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

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                  S. 3

 To amend part D of title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide 
     for fair prescription drug prices for Medicare beneficiaries.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 4, 2007

    Mr. Reid (for himself, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Leahy, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. 
Schumer, Mrs. Clinton, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Kohl, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Webb, 
and Mrs. Boxer) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend part D of title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide 
     for fair prescription drug prices for Medicare beneficiaries.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; SENSE OF THE CONGRESS.

    (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Medicare 
Prescription Drug Price Negotiation Act of 2007''.
    (b) Sense of the Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress that 
the Congress should enact, and the President should sign, legislation 
to amend part D of title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide 
for fair prescription drug prices for Medicare beneficiaries.
                                 <all>
```
WILLIAMS v. CUMBERLAND COUNTY DEPT. OF SOCIAL SERVICES.

No. COA05-1390.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed August 15, 2006.

Certification Date September 5, 2006.

Appeal from Cumberland (04CVS5956).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
# C_2023278EN.01002801.xml

| 7.8.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 278/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.8.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 278/28

---

Action brought on 22 June 2023 — Finastra International v EUIPO — Fenestrae (FINASTRA)

(Case T-346/23)

(2023/C 278/39)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Finastra International Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Malynicz, Barrister)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Fenestrae BV (‘s-Gravenhage, Netherlands)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the European Union word mark FINASTRA — International registration designating the European Union No 1 405 804

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 April 2023 in Case R 1296/2022-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO (and the intervener, should it take part in these proceedings) to bear its own costs and pay the costs of the applicant for annulment before this Court and before the Board of Appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO (and the intervener, should it take part in these proceedings) to bear its own costs and pay the costs of the applicant for annulment before this Court and before the Board of Appeal.

Pleas in law

| — | Wrong interpretation of the specified goods & services; |
| --- | --- |

—

Wrong interpretation of the specified goods & services;

| — | Misidentification of the relevant public; |
| --- | --- |

—

Misidentification of the relevant public;

| — | Failing to apply the rule of conceptual counteraction as regards a specialised public. |
| --- | --- |

—

Failing to apply the rule of conceptual counteraction as regards a specialised public.

---
IN RE S.V.

No. COA08-388.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed August 19, 2008.

Certification Date September 8, 2008.

Appeal from Orange (08J4, 08J5, 08J6).

Case reported without published opinion. Vacated.
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23

- 6783

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v.
WILLIE HORTON , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Alexandria

. Anthony John Trenga, Senior District Judge. ( 1:89

- cr - 00180

- AJT

- 1 )

Submitted : October 31, 2023 Decided: November 3, 2023

Before HARRIS and QUATTLEBAUM , Circuit Judges , and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Willie Horton , Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-6783 Doc: 6 Filed: 11/03/2023 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM: Willie Horton, a federal prisoner serving a life sentence for murder, appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for compassionate release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A), as amended by the First Step Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115

- 391, § 6 03(b)(1), 132 Stat. 5194, 5239. Having reviewed the record, we conclude that the
district court did not abuse its discretion in denying relief. See United States v. Malone , 57 F.4th 167, 172 (4th Cir. 2023) (explaining standard of review)

. Accordingly, we affirm
the district court’s order. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED USCA4 Appeal: 23-6783 Doc: 6 Filed: 11/03/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3729 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3729

 To amend the Clean Air Act to prohibit the imposition of a fee or tax 
               for direct gaseous emissions by livestock.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           December 10, 2008

  Mr. Dorgan introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Clean Air Act to prohibit the imposition of a fee or tax 
               for direct gaseous emissions by livestock.

    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 ``Livestock Emissions Tax Ban Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON IMPOSITION OF FEE OR TAX FOR DIRECT GASEOUS 
              EMISSIONS BY LIVESTOCK.

    Title III of the Clean Air Act is amended--
            (1) by inserting after section 312 (42 U.S.C. 7612) the 
        following:

``SEC. 313. PROHIBITION ON IMPOSITION OF FEE OR TAX FOR DIRECT GASEOUS 
              EMISSIONS BY LIVESTOCK.

    ``Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Administrator 
shall not impose a fee or tax under this Act on any direct gaseous 
emissions by livestock.''; and
            (2) by redesignating the second section 317 (42 U.S.C. 
        7617) (relating to economic impact assessment) as section 318.
                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 173 (Thursday, September 8, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 53349]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-17788]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Notice of Availability of the Mobile Sensors Environmental 
Assessment and Draft Finding of No Significant Impact

AGENCY: Missile Defense Agency, Department of Defense.

