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

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4759 

To provide for the withdrawal of the United States from the North American 

Free Trade Agreement. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 4, 2010 

Mr. TAYLOR (for himself, Mr. JONES, Mr. DEFAZIO, Mr. STUPAK, Mr. 

ARCURI, Mr. BACA, Mr. BARTLETT, Mr. BRALEY of Iowa, Mr. CAPUANO, 

Mr. COSTELLO, Mr. FILNER, Mr. GRIJALVA, Mr. HARE, Mr. HINCHEY, 

Mr. KAGEN, Ms. KAPTUR, Mr. KILDEE, Mr. KISSELL, Mr. KUCINICH, 

Mr. MASSA, Mr. MCINTYRE, Mr. MICHAUD, Mr. PAUL, Mr. SCHAUER, 

Mr. VISCLOSKY, Mr. WILSON of Ohio, Ms. WOOLSEY, and Mr. STARK) 

introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 

Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To provide for the withdrawal of the United States from 

the North American Free Trade Agreement. 

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

3 SECTION 1. WITHDRAWAL OF THE UNITED STATES FROM 

4 THE NAFTA. 

5 (a) WITHDRAWAL OF APPROVAL.—Notwithstanding 

6 any other provision of law, the approval of the NAFTA 

7 by the Congress provided for in section 101(a) of the 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4759 IH

1 North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation 

2 Act shall cease to be effective beginning on the date that 

3 is six months after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

4 (b) NOTIFICATION OF WITHDRAWAL.—On the date 

5 of the enactment of this Act, the President shall provide 

6 to the Governments of Canada and Mexico written notice 

7 of withdrawal of the United States from the NAFTA in 

8 accordance with Article 2205 of the NAFTA. 

9 (c) NAFTA DEFINED.—In this section, the term 

10 ‘‘NAFTA’’ means the North American Free Trade Agree11 ment entered into between the United States, Canada, and 

12 Mexico on December 17, 1992. 

Æ 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
STATE v. Frederick Lynn ATWATER

349P18-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 5, 2018

Frederick Lynn Atwater, for Atwater, Frederick Lynn.

Joseph L. Hyde, Assistant Attorney General, Patrick Nadolski, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 12th of October 2018 by Defendant for Notice of Appeal:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th of December 2018."
STATE v. Gyrell Shavonta LEE

335PA16-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 18, 2017

Paul M. Green, Assistant Appellant Defender, for Lee, Gyrell Shavonta

Kimberly D. Potter, Special Deputy Attorney General, R. Andrew Womble, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina

Camden R. Webb, Attorney at Law, for Cato Institute

Morgan, J.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 16th of May 2017 by Cato Institute for leave to file Amicus Curiae Brief:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 18th of May 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 32





CERTIFICATION





Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 as adopted by


Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002




Each of the undersigned, Shaun E. McAlmont, President and Chief Executive Officer of Lincoln Educational Services Corporation (the “Company”), and Cesar Ribeiro, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, has executed this certification in connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the Company’s
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2009 (the “Report”).




Each of the undersigned hereby certifies that, to his respective 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 presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




Date:     August 5, 2009





/s/ Shaun E. McAlmontShaun E. McAlmontPresident & Chief Executive Officer/s/ Cesar RibeiroCesar RibeiroChief Financial Officer
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 StrikeForce Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") on Form

10-Q/A

for the quarter ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Mark L. Kay, 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 2001, that:  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.   Dated: May

25,

 2011   /s/ Mark L. Kay Mark L. Kay Chief Executive Officer
```

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 201 (Wednesday, October 19, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60840-60841]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-20614]

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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[DA 05-2669]

Eighth Meeting of the Advisory Committee for the 2007 World 
Radiocommunication Conference (WRC-07 Advisory Committee)

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, this 
notice advises interested persons that the eighth meeting of the WRC-07 
Advisory Committee will be held on December 9, 2005, at the Federal 
Communications Commission. The purpose of the meeting is to continue 
preparations for the 2007 World Radiocommunication Conference. The 
Advisory Committee will consider any preliminary views and draft 
proposals introduced by the Advisory Committee's Informal Working 
Groups.

DATES: December 9, 2005; 11 a.m.-12 noon.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., 
Room TW-C305, Washington, DC 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alexander Roytblat, FCC International 
Bureau, Strategic Analysis and Negotiations Division, at (202) 418-
7501.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) 
established the WRC-07 Advisory Committee to provide advice, technical 
support and recommendations relating to the preparation of United 
States proposals and positions for the 2007 World Radiocommunication 
Conference (WRC-07).
    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 
92-463, as amended, this notice advises interested persons of the 
eighth meeting of the WRC-07 Advisory Committee. The WRC-07 Advisory 
Committee has an open membership. All interested parties are invited to 
participate in the Advisory Committee and to attend its meetings. The 
proposed agenda for the eighth meeting is as follows:

Agenda

    Eighth Meeting of the WRC-07 Advisory Committee, Federal 
Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., Room TW-C305, 
Washington, DC 20554.

December 9, 2005; 11 a.m.-12 noon.

1. Opening Remarks
2. Approval of Agenda
3. Approval of the Minutes of the Seventh Meeting
4. Reports on Recent WRC-07 Preparatory Meetings
5. NTIA Draft Preliminary Views and Proposals
6. Informal Working Group Reports and Documents relating to:
    a. Consensus Views and Issues Papers
    b. Draft Proposals
7. Future Meetings

[[Page 60841]]

8. Other Business

Federal Communications Commission.
Roderick Porter,
Acting Chief, International Bureau.
[FR Doc. 05-20614 Filed 10-18-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
```
#### Joseph DeStefano, Appellant, v Joseph V. DeStefano et al., Respondents.

