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

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1097 

To direct the Secretary of Transportation to ensure that on-duty time does 

not include waiting time at a natural gas or oil well site for certain 

commercial motor vehicle operators, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 12, 2013 

Mr. MULLIN (for himself, Mr. FARENTHOLD, Mr. LUCAS, Mr. LANKFORD, Mr. 

YOUNG of Alaska, Mr. CRAMER, Mr. RIBBLE, Mr. PEARCE, Mr. STIVERS, 

Mr. OLSON, Mr. COLE, Mr. SOUTHERLAND, Mr. BRIDENSTINE, Mrs. 

LUMMIS, Mr. LATTA, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona, Mr. SCALISE, Mr. CONAWAY, Mr. POMPEO, Mr. GOHMERT, Mr. BARLETTA, and Mr. 

HUELSKAMP) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of Transportation to ensure that 

on-duty time does not include waiting time at a natural 

gas or oil well site for certain commercial motor vehicle 

operators, 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 ‘‘Preserving Jobs in the 

5 Oilfield Act of 2013’’. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1097 IH

1 SEC. 2. WAITING TIME EXCEPTION. 

2 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Transportation 

3 shall ensure that the exception described in section 

4 395.1(d)(2) of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations (re5 lating to on-duty time not including waiting time at a nat6 ural gas or oil well site) applies to covered operators, ex7 cept that the exception shall apply to such operators with8 out regard to whether such operators have received special 

9 training or operate vehicles specially constructed to service 

10 wells. 

11 (b) COVERED OPERATOR DEFINED.—In this section, 

12 the term ‘‘covered operator’’ means the operator of a com13 mercial motor vehicle transporting supplies, equipment, or 

14 materials, including sand or water, to or from a natural 

15 gas or oil well site. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
| (logo)  **ncb**  National Cooperative Bank    | 2011  Crystal  Drive  Suite, 8oo  Arlington, VA 22202 |
|----------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

**FORM OF ANNUAL COMPLIANCE STATEMENT**

 

 

CERTIFICATION

 

BANK 2018-BNK12, Commercial Mortgage Pass-ThroughCertificates, Series 2018-BNK12 (the “Trust”)

 

I,Karyn Mann, on behalf of National Cooperative Bank, N.A., as NCB MasterServicer (the “Certifying Servicer”), certify toWells Fargo CommercialMortgage Securities, Inc. and its officers, directors and affiliates, and withthe knowledge and intent that they will rely upon this certification, that:

 

1.       I (or ServicingOfficers under my supervision) have reviewed the Certifying Servicer’sactivities during the preceding calendar year between January 1, 2018 andDecember 31, 2018 (the “Reporting Period”) and theCertifying Servicer’sperformance under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement; and

 

2.       To the best of myknowledge, based on such review, the Certifying Servicer has fulfilled all ofits obligations under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement in all materialrespects during the Reporting Period.

 

 

Date:February 4, 2019

 

 

NATIONALCOOPERATIVE BANK, N.A.,

asNCB Master Servicer

By:          /s/Karyn Mann

Name:Karyn Mann

Title:Senior Vice President
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1169 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1169

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to transfer to the Secretary of 
       the Navy certain Federal land in Churchill County, Nevada.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 14, 2013

  Mr. Amodei introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To direct the Secretary of the Interior to transfer to the Secretary of 
       the Navy certain Federal land in Churchill County, Nevada.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Naval Air Station Fallon Housing and 
Safety Development Act''.

SEC. 2. TRANSFER OF DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR LAND.