ACTION: Notice of availability and request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Missile Defense Agency (MDA) has completed an 
environmental ASSESSMENT (EA) in accordance with the National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 and the Council on 
Environmental Quality regulations implementing NEPA, Department of 
Defense Instruction 4715.9, Environmental Planning and Analysis, and 
the applicable service regulations that implement these laws and 
regulations. Based on this analysis, MDA determined that the proposed 
activities would not result in a significant impact to the environment 
and prepared a Draft Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). 
Therefore, further NEPA analysis in the form of an Environmental Impact 
Statement (EIS) is not required.

DATES: The public review and comment period for this EA and draft FONSI 
begins with the publication of this notice in the Federal Register. All 
comments on this EA and draft FONSI must be received by the MDA no 
later than September 23, 2005.
    A downloadable electronic version of the EA and Draft FONSI are 
available on the MDA Internet site: http://www.mda.mil/mdalink/html/enviro.html.

ADDRESSES: Written comments regarding the EA and Draft FONSI should be 
submitted to Mobile Sensors EA, c/o ICF Consulting, 9300 Lee Highway, 
Fairfax, VA 22031; via toll-free fax 1-877-851-5451; or via E-mail: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e2af8d808b8e87cf91878c918d9091cf8783a2aba1a4a18d8c91978e968b8c85cc818d8f"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="fdb0929f949198d08e98938e928f8ed0989cbdb4bebbbe92938e88918994939ad39e9290">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The EA analyzes the potential environmental 
consequences of using mobile land-based sensors (i.e., radar, 
telemetry, command and control, and optical systems) and the use of 
airborne sensor systems (High Altitude Observatory [HALO] I and II, and 
Widebody Airborne Sensor Platform [WASP]). This EA considers impacts 
associated with the proposed use of land-based mobile sensors and 
airborne sensor systems on targets of opportunity.

    Dated: September 1, 2005.
L.M. Bynum,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 05-17788 Filed 9-7-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
# The Planning (Fees) (Amendment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2014 (revoked)

        - Previous
        - Next

N.I.

Statutory Rules of Northern Ireland

# 2014 No. 127

Planning

# The Planning (Fees) (Amendment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2014 (revoked)F1

Made

2nd May 2014

Coming into operation

28th May 2014

F1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                        

F1Regulations revoked (1.4.2015) by The Planning (Fees) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2015 (S.R. 2015/73), reg. 1, **Sch. 3**
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

# **OFFICER’S CERTIFICATION**

# ** **

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 63 –1350, the Chief Executive Officer of Western Sizzlin Corporation (formerlyAustins Steaks & Saloon, Inc.) (the “Company”), hereby certifies that theForm 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2004 and the financial statementscontained therein, fully comply with the requirements of Sections 13(a) and15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained inthe Form 10-Q and the financial statements thereto fairly present, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

 

 
| /s/ James C.  Verney |   | May 17, 2004 |
|----------------------|--------|--------------|

 

1

----
#### In the Matter of Richard J. Hogan, Jr., a Suspended Attorney, Respondent. Grievance Committee of the Eighth Judicial District, Petitioner.

[801 NYS2d 549]

Order entered granting motion for default. Same memorandum as in *Matter of Hogan*(21 AD3d 1440 [2005]). Present—Green, J.P., Scudder, Gorski, Pine and Hayes, JJ.
##### 



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 Annual Report of Covad Communications Group, Inc. (the Company) on Form
10-K for the period ending December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the Report), I, Charles E. Hoffman, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18. U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge: (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 represents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and result of operations of the Company. COVAD COMMUNICATIONS GROUP, INC.By:

/s/
Charles E. HoffmanCharles E. HoffmanDate: March 1, 2006
    
    President, Chief Executive Officer and Director
# Commission Regulation (EU) No 104/2014Show full title

Commission Regulation (EU) No 104/2014 of 23 January 2014 establishing a prohibition of fishing for yellowtail flounder in            NAFO area 3LNO by vessels flying the flag of a Member State of the European Union         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Regulation (EU) No 104/2014                     

# of 23 January 2014

# establishing a prohibition of fishing for yellowtail flounder in NAFO area 3LNO by vessels flying the flag of a Member State                        of the European Union                     

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring                           compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy(1), and in particular Article 36(2) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Council Regulation (EU) No 40/2013 of 21 January 2013 fixing for 2013 the fishing opportunities available in EU waters and,                              to EU vessels, in certain non-EU waters for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks which are subject to international                              negotiations or agreements(2), lays down quotas for 2013.

(2)According to the information received by the Commission, catches of the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation                              by vessels flying the flag of or registered in the Member State referred to therein have exhausted the quota allocated for                              2013.

