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

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 50 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 50

    Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States 
                      relating to parental rights.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 18, 2013

  Mr. Meadows (for himself, Mr. Marchant, Mr. Franks of Arizona, Mr. 
Bonner, Mr. Gingrey of Georgia, Mr. McClintock, Mr. Graves of Georgia, 
     Mr. Coble, Mr. Smith of New Jersey, Mr. Pitts, Mr. Wolf, Mr. 
Westmoreland, Mr. Duncan of South Carolina, Mr. Lamborn, Mrs. Bachmann, 
 Mr. Huelskamp, Mr. Bridenstine, Mr. Walberg, Mr. Upton, Mr. Miller of 
 Florida, Mr. Collins of Georgia, Mr. Hudson, Mr. Harris, Mr. Forbes, 
    Mr. Hunter, Mr. Huizenga of Michigan, Mr. Broun of Georgia, Mr. 
 Stutzman, Mr. Pittenger, Mr. Wenstrup, Mr. Barton, Mr. Mulvaney, Mr. 
  Neugebauer, Mr. Wilson of South Carolina, Mr. Johnson of Ohio, Mr. 
    Fortenberry, Mr. Nugent, Mr. Jordan, Mr. Salmon, and Mr. Cole) 
 introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
    Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States 
                      relating to parental rights.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled   (two-thirds of each House 
concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an 
amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be 
valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 
ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:

                              ``Article--

    ``Section 1. The liberty of parents to direct the upbringing, 
education, and care of their children is a fundamental right.
    ``Section 2. The parental right to direct education includes the 
right to choose public, private, religious, or home schools, and the 
right to make reasonable choices within public schools for one's child.
    ``Section 3. Neither the United States nor any State shall infringe 
these rights without demonstrating that its governmental interest as 
applied to the person is of the highest order and not otherwise served.
    ``Section 4. This article shall not be construed to apply to a 
parental action or decision that would end life.
    ``Section 5. No treaty may be adopted nor shall any source of 
international law be employed to supersede, modify, interpret, or apply 
to the rights guaranteed by this article.''.
                                 <all>
```
# C_2017067EN.01000302.xml

| 3.3.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 67/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.3.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 67/3

---

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant positions at its meeting on 4 April 2016 concerning a draft decision relating to Case AT.39965(2) — Mushrooms

Rapporteur: France

(2017/C 67/05)

| 1. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that a fine should be imposed on the addressees of the draft decision. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that a fine should be imposed on the addressees of the draft decision.

| 2. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the determination of the value of sales. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the determination of the value of sales.

| 3. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the basic amounts of the fine. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the basic amounts of the fine.

| 4. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the determination of the duration for the purpose of calculating the fine. |
| --- | --- |

4.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the determination of the duration for the purpose of calculating the fine.

| 5. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that there are no mitigating/aggravating circumstances applicable in this case. |
| --- | --- |

5.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that there are no mitigating/aggravating circumstances applicable in this case.

| 6. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission as regards the reduction of the fine based on the 2006 Leniency Notice. |
| --- | --- |

6.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission as regards the reduction of the fine based on the 2006 Leniency Notice.

| 7. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s assessment of the Inability to Pay request. |
| --- | --- |

7.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s assessment of the Inability to Pay request.

| 8. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the final amount of the fine. |
| --- | --- |

8.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the final amount of the fine.

| 9. | The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its Opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

9.

The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its Opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Official Journal of the European Union

---
Darlene SCHMIDT, Petitioner v. Gary R. HERBERT, Governor of Utah

No. 19-5971

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 21, 2019

*Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis* denied, and the petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit dismissed. See Rule 39.8.
##### 



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 Quarterly Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and2.
    
    The information contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 Date: February 9, 2006
    
    By /s/ Eric H. PaulsonEric H. PaulsonChairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
```
 
 
WHEAT - MINNEAPOLIS GRAIN EXCHANGE                                   Code-001626
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 07/02/13                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:       33,647
COMMITMENTS
   4,087    4,533      644   20,062   19,100   24,793   24,277    8,854    9,370

CHANGES FROM 06/25/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:        750)
    -340      952      -14    2,271     -627    1,917      311   -1,167      439

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    12.1     13.5      1.9     59.6     56.8     73.7     72.2     26.3     27.8

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       55)
      10       10        6       30       19       42       34
```

----

Updated July 8, 2013
Frank ROARK, Petitioner, v. NEW YORK.

No. 19-7892.

Supreme Court of the United States.

May 4, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Division, Supreme Court of New York, Third Judicial Department denied.
COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE, Petitioner, v. Dorothy BROWN, Clerk, Circuit Court of Illinois, Cook County.

No. 18-1203.

Supreme Court of the United States.

Oct. 15, 2019.

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

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 13 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 13

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States waiving 
  the application of the first article of amendment to the political 
speech of corporations and other business organizations with respect to 
     the disbursement of funds in connection with public elections.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 2013

    Ms. Kaptur introduced the following joint resolution; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States waiving 
  the application of the first article of amendment to the political 
speech of corporations and other business organizations with respect to 
     the disbursement of funds in connection with public elections.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled   (two-thirds of each House 
concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an 
amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be 
valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 
ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States 
within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:

                              ``Article--

    ``The first article of amendment does not apply to the political 
speech of any corporation, partnership, business trust, association, or 
other business organization with respect to the making of 
contributions, expenditures, or other disbursements of funds in 
connection with public elections.''.
                                 <all>
```
Juan PEREZ, et al., Petitioners v. CITY OF SWEETWATER, FLORIDA

No. 19-485

Supreme Court of the United States.