    (a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall transfer to 
the Secretary of the Navy, without consideration, the Federal land 
described in subsection (b).
    (b) Description of Federal Land.--The Federal land referred to in 
subsection (a) is the parcel of approximately 400 acres of land under 
the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior that--
            (1) is adjacent to Naval Air Station Fallon in Churchill 
        County, Nevada; and
            (2) was withdrawn under Public Land Order 6834 (NV-943-
        4214-10; N-37875).
    (c) Management.--On transfer of the Federal land described under 
subsection (b) to the Secretary of the Navy, the Secretary of the Navy 
shall have full jurisdiction, custody, and control of the Federal land.
                                 <all>
```
### I N THE UNI TED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FI F TH CI RCUI T

No. 12-40570 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ENRIQUE RAMIREZ-LOARCA, Defendant-Appellant.

A ppeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas No. 7:12-CR-96-1

Before SMITH, PRADO, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *

Enrique R amirez-Loarca appeals the forty-six-month s entence imposed following his conviction of being present unlawfully in the United States after U n i t e d S t a te s C o u rt o f A p p e al s

F i f t h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D May15, 2013 Ly l e W . Cay ce Clerk

* Purs uant to 5 T H C I R

. R

. 47. 5, the court has d eterm ined that this op inion should not be p ublis hed and is not p reced ent excep t und er the lim ited circum s tances s et forth in 5 T H C I R

. R. 47. 5. 4. Case: 12-40570 Document: 00512242475 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/15/2013No. 12-40570

deportation. H e contends t hat the district court erred by imposing a s i xteenlevel enhancement under United States Sentencing Guidelines § 2L1.2 based on his conviction o f statutory rape under Georgia C o de Annotated § 1 6-6-3(a) (2005). He particularly argues that his offense does not satisfy the “generic, contemporary meaning” of t he enumerate d offenses of “statutory r a pe” or “sexual abuse of a minor” because the statute of conviction prescribes a three-year age differential between the victim and the defendant, rather than four years. The sole argument raised by Ramire z - L o a r c a i s f o r e c l o s e d b y U

nited States

v. Rodriguez , 711 F.3d 541 (5th Cir. 2013) (en banc). There, w e applied a “plainmeaning” a pproach to determine the “generic, contemporary meaning” of “statutory r a pe” and “sexual abuse of a minor” and concluded that the g eneric definitions of those offense categories do not include a ny specific a ge differential. I d. at 561-62 & n.28. We expressly rejected the claim that t h e statute at issue

SS § 2 1.11(a)(1) of t he Texas Penal Cod e S S d i d n o t satisfy the “generic, contemporary meaning” o f “sexual abus e o f a minor” because the statute p r escribed a threeyear instead o f a f

our-year age differential between the victim and the defendant. I d. a t 562 n.28. In light of Rodriguez , Ramirez-Loarca has not shown t hat it was error for the district court to impose a sixteen-level enhancement under § 2 L1.2 based on his c onviction of s tatutor y r a p e u n d e r § 16-6-3(a). Thus, the judgment of sentence is AFFIRMED.

2 Case: 12-40570 Document: 00512242475 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/15/2013
# C_2012273EN.01001402.xml

| 8.9.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 273/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.9.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 273/14

---

Action brought on 3 July 2012 — Mega Brands v OHIM — Diset (MAGNEXT)

(Case T-292/12)

2012/C 273/25

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Mega Brands International, Luxembourg, Zweigniederlassung Zug (Zug, Suisse) (represented by: A. Nordemann, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Diset, SA (Barcelona, Spain)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 24 April 2012 in case R 1722/2011-4 and reject the opposition No B 1681447; and |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 24 April 2012 in case R 1722/2011-4 and reject the opposition No B 1681447; and

| — | Order the defendant to bear the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to bear the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘MAGNEXT’, for goods in class 28 — Community trade mark application No 8990591

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Spanish trade mark registration No 2550099 of the word mark ‘MAGNET 4’, for goods in class 28; Community trade mark registration No 3840121 of the figurative mark ‘Diset Magnetics’, for goods and services in classes 16, 28 and 41

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition and rejected the application in its entirety

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009.

Pleas in law:

---
Exhibit 4.1


THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON


NEW YORK’S FIRST BANK-FOUNDED 1784 BY ALEXANDER HAMILTON


 


 


2 HANSON PLACE, 12TH FLOOR, BROOKLYN,
N.Y. 11217


 


 


 


July 25, 2019


 


Hennion & Walsh, Inc.


2001 Route 46, Waterview Plaza


Parsippany, New Jersey 07054


 


Smart Trust 437 (the “Fund”)


 


Dear Sirs:


The Bank of New York
Mellon is acting as trustee for the Fund, consisting of the unit investment trust (the “Trust”) included in
the Registration Statement relating to the Fund. We enclosed a list of the securities to be deposited in the Trust on the date
hereof. The prices indicated therein reflect our evaluation of such securities as of close of business on July 24, 2019, in accordance
with the valuation method set forth in the applicable Standard Terms and Conditions of Trust and Trust Agreement. We consent to
the reference to The Bank of New York Mellon as the party performing the evaluations of the Trust securities in the Registration
Statement (No. 333-231056) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission with respect to the registration of the sale of the
Units of the Trust and to the filing of this consent as an exhibit thereto.


 


Very truly yours,


 


/s/ GERARDO CIPRIANO_________________


Gerardo Cipriano


Vice President
Jorge L. MEDINA, Petitioner v. William P. BARR, Attorney General

No. 19-287

Supreme Court of the United States.

December 9, 2019

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

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1383 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1383

     To amend title XIV of division A of the American Recovery and 
   Reinvestment Act of 2009 to equalize the treatment of States and 
                            outlying areas.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 21, 2013

   Mr. Sablan (for himself, Mrs. Christensen, Ms. Bordallo, and Mr. 
Faleomavaega) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                Committee on Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To amend title XIV of division A of the American Recovery and 
   Reinvestment Act of 2009 to equalize the treatment of States and 
                            outlying areas.

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

SECTION 1. TREATMENT OF OUTLYING AREAS.

    (a) In General.--Section 14001 of division A of the American 
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5; 123 Stat. 279) 
is amended--
            (1) by striking subsection (a);
            (2) in subsection (c), by striking ``subsections (a) and 
        (b)'' and inserting ``subsection (a)'';
            (3) in subsection (d), by striking ``subsections (a), (b), 
        and (c),'' and inserting ``subsections (a) and (b),'';
            (4) in subsection (e), by striking ``subsection (d),'' and 
        inserting ``subsection (c),'';
            (5) in subsection (f)--
                    (A) by striking ``subsection (e)'' and inserting 
                ``subsection (d)''; and
                    (B) by striking ``subsection (d).'' and inserting 
                ``subsection (c).''; and
            (6) by redesignating subsections (b) through (f) as 
        subsections (a) through (e), respectively.
    (b) Definitions.--Section 14013(5) of such division is amended--
            (1) by striking ``and the'' and insert ``the''; and
            (2) by striking ``Rico;'' and inserting ``Rico, and each of 
        the outlying areas (as defined in section 9101 of the 
        Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
        7801));''.
                                 <all>
```
# Official Journal L 336/13 D

