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

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4704 

To provide public safety officer disability benefits to officers disabled before 

the enactment of the Federal public safety officer disability benefits law. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 25, 2010 

Mr. MASSA introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To provide public safety officer disability benefits to officers 

disabled before the enactment of the Federal public safety officer disability benefits law. 

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 ‘‘Disabled Public Safety 

5 Officers Fairness Act of 2010’’. 

6 SEC. 2. DISABILITY BENEFITS FOR PUBLIC SAFETY OFFI7 CERS DISABLED BEFORE ENACTMENT OF 

8 PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICER DISABILITY LAW. 

9 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1201(b) of the Omnibus 

10 Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4704 IH

1 3796(b)) is amended by inserting after ‘‘determines that 

2 a public safety officer has’’ the following: ‘‘, whether be3 fore, on, or after the date of the enactment of this Act,’’. 

4 (b) APPLICABILITY.—The amendment made by sub5 section (a) applies to any public safety officer alive on or 

6 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
----

Action brought on 19 September 2006 — Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Finland

(Case C-387/06)

(2006/C 294/46)

Language of the case: Finnish

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by M. Huttunen and M. Shotter, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Republic of Finland

Form of order sought

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period prescribed for implementation of the directive expired on 24 July 2003.

----

(1)  OJ 2002 L 108, p. 33.

(2)  OJ 2002 L 108, p. 7.

----
**Exhibit
      32**




**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 Cyber Merchants Exchange, Inc (the
      "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended May 31, 2006, (the "Report"),
      I,
      Kevin R. Keating, the Chief Executive Officer and 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 requirement 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 Company's financial position and results of operations.








Date:
      August 11, 2006


/s/
      Kevin
      R. Keating


Chief
      Executive Officer and
      Chief
      Financial Officer
----

ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 2 June 2005

in Case T-326/03 Hippocrate Vounakis v Commission of the European Communities (1)

(Officials - Promotion - Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations - Prior administrative complaint - Time-limits - Public policy nature - Inadmissibility)

(2005/C 205/39)

Language of the case: French

In Case T-326/03: Hippocrate Vounakis, an official of the Commission of the European Communities, residing in Wezembeek-Oppem (Belgium), represented by J.-N. Louis, E. Marchal, A. Coolen and S. Orlandi, lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg, against Commission of the European Communities (Agents: C. Berardis-Kayser and G. Berscheid, with an address for service in Luxembourg) — action for the annulment of the Commission's decision not to promote the applicant to grade A4 under the 2002 promotion procedure — the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber), composed of M. Jaeger, President, V. Tiili and O. Czúcz, Judges; H. Jung, Registrar, made an order on 2 June 2005, the operative part of which is as follows:

----

(1)OJ C 289, 29.11.2003.

----
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. §1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the Quarterly Report of WPT Entertainment, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for
the period ended April 3, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), I, Steven Lipscomb, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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; and 2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company. Date: May 13, 2005
    
    /s/  Steven LipscombSteven LipscombPresident and Chief Executive Officer
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 White Mountain Titanium Corporation (the
      “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the three months ended June 30, 2008, as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the
      undersigned principal financial officer of the Company, hereby certifies
      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;
                and





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





Date:
      August 14, 2008





*/* *s/* Michael
      P. Kurtanjek





Michael
      P. Kurtanjek, President & Chief Executive Officer


(Principal
      Executive Officer)
AZURE DOLPHIN, LLC, et al. v. BARTON, et al.

128A18-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 20, 2018

Peter J. Juran, M. Rachael Dimont, Winston-Salem, Chad A. Archer, Greensboro, Attorneys at Law, for Azure Dolphin, LLC, et al.

Alan M. Ruley, Andrew A. Freeman, Attorneys at Law, Winston-Salem, for Barton, Justin

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 18th of June 2018 by Defendants:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 20th of June 2018."

Defendants shall have up to and including the 16th day of August 2018 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.
STATE v. Douglas W. STANDARD

309P18-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

September 20, 2018

Douglas Wayne Standard, for Standard, Douglas W.

