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

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3931 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3931

    To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to allow for the 
  continuation of the pre-ACA flexibility of States in providing CHIP 
                    coverage to low-income children.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 27, 2014

   Mr. Dent (for himself, Ms. Schwartz, Mr. Gerlach, Mr. Meehan, Mr. 
 Fitzpatrick, Mr. Kelly of Pennsylvania, Mr. Thompson of Pennsylvania, 
and Mr. Barletta) introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
                  the Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to allow for the 
  continuation of the pre-ACA flexibility of States in providing CHIP 
                    coverage to low-income children.

    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 ``Children's Health Insurance 
Protection (CHIP) Act''.

SEC. 2. CONTINUING PRE-ACA STATE FLEXIBILITY IN PROVIDING CHIP COVERAGE 
              FOR LOW-INCOME CHILDREN.

    Effective January 1, 2014, section 1902(l)(2)(C) of the Social 
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396a(l)(2)(C)) is amended by striking ``(or, 
beginning January 1, 2014, 133 percent)''.
                                 <all>
```
P u rsuan t t o 5 T H C IR . R. 47. 5, t h e courtha s det erm i n ed that t h i s opi n i on * shou l d n otbe pu bl i shed an d i s not preceden texcept u n der t h e l i m i t ed c i r c um s t anc e s s e tf

o r t h i n 5 T H C IR . R. 47. 5. 4. 

### INTHE UNITED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHEFIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 09- 50322 Su m m ar yC al endar
UN I TE D S TA TE S OF AM ERI CA, P l ai n t i f f

- A pp el l ee
v. M A R IC E LAH E R N A N D E Z , D e fe nda nt
- Appe l l ant

A pp ealf

rom t h e U n i t ed S t ates D i st ri ctC ou rt f or th e W est ernD i st ri ctof T exas U SD C N o. 2: 06- C R
- 901- 3
B ef ore R E AV L E Y , JO L LY , an d O W E N , C i rcui tJu dg es. P E R C U R IA M: * T h i s c ou rtprevi ou sly rem an ded t h i s c ase f or r esentenci n g du e t o a m a th e m a tic a l e r r o rinth e d is tr ic t c o u r t ’s d r u gq u a n tit yd e te r m in a tio n . S ee Un i t ed S t ate s v. Hernan d ez , 2 9 9 F
. A p p ’ x4 1 3 , 4 1 4
- 4 1 6 ( 5 t h C i r . 2 0 0 8 )
. O n r e m and , t he di s t r i c tco ur tco r r e c t e d the m at he m at i c ale r r o ra nd r e s e nt e nc e d the ap pel l an t , M ari cel a H erna n dez, t o 110 m on t h s of i m pri sonm en ton h er j u ry c onvi c t i on o f

c ons pi r ac y t o po ss es s w i t h i nt entt o di st r ibut e m or e than 100 United States Court of App eals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D December

17, 2009 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I ClerkN o. 09- 50322

2 k il o g r a m s o f

m a r ij u a n a . H e r n a n d e z n o w a p p e a ls fr o m th e d is t r ic tc o u r t ’s j udg m entupon r em and, ar gui ng t hatt he di st r i c tc our ter r ed byas se ss i ng an ex tra 47 7 k i l og ra m s of m a rij u a n a b eca u se th ere i s n o ev i d en ce to con n ect h er to t he a c t ivit y de s c r ibe d i n Pr e s e nt e nc e R e po r t(PSR ) pa r ag r ap hs 3 4- 36 a nd pa ragrap h 39. S h e furt h er argu es that b ecau se sh e is b ei n g h el d accoun t able f or cond uc t by o t he r s i n a j o i nt l y unde r t ak e n c r i m i nal ac t ivit y, t he di s t r i c tcourt erred by fai l i n g t o m ak e par ticu l ari zed f i n di n gs regardi n g t h e el em en t s of forese ea b i l i ty a n dthe scop e of the ag ree m en t. H ern a n d e z is requesti n g t h at th i s c ou rtreexam i n e i ssues t h at w ere p r e v io u s lya d d r e s s e d a n d reje c te db yth is co u r t in its re m a n d in go p in io n . S ee Hernan d ez , 299 F
. A pp ’ x at 415- 16. H erna n dez’ s argum en t s a r ethe r e f o r eb arr ed b y th e la w o f th e ca s e d o c tr in e . S e eUn i t e dS t a t e s v . Ma t t h e ws , 312 F. 3d 652, 657 ( 5th C i r. 2002 )
. M oreover, t h e m an da t e rul e f orecl oses rel i t i gati on of H e r n a n d e z ’ s a r g u m e n ts . S ee Un i t ed S t ate s v. L ee , 358 F
. 3d315 , 320
- 21 (5t h C i r. 2 0 0 4 ). E xcepti on s to the l aw of t h e case doctr i n e an d the m an da t e rul e are not a p p lic a b le inth is ca s e . Se ei d. at 320 n. 3; Ma t t h e ws , 312 F. 3d at657. AF F I RMED.