| | ISSN 1725-2555 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 336 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 5113 December 2008 |

ISSN 1725-2555

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 336

English edition

Legislation

Volume 5113 December 2008

---

| Contents | | I   Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is obligatory | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Commission Regulation (EC) No 1221/2008 of 5 December 2008 amending Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 laying down implementing rules of Council Regulations (EC) No 2200/96, (EC) No 2201/96 and (EC) No 1182/2007 in the fruit and vegetable sector as regards marketing standards | 1 |

Contents

I   Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is obligatory

page

REGULATIONS

*

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1221/2008 of 5 December 2008 amending Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 laying down implementing rules of Council Regulations (EC) No 2200/96, (EC) No 2201/96 and (EC) No 1182/2007 in the fruit and vegetable sector as regards marketing standards

1

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | * | Note to the reader (see page 3 of the cover) | s3 |

*

Note to the reader (see page 3 of the cover)

Note to the reader

s3

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
**Exhibit
      32.2**














**CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF FINANCIAL**


**OFFICER
      REGARDING PERIODIC REPORT CONTAINING**


**FINANCIAL
      STATEMENTS**









I,
      Jeffrey T. Fisher, the Chief Financial Officer of CCO Holdings, LLC and CCO
      Holdings Capital Corp. (the "Company") in compliance with 18 U.S.C. Section
      1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
      hereby certify that, the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
      period ended March 31, 2006 (the "Report") filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission:




|· | fully
              complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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.
|- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------








/s/
      Jeffrey T. Fisher


Jeffrey
      T. Fisher


Chief
      Financial Officer


(Principal
      Financial Officer)


May
      12,
      2006
Carter STEPHENS, Petitioner, v. Marcelo Britto GOMEZ, et al.

