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

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 41 Received in Senate (RDS)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 H. R. 41

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

              January 4 (legislative day, January 3), 2013

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
    To temporarily increase the borrowing authority of the Federal 
    Emergency Management Agency for carrying out the National Flood 
                           Insurance Program.

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

SECTION 1. TEMPORARY INCREASE IN BORROWING AUTHORITY FOR NATIONAL FLOOD 
              INSURANCE PROGRAM.

    (a) Section 1309(a) of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 
U.S.C. 4016(a)) is amended by striking ``$20,725,000,000'' and 
inserting ``$30,425,000,000''.
    (b) The amount provided by this section is designated by the 
Congress as an emergency requirement pursuant to section 403(a) of S. 
Con. Res. 13 (111th Congress), the concurrent resolution on the budget 
for fiscal year 2010, and as an emergency pursuant to section 4(g) of 
the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 (2 U.S.C. 933(g)).

            Passed the House of Representatives January 4, 2013.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
Exhibit 23.1





Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm




The Board of Directors


Essex Property Trust, Inc.:




We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-165693, 333-141726, 333-131276, 333-131178, and 333-102552), the registration statement on Form S-3D (No. 333-36029), and the registration statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-123001, 333-122999, and 333-55646) of Essex Property Trust, Inc. of our reports dated February 23, 2012, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Essex Property Trust, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity, noncontrolling interest and comprehensive income, and cash flows, for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2011, the related financial statement schedule III, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2011, which reports appear in the December 31, 2011 annual report on Form 10-K/A of Essex Property Trust, Inc.




San Francisco, California


February 29, 2012
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4056 

To reduce the operation and maintenance costs associated with the Federal 

fleet by encouraging the use of remanufactured parts, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 11, 2014 

Mr. PETERS of Michigan (for himself and Mr. LANKFORD) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

A BILL 

To reduce the operation and maintenance costs associated 

with the Federal fleet by encouraging the use of remanufactured parts, 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 ‘‘Federal Vehicle Repair 

5 Cost Savings Act of 2014’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 The Congress finds that in March 2013 the Govern8 ment Accountability Office issued a report that confirmed 

9 the following: 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4056 IH

1 (1) There are approximately 588,000 vehicles in 

2 the civilian Federal fleet. 

3 (2) Federal agencies spent approximately $975 

4 million on repair and maintenance of these vehicles 

5 in 2011. 

6 (3) Remanufactured vehicle components, such 

7 as engines, starters, alternators, steering racks, and 

8 clutches, tend to be less expensive than comparable 

9 new replacement parts. 

10 (4) The United States Postal Service and 

11 United States Department of the Interior both in12 formed the Government Accountability Office that 

13 they rely on the use of remanufactured vehicle com14 ponents to reduce costs. 

15 SEC. 3. REQUIREMENT TO USE REMANUFACTURED VEHI16 CLE COMPONENTS. 

17 (a) REQUIREMENT.—The head of each Federal agen18 cy shall encourage the use of remanufactured vehicle com19 ponents to maintain Federal vehicles, if using such compo20 nents reduces the cost while maintaining quality, but not 

21 if using such components— 

22 (1) does not reduce the cost; 

23 (2) lowers the quality of vehicle performance, as 

24 determined by the employee of the Federal agency 

25 responsible for the repair decision; or 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 4056 IH

1 (3) delays the return to service of a vehicle. 

2 (b) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

3 (1) FEDERAL AGENCY.—The term ‘‘Federal 

4 agency’’ has the meaning given that term in section 

5 102 of title 40, United States Code. 

6 (2) REMANUFACTURED VEHICLE COMPO7 NENT.—The term ‘‘remanufactured vehicle compo8 nent’’ means a vehicle component (including an en9 gine, transmission, alternator, starter, turbocharger, 

10 steering, or suspension component) that has been re11 turned to same-as-new, or better, condition and per12 formance by a standardized industrial process that 

13 incorporates technical specifications (including engi14 neering, quality, and testing standards) to yield fully 

15 warranted products. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
# C_2011340EN.01004001.xml

| 19.11.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 340/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.11.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 340/40

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 27 September 2011 — Dittert v Commission

(Case F-82/07) (1)

1

(Staff Cases - Officials - Promotion - 2006 promotion year - New career structures - Extension of careers by the introduction of new grades having no equivalent in the old Staff Regulations - Application of Article 45 and Annex XIII of the Staff Regulations, as well as the general implementing provisions applicable from 2005 - Principle of equal treatment - Retroactive effect of promotion decisions to a date prior to 1 May 2004 - Transitional measures - Action which must manifestly be dismissed)