Daniel P. O'Brien, Special Deputy Attorney General, for State of N.C.

Robert S. Banks, District Attorney, for State.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 17th of September 2018 by Defendant for Trial by Jury:

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 20th of September 2018."
----

|   | 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|--------|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | By:    | /s/ Dennis M. Terry                               |
|--------|--------|---------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |                                              |   |
|   |   | Dennis M. Terry                                   |
|   |   | President and Chief Executive Officer             |
|   |   |                                              |
|   | By:    | /s/ Darlene F. McDonald                           |
|   |   |                                              |   |
|   |   | Darlene F. McDonald                               |
|   |   | Senior Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer |

----
Thomas Robert LIENAU, Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH of Virginia, Appellee.

Record No. 0685-17-4

Court of Appeals of Virginia.

October 16, 2018

*451*342Upon a Petition for Rehearing En Banc

On September 25, 2018 came the appellee, by the Attorney General of Virginia, and filed a petition requesting that the Court set aside the judgment rendered herein on September 11, 2018, and grant a rehearing *en banc* on the issue(s) raised in the petition.

On consideration whereof and pursuant to Rule 5A:35 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Virginia, the petition for rehearing *en banc* is granted and the appeal of those issues is reinstated on the docket of this Court. The mandate previously entered herein is stayed pending the decision of the Court *en banc* .

The parties shall file briefs in compliance with the schedule set forth in Rule 5A:35(b). The appellant shall attach as an addendum to the opening brief upon rehearing *en banc* a copy of the opinion previously rendered by the Court in this matter. An electronic version of each brief shall be filed with the Court and served on opposing counsel. In addition, four printed copies of each brief shall be filed. It is further ordered that the appellee shall file an electronic version and four additional copies of the appendix previously filed in this case.1

1

The guidelines for filing electronic briefs and appendices can be found at www.courts.state.va.us/online/vaces/resources/guidelines.pdf.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4651 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4651

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 601 West Baker Road in Baytown, Texas, as the ``Specialist Keith 
                Erin Grace, Jr. Memorial Post Office''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 9, 2014

 Mr. Stockman introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
              Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 601 West Baker Road in Baytown, Texas, as the ``Specialist Keith 
                Erin Grace, Jr. Memorial Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. SPECIALIST KEITH ERIN GRACE, JR. MEMORIAL POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 601 West Baker Road in Baytown, Texas, shall be known as the 
``Specialist Keith Erin Grace, Jr. Memorial Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referenced 
to subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Specialist 
Keith Erin Grace, Jr. Memorial Post Office''.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 24
- 0368 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. ABIGAIL MORGAN TURNER,

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 November 22 , 2024, within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

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

October 2 2024

10/02/2024

Case Number: DA 24-0368
RE: EXPANSION OF ELECTRONIC FILING PILOT PROGRAM-COURT OF COMMON PLEAS

Appellate Case No. 2015-002439

Supreme Court of South Carolina.

April 23, 2018

**642ORDER

Pursuant to the provisions of Article V, Section 4 of the South Carolina Constitution,

IT IS ORDERED that the Pilot Program for the Electronic Filing (E-Filing) of documents in the Court of Common Pleas, which was established by Order dated December 1, 2015, is expanded to include Lancaster County. Effective May 15, 2018, all filings in all common pleas cases commenced or pending in Lancaster County must be E-Filed if the party is represented by an attorney, unless the type of case or the type of filing is excluded from the Pilot Program. The counties currently designated for mandatory E-Filing are as follows:

Attorneys should refer to the South Carolina Electronic Filing Policies and Guidelines, which were adopted by the Supreme Court on October 28, 2015, and the training materials available on the E-Filing Portal page at http://www.sccourts.org/efiling/ to determine whether any specific filings **643are exempted from the requirement that they be E-Filed. Attorneys who have cases pending in Pilot Counties are strongly encouraged to review, and to instruct their staff to review, the training materials available on the E-Filing Portal page.