[718 NYS2d 869]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Murphy, J.), dated July 28, 1999, which denied his motion to restore the action to the calendar.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiffs action was dismissed when he failed to appear at a compliance conference. A court will vacate such a default and restore a case to the calendar upon a showing of a meritorious cause of action, a justifiable excuse for the default, and the absence of willfulness *(see, Perez v Astoria Gen. Hosp.,*260 AD2d 457; *Arthur v City of Yonkers,*237 AD2d 474; *Brown v Ryder Truck Rental,*172 AD2d 477). The plaintiff failed to satisfy these elements. Thus, the Supreme Court properly denied his motion. O’Brien, J. P., Krausman, Goldstein and Schmidt, JJ., concur.
#### STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. TONY GWYN MINK

No. 7223SC840

(Filed 20 December 1972)

Appeal by defendant from *Kivett, Judge,*14 August 1972 Session of Superior Court held in Wilkes County.

Defendant, represented by counsel, entered pleas of guilty to two charges of felonious larceny and one charge of larceny punishable as a misdemeanor. From the judgments entered, defendant appealed.

*Attorney General Robert Morgan by James E. Magner, Jr., Assistant Attorney General for the State.*

*Porter, Conner & Winslow by Douglas L. Winslow for defendant appellant.*

VAUGHN, Judge.

Defendant’s court appointed counsel, with appropriate candor, states that he is unable to assign error. The record reveals that the trial judge, after due inquiry of defendant and upon sufficient evidence, adjudicated that defendant understandingly and voluntarily entered pleas of guilty. We have reviewed the record proper and find no prejudicial error.

No error.

Judges Britt and Parker concur.
<PAGE>
                                                                    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 Pulitzer Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-K for the year ended December 26, 2004 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert C.
Woodworth, President and 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 my knowledge, (i) the Report fully complies with the requirements of
         section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii)
         the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
         the Company.



                                           /s/ Robert C. Woodworth
                                           -----------------------
                                           Robert C. Woodworth
                                           President and Chief Executive Officer
                                           March 16, 2005


         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1998 AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          28,330
<SECURITIES>                                   120,475
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,742
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (537)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               191,966
<PP&E>                                          91,097
<DEPRECIATION>                                (17,198)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 296,141
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           59,972
<BONDS>                                        258,217
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            83
<OTHER-SE>                                    (30,374)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   296,141
<SALES>                                         63,611
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                63,611
<CGS>                                           93,298
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  111,444
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              15,390
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (57,830)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (57,830)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (57,830)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.73)<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.73)
<FN>
<F1>EPS-PRIMARY REFERS TO BASIC EARNINGS PER SHARE, AS DEFINED IN STATEMENT OF
FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING STANDARDS NO. 128, "EARNINGS PER SHARE."
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
STATE of North Carolina v. Harold J. BRANDON

No. 386P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 5, 2018

Harold J. Brandon, for Brandon, Harold James.

Kathleen N. Bolton, Assistant Attorney General, Roger A. Echols, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

*183***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 1st of November 2018 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the Superior Court, Durham County, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court of that County:

"Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th of December 2018."

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 1st of November 2018 by Defendant to Proceed In Forma Pauperis:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th of December 2018."

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 1st of November 2018 by Defendant to Appoint Counsel:

"Motion Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th of December 2018."
Order entered January 9, 2023

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-22-01056-CV

NATHANIEL TIMOTHY PHILLIPS, Appellant

V.

MARC S. MALOUF, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CC-22-04163-B

ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case has not been filed. By letter dated 

December 12, 2022, we informed appellant the court reporter notified us that the 

reporter’s record had not been filed because appellant had not (1) requested the 

record; or (2) paid for or made arrangements to pay for the record. We directed 

appellant to provide the Court with written verification showing the reporter’s 

record had been requested and that appellant had paid for or made arrangements to 

pay for the record or had been found entitled to proceed without payment of costs. 
We cautioned appellant that failure to provide the required documentation within 

ten days might result in the appeal being ordered submitted without the reporter’s 

record. To date, appellant has not provided verification that the reporter’s record 

has been requested nor otherwise corresponded with the Court regarding the status 

of the reporter’s record. Accordingly, we ORDER this appeal submitted without a 

reporter’s record. 

Appellant’s brief is due THIRTY DAYS from the date of this order.

