified and confirmed in all respects.

 











 

EXECUTED this          day of                               , 2012.

 

	
 
    	
HELMERICH &   PAYNE, INC., a Delaware corporation
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
ATTEST:
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
By
    	
 
    
	
Secretary
    	
 
    	
 
    


 

2
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 14 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.Con.Res.14
                                        Agreed to March 11, 2013        

                     One Hundred Thirteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday,
           the third day of January, two thousand and thirteen

                          Concurrent Resolution

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring),

SECTION 1. USE OF ROTUNDA FOR HOLOCAUST DAYS OF REMEMBRANCE CEREMONY.

    The rotunda of the Capitol is authorized to be used on April 11, 
2013, for a ceremony as part of the commemoration of the days of 
remembrance of victims of the Holocaust. Physical preparations for the 
ceremony shall be carried out in accordance with such conditions as the 
Architect of the Capitol may prescribe.
Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.

Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.
```