Tully v. City of Wilmington

348A16-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

January 17, 2017

Katie Weaver Hartzog, Attorney at Law, Jaye E. Bingham-Hinch, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for City of Wilmington.

S. Luke Largess, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, Cheyenne Chambers, Attorney at Law, for Tully, Kevin J.

J. Michael McGuinness, Attorney at Law, Elizabethtown, Megan Ashley Milliken, Attorney at Law, for Southern States Police Benevolent Association, et al.

M. Travis Payne, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for Professional Fire Fighters and Paramedics of North Carolina.

Michael C. Byrne, Attorney at Law, for North Carolina Fraternal Order of Police.

Robert M. Elliot, Attorney at Law, Winston-Salem, Reynolds Michael Elliot, Attorney at Law, for N.C. Advocates for Justice.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 17th of January 2017 by Professional Fire Fighters and Paramedics of North Carolina for leave to file Amicus Curiae Brief:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 17th of January 2017."

Unless already submitted, the Amicus Brief shall be submitted to the court within the times allowed and in the manner provided by Appellate Rule 28(i).
Exhibit 99.1

                            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 RTIN Holdings,  Inc. (the "Company") on
Form  10-KSB  for the  period  ending  December  31,  2003,  as  filed  with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Curtis
A. Swanson,  Chief  Financial  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:

(1)      The 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));
         and

(2)      The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
         the Company.



 /s/ Curtis A. Swanson
-----------------------
Curtis A. Swanson
Chief Financial Officer
March 21, 2003
State of North Carolina v. William Edward Godwin, III

No. 167PA16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

September 22, 2016

M. Gordon Widenhouse, Jr., Attorney at Law, Chapel Hill, for Godwin, William Edward (III).

Teresa L. Townsend, Assistant Attorney General, Kristin Jo Uicker, Assistant Attorney General, R. Andrew Murray, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by State of NC on the 9th of May 2016 for Writ of Supersedeas of the judgment of the Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 22nd of September 2016."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 9th of May 2016 by State of NC 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:

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 22nd of September 2016."

Therefore the case is docketed as of the date of this order's certification. Briefs of the respective parties shall be submitted to this Court within the times allowed and in the manner provided by Appellate Rule 15(g)(2).
NUMBER 13-15-00402-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

MICHAEL CLARENCE GILLUM, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

____________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 36th District Court

of Aransas County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

ORDER OF ABATEMENT

Before Justices Garza, Benavides, and Longoria

Order Per Curiam

Appellant, Michael Clarence Gillum, has filed a notice of appeal with this Court 

from his conviction in trial court cause number A-15-5077-CR. The trial court's 

certification of the defendant's right to appeal shows that the defendant does not have the 

right to appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). 
On September 8, 2015, we ordered appellant's counsel, Michele Villarreal-Kuchta, 

to, within thirty days, review the record and advise this Court as to whether appellant has 

a right to appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 44.3, 44.4. No response to this Court's order has 

been received. Therefore, we abate this appeal and remand this cause to the trial court 

for a hearing to determine why counsel has failed to comply with this Court's order. The 

trial court's findings and conclusions shall be included in a supplemental clerk's record. 

The trial court shall file the supplemental clerk's record and reporter's record, if any, with 

the Clerk of this Court within thirty days of the date of this order.

If the trial court determines that counsel is unable to represent appellant in this 

matter, the trial court shall conduct a hearing to determine whether appellant desires to 

prosecute the appeal, whether appellant is indigent, and whether appellant is entitled to 

appointed counsel. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 83-84 (1988); Stafford v. State, 

813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We further direct the trial court to issue 

findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding these issues. Should the trial court find 

that appellant desires to pursue this appeal, is indigent, and is entitled to appointed 

counsel, the trial court shall appoint counsel. If counsel is appointed, the name, address,

e-mail address, telephone number, and state bar number of said counsel shall be 

included in the trial court's findings of fact and conclusions of law.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish.