*/s/ Donald W. Beatty*

Donald W. Beatty

Chief Justice of South Carolina
STATE of North Carolina v. Daquan Keith FOSTER

No. COA17-989

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: June 5, 2018

NO PLAIN ERROR IN PART. NO ERROR IN PART.
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D17-2370

_____________________________

VICTOR JEROME BELL,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Escambia County.

Jan Shackelford, Judge.

May 1, 2018

PER CURIAM.

Due to Appellant’s apparent abuse of the legal process by his 

repeated pro se filings attacking his judgment and sentence, the 

Court issued an order directing Appellant to show cause why he 

should not be prohibited from future pro se filings. See State v. 

Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47, 48 (Fla. 1999) (requiring that courts “first 

provide notice and an opportunity to respond before preventing [a] 

litigant from bringing further attacks on his or her conviction and 

sentence”). Appellant’s response to the show cause order does not 

provide a legal basis to prohibit the imposition of sanctions.

Because Appellant’s continued and repeated attacks on his 

judgment and sentence have become an abuse of the legal process, 

we hold that he is barred from future pro se filings in this Court 
2

concerning Escambia County Circuit Court case number 2012-CF1842. The Clerk of the Court is directed not to accept any future 

filings concerning this case unless they are filed by a member in 

good standing of The Florida Bar. Appellant is warned that any 

filings that violate the terms of this opinion may result in a referral 

to the appropriate institution for disciplinary procedures as 

provided in section 944.279, Florida Statutes. See Fla. R. App. P. 

9.410.

ROWE, RAY, and MAKAR, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________

Victor Jerome Bell, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Thomas H. Duffy, 

Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
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 White Mountain Titanium
Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30,
2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), the undersigned principal financial officer of the Company,
hereby certifies 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; and

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


Date:  August 17, 2006

/s/ Brian Flower
Brian Flower, Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
STATE v. Christina Shea WALTERS

548A00-2

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

July 13, 2018

Shelagh R. Kenney, Attorney at Law, Malcolm Ray Hunter, Jr., Attorney at Law, Durham, for Walters, Christina Shea.

Danielle Marquis Elder, Special Deputy Attorney General, Jonathan P. Babb, Special Counsel to Attorney General, William R. West, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

James E. Williams, Jr., Attorney at Law, Carrboro, for N.C. Advocates for Justice.

James E. Coleman, Jr., Attorney at Law, Dallas, TX, for Becton, Charles, et al.

Robert P. Mosteller, Attorney at Law, for Professors John Charles Boger & Robert P. Mosteller.

Grady Jessup, Attorney at Law, for N.C. Association of Black Lawyers.

Lisa A. Bakale-Wise, Attorney at Law, Irving Joyner, Attorney at Law, Durham, for N.C. State Conference of the NAACP.

Edward Joseph Blocher, Jr., Attorney at Law, for Social Scientists.

Janet Moore, Attorney at Law, for National Association for Public Defense.

*364The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 12th of July 2018 by National Association for Public Defense for leave to file Amicus Curiae Brief:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 13th of July 2018."
STATE of North Carolina v. Amia Smith ERVIN

No. COA17-324

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: September 19, 2017

REVERSED IN PART, NO ERROR IN PART, and REMANDED.
##### 



Holly Energy Partners, L.P.
Computation of Ratio of Earnings
To Fixed Charges
 Six MonthsEndedJune 30,
    
    
    Years Ended December 31,2007
    
    
    2006
    
    
    2005
    
    
    2004
    
    
    2003
    
    
    2002Earnings:Net income
    
    $
    18,440
    
    
    $
    27,543
    
    
    $
    26,816
    
    
    $
    32,494
    
    
    $
    581
    
    
    $
    2,670Minority interest in consolidated subsidiary
    
    
    581
    
    
    
    680
    
    
    
    740
    
    
    
    1,994
    
    
    
    758
    
    
    
    Income from equity investee
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    (894
    )
    
    
    (2,737
    )19,021
    
    
    
    28,223
    
    
    