/s/ ROBERT D. BURNS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE
##### 



Exhibit 32
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the dates and for
the periods expressed in the Report.
 Date: November 1, 2006
    
    By:
    
    /s/ William H. RojName:
    
    William H. RojTitle:
    
    Chairman, Chief Executive Officerand DirectorBy:
    
    /s/ Jeffrey R. SteinhilberName:
    
    Jeffrey R. SteinhilberTitle:
    
    Chief Financial Officer and Director
#### STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. LLOYD SUTTON

No. 6830SC461

(Filed 11 December 1968)

Criminal Law § 161— assignment of error to entry of judgment

Assignment of error to the entry of the judgment presents the record proper for review.

Appeal by defendant from *Jackson, J.,*8 July 1968 Session, Haywood Superior Court.

Defendant states in his brief that he was tried in the District Court of Haywood County on three warrants charging him with public drunkenness. He further states that he pleaded guilty in the District Court to each charge, and that after judgment was pronounced he appealed to the Superior Court. Each of the three warrants charged a subsequent offense within twelve months.

Upon the call of the three cases for trial in the Superior Court the defendant again entered pleas of .guilty. Judgment was entered committing defendant to the custody of the Commissioner of Correction for an indeterminate sentence of not less than thirty days nor more than six months.

*T. W. Bruton, Attorney General, by (Mrs.) Christine Y. Den-son, Staff Attorney, for the State.*

*W. R. Francis for the defendant.*

BROCK, J.

Defendant’s only assignment of error is to the entry of the judgment..This assignment of error presents the record proper for review. 1 Strong, N. C. Index 2d, Appeal and Error, § 26, p. 152. We note that the pleas of guilty tendered by the defendant were accepted only after Judge Jackson had carefully examined the defendant and advised him of the possible consequences of his pleas. The sentence imposed was within statutory limits. G.S. 14-335.

With appropriate candor, defendant’s court-appointed counsel has stated that his review of the record of the proceedings discloses no prejudicial error. We agree with counsel’s appraisal.

No error.

Britt and Parker, JJ., concur.
|                                              |   |   |   | RIDGEWOOD      ENERGY K FUND, LLC                         |   |
|---------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                              |   |   |   |                                                      |   |
| Dated:         August      1, 2008 | By:    | /s/    |   | ROBERT      E. SWANSON                                    |   |
|                                              |   | Name:  |   | Robert      E. Swanson                                    |   |
|                                              |   | Title: |   | President      and Chief Executive Officer                |   |
|                                              |   |   |   | (Principal      Executive Officer)                        |   |
|                                              |   |   |   |                                                      |   |
|                                              |   |   |   |                                                      |   |
|                                              |   |   |   |                                                      |   |
| Dated:         August      1, 2008 | By:    | /s/    |   | KATHLEEN      P. MCSHERRY                                 |   |
|                                              |   | Name:  |   | Kathleen      P. McSherry                                 |   |
|                                              |   | Title: |   | Executive      Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |   |
|                                              |   |   |   | (Principal      Financial and Accounting Officer)         |   |

----
In the Matter of the Estate of: Johnnie Edward HARPER v. Kim L. HARPER

No. 13P19

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

January 10, 2019

Kim Harper, for Harper, Kim L.

Daniel L. Strobel, Attorney at Law, Asheville.

Rochelle Harper Greenidge.

Sonya Thomas.

Beth Harper Rodriquez.

James M. Ellis, Attorney at Law, for Harper, Johnnie Edward.

***ORDER***

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 8th of January 2019 by Defendant to Stay:

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 10th of January 2019."

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 8th of January 2019 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, 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 10th of January 2019."
COOPER v. BERGER, et al.

315PA18-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February 22, 2019

Jim W. Phillips, Jr., Attorney at Law, Greensboro, Eric M. David, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, Daniel F.E. Smith, Attorney at Law, Greensboro, for Cooper, Roy A. (III).

Noah H. Huffstetler, III, Attorney at Law, D. Martin Warf, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for Berger, Philip E., et al.

Andrew H. Erteschik, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for Professor Marin K. Levy.

The following order has been entered on the joint motion filed on the 21st of February 2019 to Continue Oral Argument of 4 March 2019:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 22nd of February 2019."
W. ALAN JORGENSEN, CPA
                          720 THIRD AVENUE, SUITE 1910
                                SEATTLE, WA 98104



                                 April 10, 2001




Office of the Chief Accountant
Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, NW
Washington, D.C.  20549

RE:      Aqua Vie Beverage Corporation File 000 24801

Dear Sir/Madam:

I have  read the  relevant  information  referring  to my firm in Item 4 of Form
8-K/A dated April, 2001, for Aqua Vie Beverage  Corporation to be filed with the
securities  and Exchange  Commission  and I am in agreement  with the statements
contained  therein,  except,  I  have  no  direct  information  to  confirm  the
engagement of Webster & Williams as new accounts and related  information  found
in paragraph (a)(2)(i).

                                            Sincerely,

                                            /s/  W. Alan Jorgensen, CPA
                                            ---------------------------
                                                 W. Alan Jorgensen, CPA