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed 

The 28th day of October, 2015.
In the Matter of: C.N.H-P., M.S.N.P., A.D.S., M.C-N.H-P.

No. 236P16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 18, 2016.

Jeffrey William Gillette, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, Sierra Pharr, for Pharr, Sierra.

Roger A. Askew, Attorney at Law, for Wake County Human Services.

James Michael Weiss, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for GAL.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 21st of June 2016 by Respondent (Mother) 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 18th of August 2016."
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

I, Curtis W. Mewbourne, Chief Executive Officer of Mewbourne Development Corporation, Managing General Partner of Mewbourne Energy Partners 04-A, L.P.(the “Registrant”), certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterlyreport on Form 10-Q of Mewbourne Energy Partners 04-A, L.P. 

 

2. Based on myknowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleadingwith respect to the period covered by this quarterly report; 

 

3. Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, theperiods presented in this quarterly report; 

 

4. The registrant’s othercertifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have: 

 

(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant is made known to us particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared; 

 

(b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of thisquarterly report (the “Evaluation Date”); and 

 

(c)presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date; 

 

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

 

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

 

(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrols; and 

 

6. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I haveindicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date or our most recent evaluation, including anycorrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses. 

 

Date: May 12, 2005
# Continuation of the National Emergency With Respect to Persons Who Commit, Threaten To Commit, or Support Terrorism

On September 23, 2001, by Executive Order 13224, I declared a national emergency with respect to persons who commit, threaten to commit, or support terrorism, pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701-1706). I took this action to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States constituted by the grave acts of terrorism and threats of terrorism committed by foreign terrorists, including the terrorist attacks in New York, in Pennsylvania, and against the Pentagon committed on September 11, 2001, and the continuing and immediate threat of further attacks against United States nationals or the United States. Because the actions of these persons who commit, threaten to commit, or support terrorism continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the United States, the national emergency declared on September 23, 2001, and the measures adopted on that date to deal with that emergency, must continue in effect beyond September 23, 2005. Therefore, in accordance with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year the national emergency with respect to persons who commit, threaten to commit, or support terrorism.

                        This notice shall be published in the                         **Federal Register**                         and transmitted to the Congress.                    

[FR Doc. 05-19157

Billing code 3195-01-P
IIB 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4199 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 18, 2014 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

AN ACT 

To name the Department of Veterans Affairs medical center 

in Waco, Texas, as the ‘‘Doris Miller Department of 

Veterans Affairs Medical Center’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


rfrederick on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 4199 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. FINDINGS. 

2 Congress makes the following findings: 

3 (1) On October 12, 1919, Doris Miller was born 

4 in Waco, Texas. 

5 (2) On September 16, 1939, Miller enlisted in 

6 the United States Navy as mess attendant, third 

7 class at Naval Recruiting Station, Dallas, Texas, to 

8 serve for a period of six years. 

9 (3) On February 16, 1941, Miller received a 

10 change of rating to mess attendant, second class. 

11 (4) On June 1, 1942, Miller received a change 

12 of rating to mess attendant, first class. 

13 (5) On June 1, 1943, Miller received a change 

14 of rating, to cook, third class. 

15 (6) On November 25, 1944, Miller was pre16 sumed dead by the Secretary of the Navy a year and 

17 a day after being carried as missing in action since 

18 November 24, 1943, while serving aboard USS 

19 Liscome Bay when that vessel was torpedoed and 

20 sunk in the Pacific Ocean. 

21 (7) Miller was awarded the Navy Cross Medal, 

22 Purple Heart Medal, American Defense Service 

23 Medal, Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal, and World 

24 War II Victory Medal. 

25 (8) Miller’s citation for the Navy Cross said 

26 ‘‘for distinguished devotion to duty, extraordinary 


rfrederick on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

HR 4199 RFS 

1 courage and disregard for his own personal safety 

2 during the attack on the Fleet in Pearl Harbor, Ter3 ritory of Hawaii, by Japanese forces on December 7, 

4 1941. While at the side of his Captain on the bridge, 

5 Miller, despite enemy strafing and bombing and in 

6 the face of a serious fire, assisted in moving his 

7 Captain, who had been mortally wounded, to a place 

8 of greater safety, and later manned and operated a 

9 machine gun directed at enemy Japanese attacking 

10 aircraft until ordered to leave the bridge.’’. 