(3)It is therefore necessary to prohibit fishing activities for that stock,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

## Article 1U.K.Quota exhaustion

The fishing quota allocated to the Member States referred to in the Annex to this Regulation for the stock referred to therein                     for 2013 shall be deemed to be exhausted from the date set out in that Annex.                  

## Article 2U.K.Prohibitions

Fishing activities for the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation by vessels flying the flag of or registered in                     the Member States referred to therein shall be prohibited from the date set out in that Annex. In particular it shall be prohibited                     to retain on board, relocate, tranship or land fish from that stock caught by those vessels after that date.                  

## Article 3U.K.Entry into force

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*.                  

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 23 January 2014.

*For the Commission, On behalf of the President*,                           

Lowri Evans                            

*Director-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries*                            

## ANNEXU.K.

1

OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.                           

2

OJ L 23, 25.1.2013, p. 54.
STATE v. Arles EUCEDA-VALLE.

No. 211P07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 11, 2007.

Mary Carla Hollis, Assistant Attorney General, Sam Currin, District Attorney, for State of NC.

Prior report: ___ N.C.App. ___, 641 S.E.2d 858.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 27th day of April 2007 by Defendant for "Petition for Discretionary Review or Writ of Certiorari":

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference this the 11th day of October 2007."
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION

            Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
                    (Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350,
                   Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)

         Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsections
(a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the
undersigned officer of Western Wireless Corporation, a Washington corporation
(the "Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:

         The Amendment No. 1 to Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter
         ended June 30, 2003 (the "Form 10-Q/A") of the Company fully complies
         with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
         Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 10-Q/A
         fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
         results of operations of the Company.

Dated: September 11, 2003

                                        By: /s/ JOHN W. STANTON
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            John W. Stanton
                                            Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

         The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsections (a) and (b) of
Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code).
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 11**  **- 6543** 

JAMES LEWIS COLE , Petitioner

– Appellant ,
v. KEITH W. DAVIS, Warden , Respondent

– Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Alexandria
. Anthony John Trenga , District Judge. ( 1:11

- cv - 00119

- AJT

- JFA )

Submitted : June 16, 2011 Decided: June 21, 2011

Before NIEMEYER and GREGORY , Circuit Judges , and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge
.
Dismi ssed by un published per curiam opinion
. James Lewis Cole, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: James Lewis Cole seeks to appeal the district court ’ s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C
. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(1) (2006) . A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “ a substantial showing of the denial o f a constitutional right. ” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2)
. When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional clai ms is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Cole has n ot made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the3 materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSE D
**Exhibit32.1**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002(SUBSECTIONS (a) AND (b) OF SECTION 1350,CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE)**

In connection withthe Annual Report on Form 10-K of Intermec, Inc. (the “Company”)for the period ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Larry D. Brady, ChiefExecutive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, that:

(1)          The Report fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)          Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| /s/ LARRY D. BRADY        |     |
|---------------------------|----------|
| Larry D. Brady            |     |
| *Chief Executive Officer* | * * |
| March 15, 2006       |     |

 

----
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. 24 - 0094 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. JOEL WESLEY SPEISER,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including July 8 , 202 4 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 29 2024

05/29/2024

Case Number: DA 24-0094
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 173 (Thursday, September 8, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53375-53376]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-17894]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention


Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and Control Special 
Emphasis Panel (SEP): Mind/Body Research and Chronic Disease 
Conditions, Request for Applications Number DP-05-133

    In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention (CDC) announces the following meeting:

    Name: Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and Control 
Special Emphasis Panel (SEP): Mind/Body Research and Chronic Disease 
Conditions, Request for Applications Number DP-05-133.
    Time and Date: 1:30 p.m.-3 p.m., September 28, 2005 (Closed).
    Place: Teleconference.
    Status: Portions of the meeting will be closed to the public in 
accordance with provisions set forth in Section 552b(c)(4) and (6), 
Title 5 U.S.C., and the Determination of the Director, Management 
Analysis and Services Office, CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92-463.
    Matters to be Discussed: The meeting will include the review, 
discussion, and evaluation of applications received in response to: 
Mind/Body Research and Chronic Disease Conditions, Request for 
Applications Number DP-05-133.
    Contact Person for More Information: J. Felix Rogers, PhD, 
Scientific Review Administrator, National Center for Chronic Disease 
Prevention and Health Promotion,

[[Page 53376]]

4770 Buford Highway, MS-K92, Atlanta, GA 30341, Telephone (404) 639-
6101.
    The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been 
delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices pertaining 
to announcements of meetings and other committee management 
activities, for both CDC and the Agency for Toxic Substances and 
Disease Registry.

    Dated: September 1, 2005.
Alvin Hall,
Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease 
Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. 05-17894 Filed 9-7-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-18-M