    27,556
    
    
    
    34,488
    
    
    
    445
    
    
    
    (67
    )Add:Total fixed charges (per below)
    
    
    7,602
    
    
    
    14,815
    
    
    
    11,324
    
    
    
    2,279
    
    
    
    1,665
    
    
    
    1,657Distributed income of equity investee
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    2,487Total earnings
    
    $
    26,623
    
    
    $
    43,038
    
    
    $
    38,880
    
    
    $
    36,767
    
    
    $
    2,110
    
    
    $
    4,077Fixed charges:Interest expense
    
    $
    6,729
    
    
    $
    13,056
    
    
    $
    9,633
    
    
    $
    697
    
    
    $
    
    
    
    $
    Estimate of interest within rental expense(1)
    
    
    873
    
    
    
    1,759
    
    
    
    1,691
    
    
    
    1,582
    
    
    
    1,665
    
    
    
    1,657Total fixed charges
    
    $
    7,602
    
    
    $
    14,815
    
    
    $
    11,324
    
    
    $
    2,279
    
    
    $
    1,665
    
    
    $
    1,657Ratio of earnings to fixed charges
    
    
    3.50
    
    
    
    2.91
    
    
    
    3.43
    
    
    
    16.13
    
    
    
    1.27
    
    
    
    2.46
 
 (1)
    
    Represents 30% of the total operating lease rental expense which is that portion deemed to be
interest.
Exhibit 23


                           REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION

                                  Subsidiaries


Regency Centers, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership
     Equiport Associates, L.P., a Georgia limited partnership
     Queensboro Associates, L.P., a Georgia limited partnership
     Northlake Village Shopping Center, LLC, a Florida limited liability company
     Regency Centers Advisors, LLC, a Florida limited liability company
     RC Georgia Holdings, LLC, a Georgia limited liability company
         Regency Centers Georgia, L.P., a Georgia limited liability company
     T&R New Albany Development, LLC, an Ohio limited liability company
     RRG-RMC/Tracy, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
     OTR/Regency Colorado Realty Holdings, L.P., an Ohio limited partnership
     OTR/Regency Texas Realty Holdings, L.P., an Ohio limited partnership
     R&KS Dell Range LLC, a Wyoming limited liability company
     T&M Shiloh Development Company, a Texas general partnership


Regency Ocean East, Ltd. a Florida limited partnership
Regency Remediation, LLC, a Florida limited liability company
Regency Centers Texas, LLC, a Florida limited liability company

Regency Realty Group, Inc., a Florida corporation
     Chestnut Powder LLC, a Georgia limited liability company
     Marietta Outparcel, Inc., a Georgia corporation
     Thompson-Nolensville, LLC, a Florida limited liability company
     Dixon LLC, a Florida limited liability company
     Atlantic-Pennsylvania, LLC, a Florida limited liability company
     Rhett-Remount, LLC, a Florida limited liability company
     Regency Realty Group-NE, Inc., a Florida corporation
     Regency Realty Colorado, Inc., a Florida corporation
     Mountain Meadow, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
     Edmunson Orange Corp., a Tennessee corporation
     Luther Properties, Inc., a Tennessee corporation
     Tulip Grove, LLC, a Florida limited liability company
     Hermitage Development, LLC, a Florida limited liability company
     Hermitage Development II, LLC, a Florida limited liability company
     West End Property, LLC, a Florida limited liability company
     Bordeaux Development, LLC, a Florida limited liability company
     Tinwood, LLC, a Florida limited liability company
     8th & 20th Chelsea, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
     Middle Tennessee Development, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
     R2 Media, LLC, a Florida limited liability company


<PAGE>


     K&G/RRG II, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
     Regency Grocery Anchored Properties, Inc., a Maryland corporation
         Regency Trailblazer LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
               Regency Grocery Anchored Properties, L.P., a Delaware limited
               Partnership
         Regency/DS Ballwin LLC, a Missouri limited liability company GME/RRG I,
         LLC, a Delaware limited liability company















                                      -2-