2011/C 340/81

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Daniel Dittert (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: B. Cortese and C. Cortese, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Berscheid and K. Herrmann, Agents)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the defendant: Council of the European Union (represented initially by M. Arpio Santacruz and I. Šulce, later by: M. Bauer, J. Monteiro and K. Zieleśkiewicz, Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant:

Re:

Re:

Annulment of the Commission’s decision of 23 April 2007 to promote the applicant to grade AD 9 and not AD 10.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed.

| 2. | Mr Dittert and the European Commission are ordered to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mr Dittert and the European Commission are ordered to bear their own costs.

| 3. | The Council of the European Union, which intervened, is ordered to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The Council of the European Union, which intervened, is ordered to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 235 of 6.10.07, p. 32.

1

---
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 24, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

134198 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 134198 

 COA: 277673 

Kalamazoo CC: 06-001346-FC 

WILLIE EARL RIDDLE,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 5, 2007 order of 

the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in lieu of granting 

leave to appeal, we REMAND this case to the Kalamazoo Circuit Court for amendment 

of the presentence report. The circuit judge stated at the sentencing hearing on December 

11, 2006 that he would make a note in the presentence report that the defendant denies 

that his family fears him, but the presentence report was not amended in accordance with 

that statement. Therefore, the circuit court shall direct the probation officer to amend the 

presentence report to note that the defendant denies that his family fears him. MCR 

6.425(E)(2). The circuit court is further ORDERED to ensure that the amended 

presentence report is transmitted to the Department of Corrections. In all other respects, 

leave to appeal is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the remaining question 

presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

p0917 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

September 24, 2007 

 Clerk
# C_2010221EN.01003601.xml

| 14.8.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 221/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.8.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 221/36

---

Judgment of the General Court of 6 July 2010 — Aer Lingus Group v Commission

(Case T-411/07) (1)

1

(Competition - Concentrations - Decision declaring a concentration incompatible with the common market - Concept of concentration - Disposal of all the shares acquired, so as to restore the situation prevailing before the implementation of the concentration - Refusal to order appropriate measures - Lack of competence of the Commission)

2010/C 221/56

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Aer Lingus Group plc (Dublin, Ireland) (represented by: A. Burnside, Solicitor, B. van de Walle de Ghelcke and T. Snels, lawyers, and subsequently by A. Burnside and B. van de Walle de Ghelcke)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: X. Lewis, É. Gippini Fournier and S. Noë, Agents)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the defendant: Ryanair Holdings plc (Dublin), (represented by J. Swift QC, V. Power, A. McCarthy, D. Hull, Solicitors, and G. Berrisch, lawyer)

Intervener in support of the defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2007) 4600 of 11 October 2007 rejecting the applicant’s request to initiate proceedings under Article 8(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (OJ 2004 L 24, p. 1), and to adopt interim measures under Article 8(5) of that regulation

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Aer Lingus Group plc to bear it own costs and those incurred by the Commission and Ryanair Holdings plc, including those relating to the interim proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Aer Lingus Group plc to bear it own costs and those incurred by the Commission and Ryanair Holdings plc, including those relating to the interim proceedings.

---

(1)  OJ C 8, 12.1.2008.

1

---
| 1. | In Section 8.1(c) of the PSA, the sentence “by any Party who is not in default or breach hereunder if the Closing has not occurred by August 1, 2011.” shall be deleted in its entirety and replaced with the sentence “by any Party who is not in default or breach hereunder if the Closing has not occurred by August 2, 2011.” |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | In Section 9.1 of the PSA, the sentence “The “Closing” of the transaction contemplated hereby shall be held at Eternal’s offices on July 26, 2011, or such other date and location as the Parties may agree.” shall be deleted in its entirety and replaced with the sentence “The “Closing” of the transaction contemplated hereby shall be held at Eternal’s offices on August 2, 2011, or such other date and location as the Parties may agree.” |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----

| By:                        |   |   |
|----------------------------|--------|--------|
| Name:                      |   |   |
| Title:                     |   |   |
|                       |   |   |
| ETERNAL ENERGY CORP.       |   |
|                       |   |
| By:                        |   |   |
| Name:                      |   |   |
| Title:                     |   |   |
|                       |   |   |
| AMERICAN EAGLE ENERGY INC. |   |
|                       |   |
| By:                        |   |   |
| Name:                      |   |   |
| Title:                     |   |   |

----
# Official Journal C 270/2006

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 270 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 497 November 2006 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 270