11 (9) On June 20, 1973, the USS Miller (FF– 

12 1091), a Knox-class frigate, was named in honor of 

13 Doris Miller. 

14 SEC. 2. NAME OF DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS 

15 MEDICAL CENTER, WACO, TEXAS. 

16 The Department of Veterans Affairs medical center 

17 in Waco, Texas, shall after the date of the enactment of 

18 this Act be known and designated as the ‘‘Doris Miller 

19 Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center’’. Any ref20 erence to such medical center in any law, regulation, map, 

21 document, record, or other paper of the United States 


rfrederick on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
4 

HR 4199 RFS 

1 shall be considered to be a reference to the Doris Miller 

2 Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center. 

Passed the House of Representatives June 17, 2014. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


rfrederick on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. 

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 

2008-1155 

THE MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY 

and ELECTRONICS FOR IMAGING, INC., 

Plaintiffs-Appellants, 

v. 

ABACUS SOFTWARE, 

 Defendant, 

and 

MICROSOFT CORPORATION, 

Defendant-Appellee. 

 

Russell B. Hill, Howrey LLP, of Irvine, California, argued for plaintiffs-appellants. 

With him on the brief were William C. Rooklidge Andrew S. Dallmann, and Alyson G. 

Barker. 

Roy W. Hardin, Locke, Lord, Bissell & Liddell, LLP, of Dallas, Texas, argued for 

defendant-appellee. With him on the brief was M. Scott Fuller. Of counsel on the brief 

was Isabella E. Fu, Microsoft Corporation, of Redmond, Washington. 

Appealed from: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas 

Judge David J. Folsom 
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 

 2008-1155 

THE MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY 

and ELECTRONICS FOR IMAGING, INC., 

 Plaintiffs-Appellants, 

v. 

ABACUS SOFTWARE, 

 Defendant, 

and 

MICROSOFT CORPORATION, 

 Defendant-Appellee. 

 Judgment

ON APPEAL from the United States District Court for the 

Eastern District of Texas 

in CASE NO(S). 5:01-CV-344. 

This CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is 

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 

 

Per Curiam (MAYER, FRIEDMAN, and DYK Circuit Judges ) 

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36. 

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT 

DATED: October 14, 2008 / s / Jan Horbaly 

 Jan Horbaly, Clerk
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



         We have issued our report  dated  January 23,  2003,  accompanying  the
consolidated  financial statements  incorporated by reference or included in the
Annual Report of TF Financial  Corporation and Subsidiaries on Form 10-K for the
year  ended  December  31,  2002.  We hereby  consent  to the  incorporation  by
reference  of  said  report  in  the  Registration  Statements  of TF  Financial
Corporation and Subsidiaries on Form S-8 (File No. 33-87176,  effective December
7, 1994,  File No. 333- 09235,  effective July 31, 1996 and File No.  333-27085,
effective May 14, 1997).


/s/ Grant Thornton LLP

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
March 26, 2003
Gary Warren SPRUILL v. WESTFIELD INSURANCE COMPANY, Allstate Property and Casualty Insurance Company

No. 5P17

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 16, 2017

Heather G. Connor, Attorney at Law, Jeffrey B. Kuykendal, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, Carson W. Johnson, Attorney at Law, for Westfield Insurance Company.

L. Phillip Hornthal, III, Attorney at Law, L.P. Hornthal, Jr., Elizabeth City, Attorney at Law, for Spruill, Gary Warren.

Kevin N. Lewis, Attorney at Law, Ahoskie, for Allstate Property and Casualty Insurance Company.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 5th of January 2017 by Defendant (Westfield Insurance Company) 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 16th of March 2017."
IN RE: Matter of Proposed Foreclosure of a Deed of Trust Executed by Sheila MCLEAN Dated June 2, 2005, and Recorded in Book 1477, Page 417 Et. Seq., of the Franklin County Registrar of Deeds.

No. COA16-1173

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: May 16, 2017

AFFIRMED.