December 9, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
Aaron NEW, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-7729.

Supreme Court of the United States.

June 1, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
# C_2018310EN.01000202.xml

| 3.9.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 310/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.9.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 310/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8879 — JERA Trading/LNG Optimisation)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2018/C 310/04)

On 23 August 2018, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32018M8879. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32018M8879. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           1,698
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   18,784
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      5,106
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                30,437
<PP&E>                                         179,658
<DEPRECIATION>                                  47,220
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 549,942
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           30,141
<BONDS>                                        337,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           284
<OTHER-SE>                                     164,646
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   549,942
<SALES>                                          8,624
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               159,743
<CGS>                                           17,944
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   46,661
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              31,462
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  7,406
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,724
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,682
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,682
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .18


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION ACCOMPANYING FORM 10-Q REPORT  OF  REDDY ICE HOLDINGS, INC.  PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  (CHAPTER 63, TITLE 18 U.S.C. SS.SS. 1350(a) AND (b))

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Chapter 63, Title 18 U.S.C. ss.ss. 1350(a) and (b)), each of the undersigned hereby certifies
that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2007 of Reddy Ice Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of the Company.

Date:
October 26, 2007

|/s/JIMMY C. WEAVERJimmy C. Weaver, Chief Executive Officer |  | 
|---------------------------------------------------------- |  | 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Chapter 63, Title 18 U.S.C. ss.ss. 1350(a)
and (b)), is not a part of the Form 10-Q to which it refers and is, to the extent permitted by law, provided by the above signatory to the extent of his knowledge.

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed
form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Reddy Ice Holdings, Inc. and will be retained by Reddy Ice
Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---



QuickLinks
William Charles BURGESS, Petitioner v. Chuck BOWERS, Jr., et al.

No. 19-5868

Supreme Court of the United States.

November 4, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
Geoffrey ELKINGTON, Petitioner v. Michael CLARK, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution at Albion, et al.

No. 19-6351

Supreme Court of the United States.

December 9, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
Exhibit 31.1



CERTIFICATION BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Daniel M. Gottlieb, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of G&L Realty Corp.;



2. Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;



3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this 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 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 have:



a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, 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 report is being prepared;



b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this 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; and



5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in
the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and



b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves
management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.



|                       
|-----------------------
|Date: November 15, 2004
|                       
|/s/DanielM. Gottlieb   
|Daniel M. Gottlieb     
|Chief Executive Officer
IN RE Anthony BRAWNER, Petitioner

No. 19-6169

Supreme Court of the United States.

November 12, 2019

Petition for writ of mandamus and/or prohibition denied.
<PAGE>
                                                                     Exhibit 4.6


                            CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
                                       TO
                              CERTIFICATE OF TRUST
                                       OF
                            METLIFE CAPITAL TRUST III


            THIS Certificate of Amendment to Certificate of Trust of MetLife
Capital Trust III (the "Trust"), is being duly executed and filed by the
undersigned trustee to amend the Certificate of Trust of the Trust, dated May
17, 2001 (the "Certificate of Trust"), pursuant to the Delaware Statutory Trust
Act (12 Del. C. Section 3801, et seq.)(the "Act").

            1. Name. The name of the statutory trust is MetLife Capital Trust
III.

            2. Amendment to Certificate of Trust. The Certificate of Trust is
hereby amended by amending and restated Section 2 thereof in its entirety as
follows:

            "2. Delaware Trustee. The name and business address of the trustee
of the Trust with a principal place of business in the State of Delaware is:

                             Chase Manhattan Bank USA, National Association
                             500 Stanton Christiana Road
                             OPS4 / 3rd Floor
                             Newark, Delaware 19713
                             Attn:  Institutional Trust Services"

            3. Effective Date. This Certificate of Amendment shall be effective
upon filing.

            IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned trustee of the Trust has
executed this Certificate of Amendment in accordance with Section 3811(a)(2) of
the Act.



                                     CHASE MANHATTAN BANK USA, NATIONAL
                                     ASSOCIATION,
                                     not in its individual capacity but
                                     solely as trustee




                                     By: /s/ John J. Cashin
                                         --------------------------------------
                                          Name: John J. Cashin
                                          Title: Vice-President
**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) 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 result of operations of the              Company. |
|-----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:                May 15, 2007 | By: /s/                David A. Gillespie                                                                                         |
|-----------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                              | David                A. Gillespie                                                                                                      |
|                              | President                and Chief Executive Officer                                                                                   |
|                              |       (Principal                executive and principal financial officer of the                Company) |
Crystal BITON, et al., Petitioners v. Donald B. VERRILLI, et al.

No. 19M59

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 21, 2019

Motion to direct the Clerk to file a petition for writ of certiorari out of time denied.
HSBC HOLDINGS PLC, et al., Petitioners v. Irving H. PICARD, et al.

No. 19-277

Supreme Court of the United States.

December 9, 2019

The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States.
Antoine GAUSE, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-9701

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 07, 2019

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