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 497 November 2006

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Information |
| | Commission |
| 2006/C 270/1 | Euro exchange rates | 1 |
| 2006/C 270/2 | Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (1) | 2 |
| 2006/C 270/3 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.4392 — DSGI/FR-Invest/F-group JV) (1) | 6 |
| 2006/C 270/4 | List of Customs Offices in which products listed in Annex I of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1635/2006 may be declared for free circulation in the European Community | 7 |
| 2006/C 270/5 | Notice concerning a request in accordance with Article 30 of Directive 2004/17/EC | 10 |

Notice No

Contents

page

I   Information

Commission

2006/C 270/1

Euro exchange rates

1

2006/C 270/2

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (1)

2

2006/C 270/3

Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.4392 — DSGI/FR-Invest/F-group JV) (1)

6

2006/C 270/4

List of Customs Offices in which products listed in Annex I of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1635/2006 may be declared for free circulation in the European Community

7

2006/C 270/5

Notice concerning a request in accordance with Article 30 of Directive 2004/17/EC

10

---

| | III   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | Commission |
| 2006/C 270/6 | Culture programme (2007–2013) — Support for cultural actions — Strand 1.1 multi-annual cooperation projects — Strand 1.2.1 cooperation measures — Conditional call for proposals — EACEA No 9/2006 | 11 |
| 2006/C 270/7 | Culture programme (2007–2013) — Support for cultural actions — Strand 1.2.2 literary translation — Conditional call for proposals — EACEA No/2006 | 15 |
| 2006/C 270/8 | Conditional Call for proposals — DG EAC No 55/06 — Conditional Call for proposals for the organisation and implementation of an annual European Union prize scheme in the field of cultural heritage | 18 |

III   Notices

Commission

2006/C 270/6

Culture programme (2007–2013) — Support for cultural actions — Strand 1.1 multi-annual cooperation projects — Strand 1.2.1 cooperation measures — Conditional call for proposals — EACEA No 9/2006

11

2006/C 270/7

Culture programme (2007–2013) — Support for cultural actions — Strand 1.2.2 literary translation — Conditional call for proposals — EACEA No/2006

15

2006/C 270/8

Conditional Call for proposals — DG EAC No 55/06 — Conditional Call for proposals for the organisation and implementation of an annual European Union prize scheme in the field of cultural heritage

18

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
IN RE: RANKIN

192P17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 16, 2017

Erin Rozzelle, Attorney at Law, for Bailey, Mozijah.

Otha Townsend, Attorney at Law, for Substitute Trustee Services, Inc.

Jeffrey A. Bunda, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, for Deutsche Bank National Trust Company.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 15th of June 2017 by Respondent (Mozijah Bailey) for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 16th of June 2017."
----

(2004/C 88 E/0591)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2951/02

by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission

(14 October 2002)

Subject:   Allocation of structural funds

Would the Commission please give details of the allocation by each local authority in Galicia (Spain) of the monies invested by the structural funds over the 1994-1999 programming period?

Supplementary answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(29 April 2004)

The Commission is informed by the responsible authorities in Spain that the information requested for the region of Galicia is available at the detailed geographical level of the municipalities in incomplete form only. They have given us the following breakdown by province for the 1994-1999 programming period:

They state that owing to the nature of the action financed by the ESF, the large number of Operational Programmes (multiregional and one regional) involved and the large number of managing bodies acting in Galicia, the breakdown asked for is very difficult to make. For Galicia as a whole the ESF contribution for 1994-1999 is EUR 576,13 million. This covers both the regional programme and the national level ones.

----
STATE of North Carolina v. Jarid Jermaine ARCHIE.

No. COA16-90.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

July 19, 2016.

**Case Reported Without Published Opinion**

Dismissed as moot in part; vacated in part and remanded.
STATE v. Thomas W. MCNEILL

352P17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 7, 2017

Daniel P. O'Brien, Special Deputy Attorney General, Vernon K. Stewart, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

Thomas W. McNeill, for McNeill, Thomas Wayne.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 19th of October 2017 by Defendant for Petition for Discretionary Review:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 7th of December 2017."
##### 



Exhibit 31.3 CERTIFICATIONS
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Thomas Avallone, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form
10-Q of BH/RE, L.L.C.; 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(s) 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 (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) 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(s) 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: August 4, 2004
    
    /s/ Thomas AvalloneThomas AvalloneActing Chief Financial Officer
STATE of North Carolina v. Michael Lee WHITE, Defendant.

No. COA16-945

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: October 17, 2017

NO ERROR.
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 quarterly report of Colony Resorts LVH Acquisitions, LLC (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Rodolfo Prieto, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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; 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/ Rodolfo Prieto     
|Rodolfo Prieto         
|Chief Executive Officer
|July 31, 2005