No. 19-5662

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 13, 2020

The petition for rehearing is denied.
Dorothy Williams ELLIOTT, Petitioner, v. FLORIDA.

No. 19-6575

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 13, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Florida denied.
Independent Auditors' Consent




To the Shareholders and Board of Directors of
Intermediate Muni Fund, Inc.:
We consent to the incorporation by reference, in this combined
Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information, of our report
dated February 8, 2001, on the statement of assets and liabilities
for the Intermediate Muni Fund, Inc. (the "Fund") as of December
31, 2000 and the related statement of operations for the year then
ended, the statements of changes in net assets for each of the
years in the two-year period then ended and the financial
highlights for each of the years in the five-year period then
ended.  These financial statements and financial highlights and
our report thereon are included in the Annual Report of the Fund
as filed on Form N-30D.
We also consent to the references to our firm under the headings
"Financial Highlights" and "Independent Auditors" in the combined
Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information.



KPMG LLP
New York, New York
April 25, 2001
Page
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

**CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

     In connection with theQuarterly Report of Golden Oval Eggs, LLC (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for theperiod ended May 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Doug Leifermann, Vice President and ChiefFinancial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (1)The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

     (2)The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 
|   |   |                                       |
|--------|--------|--------------------------------------------|
|   | By:    | /s/  Doug Leifermann                       |
|   |   | Doug  Leifermann                           |
|   |   | *Vice President/**Chief Financial Officer* |

Date: January 14, 2005

 

----
STATE of North Carolina v. Edward ANDERSON.

No. 65P04.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 6, 2004.

Edward Anderson, Pro Se.

Jeffrey R. Edwards, Assistant Attorney General, Kathryne E. Hathcock, Certified Legal Intern., Kenneth W. Honeycutt, District Attorney, for State.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 10th day of February 2004 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

> "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 6th day of May 2004."
Charles Phillips BOND v. STATE.

No. 143A95-6.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 12, 2004.

William P. Hart, Senior Deputy Attorney General, Valerie M. Pittman, District Attorney, for State.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 13th day of May 2004 by Pro Se for Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts:

> "Motion dismissed by order of the Court in conference this the 12th day of August 2004."
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A14A2264. MAJOR FORTSON v. RENDER C. FREEMAN et al.

On April 25, 2014, the trial court entered an order denying Major Fortson’s

petition to remove an attorney’s fees lien from his property. Fortson filed a motion

for reconsideration, which the trial court denied. On June 3, 2014, Fortson filed this

direct appeal. We lack jurisdiction.

A notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days of the entry of the order sought

to be appealed. OCGA § 5-6-38 (a). “The proper and timely filing of a notice of

appeal is an absolute requirement to confer jurisdiction upon an appellate court.”

(Citation and punctuation omitted.) Perlman v. Perlman, 318 Ga. App. 731, 739 (4)

(734 SE2d 560) (2012). The filing of a motion for reconsideration does not extend

the time for filing a notice of appeal, and the denial of a motion for reconsideration

is not itself a directly appealable order. See Bell v. Cohran, 244 Ga. App. 510, 511

(536 SE2d 187) (2000); Savage v. Newsome, 173 Ga. App. 271 (326 SE2d 5) (1985). 

Here, Fortson filed his notice of appeal 39 days after entry of the underlying order.

The untimely appeal is hereby DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. 

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

10/10/2014

October 10, 2014
Anthony DOVE v. WIL-O-WISP APARTMENTS, Owner(s) - John Doe(s), Wil-O-Wisp Apartments Manager, - Jane or Richard Doe, Luby Edward Outlaw, et. al.

No. 186P04.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 12, 2004.

Anthony Dove, Pro Se.

Kari R. Johnson, Jaye E. Bingham, Raleigh, for Wil-O-Wisp Apartments et al.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Plaintiff on the 19th day of July 2004 for rehearing of the decision of this Court pursuant to Rule 31, N.C. Rules of Appellate Procedure, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

> "Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 12th day of August 2004."
Vernon ROBINSON, Petitioner, v. FLORIDA.

No. 18-6331

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 21, 2020

The petition for rehearing is denied.