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

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2071 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 19, 2019 

Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

AN ACT 

To repeal certain obsolete laws relating to Indians. 

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


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

S 2071 RFH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Repealing Existing 

3 Substandard Provisions Encouraging Conciliation with 

4 Tribes Act’’. 

5 SEC. 2. REPEAL OF CERTAIN OBSOLETE LAWS RELATING 

6 TO INDIANS. 

7 (1) Section 2080 of the Revised Statutes (25 

8 U.S.C. 72) is repealed. 

9 (2) Section 2100 of the Revised Statutes (25 

10 U.S.C. 127) is repealed. 

11 (3) Section 2 of the Act of March 3, 1875 (18 

12 Stat. 449, chapter 132; 25 U.S.C. 128), is repealed. 

13 (4) The first section of the Act of March 3, 

14 1875 (18 Stat. 424, chapter 132; 25 U.S.C. 129), 

15 is amended under the heading ‘‘CHEYENNES 

16 AND ARAPAHOES.’’ by striking ‘‘; that the Sec17 retary of the Interior be authorized to withhold, 

18 from any tribe of Indians who may hold any captives 

19 other than Indians, any moneys due them from the 

20 United States until said captives shall be surren21 dered to the lawful authorities of the United 

22 States’’. 

23 (5) Section 2087 of the Revised Statutes (25 

24 U.S.C. 130) is repealed. 

25 (6) Section 3 of the Act of March 3, 1875 (18 

26 Stat. 449, chapter 132; 25 U.S.C. 137), is repealed. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

S 2071 RFH

1 (7) Section 2101 of the Revised Statutes (25 

2 U.S.C. 138) is repealed. 

3 (8) Section 7 of the Act of June 23, 1879 (21 

4 Stat. 35, chapter 35; 25 U.S.C. 273), is repealed. 

5 (9) The first section of the Act of March 3, 

6 1893 (27 Stat. 612, chapter 209), is amended— 

7 (A) under the heading ‘‘MISCELLA8 NEOUS SUPPORTS.’’ (27 Stat. 628; 25 

9 U.S.C. 283), by striking the last 2 undesig10 nated paragraphs; and 

11 (B) under the heading ‘‘FOR SUPPORT 

12 OF SCHOOLS.’’ (27 Stat. 635; 25 U.S.C. 

13 283), by striking the second undesignated para14 graph. 

15 (10) Section 18 of the Act of June 30, 1913 

16 (38 Stat. 96, chapter 4; 25 U.S.C. 285), is amended 

17 by striking the tenth undesignated paragraph. 

18 (11) The Act of June 21, 1906 (34 Stat. 325, 

19 chapter 3504), is amended under the heading ‘‘COM20 MISSIONER.’’ under the heading ‘‘I. GENERAL 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
4 

S 2071 RFH

1 PROVISIONS.’’ (34 Stat. 328; 25 U.S.C. 302) by 

2 striking the fourth undesignated paragraph. 

Passed the Senate November 18, 2019. 

Attest: JULIE E. ADAMS, 

Secretary. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2264 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2264

 To amend title 18, United States Code, to require the impaneling of a 
new jury if a jury fails to recommend by unanimous vote a sentence for 
               conviction of a crime punishable by death.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 25, 2019

  Mr. Toomey (for himself, Mr. Braun, Mr. Cornyn, Mr. Cotton, and Mr. 
Cruz) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 
                   to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 18, United States Code, to require the impaneling of a 
new jury if a jury fails to recommend by unanimous vote a sentence for 
               conviction of a crime punishable by death.

    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 ``Eric's Law''.

SEC. 2. REQUIREMENT TO IMPANEL A NEW JURY IN CERTAIN CASES.

    (a) Additional Ground for Impaneling Jury.--Section 3593(b)(2) of 
title 18, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``or'' at the end; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
                    ``(E) a new special hearing is required pursuant to 
                subsection (g); or''.
    (b) Impaneling of New Jury When Jury Does Not Reach a Unanimous 
Recommendation.--Section 3593 of title 18, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(g) Special Rule When Jury Does Not Return a Unanimous 
Recommendation.--
            ``(1) In general.--If a jury described in subsection (b)(1) 
        or subparagraphs (A) through (D) of subsection (b)(2) does not, 
        by unanimous vote, make a recommendation whether the defendant 
        should be sentenced to death, to life imprisonment without 
        possibility of release, or some other lesser sentence pursuant 
        to subsection (e), the court, upon motion of the attorney for 
        the government, shall order a new special hearing and impanel a 
        new jury pursuant to subsection (b).
            ``(2) Imposition of sentence.--If the jury impaneled 
        pursuant to paragraph (1) does not reach a unanimous 
        recommendation as to sentence, the court shall impose a 
        sentence other than death authorized by law.''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit
32.2





Certification
of Chief Financial Officer 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 WindTamer Corporation (the “Company”) on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I Gerald E. Brock, as
acting Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 to the best of my knowledge, 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 result of operations of the Company.





Date:
      April 28, 2010/s/
      Gerald E. BrockGerald
      E. BrockActing
      Chief Financial Officer





This
Certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended.
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 09**  **- 8**  **1 9**  **3**

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

– Appell ee ,
v. JORGE ROMERO

- ALARCON, a/k/a Ramiro Ortiz, a/ka Ramiro Ortiz

Tobias , Defendant

– Appell ant . Appeal from th e United States District Court for the We st ern District of North Carolina , at Charlotte
. Frank D. Whitney , District Judge. ( 3 : 04

- c r - 00 008

- FDW

- CH

- 3; 3:08

- cv - 00567

- FDW

- 1 )

Submitted : September 16, 2010 Decided: October 4, 2010

Before WILKINSO N and N IEMEYER , Circuit J udges , and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge
.
Dismiss e d by un published per curiam opinion
.
Jorge Romero

- Alarcon , Appellant Pro Se
. Amy Elizabeth Ray , Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville , North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpubli shed opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Jorge Romero

- Alarcon seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. A. § 2255 ( West Supp. 2010 ) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (200 6 ). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (200 6 ). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

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

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

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Romero

- Alarcon has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dis pense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the3 materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

December 11, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

135787(87) Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, 

Justices 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

 SC: 135787 

v COA: 277905 

LINCOLN WATKINS, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

Wayne CC: 06-008116 

___________________________________ 

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion by Ralph Edward Parish for leave 

to file a brief amicus curiae is considered and it is GRANTED. 

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. 

December 11, 2008 

 Clerk
EXHIBIT 14.1

                          PENINSULA GAMING COMPANY, LLC

              CEO AND SENIOR FINANCIAL OFFICERS' CODE OF ETHICS

General Philosophy

The honesty,  integrity and sound judgment of the chief  executive  officer (the
"CEO") and senior  financial  officers  is  fundamental  to the  reputation  and
success of Peninsula Gaming Company,  LLC (the "Company").  The professional and
ethical  conduct of the CEO and senior  financial  officers is  essential to the
proper  function  and  success of the  Company as a leading  hardware  wholesale
cooperative.

Senior Financial Officers Code of Ethics

Pursuant  to the  mandate  of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 (the  "Act")  and
regulations  of the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  ("SEC")  promulgated
pursuant to the  authority  and mandate of the Act, this Code of Ethics has been
adopted for our CEO, chief financial officer,  controller or officers performing
a similar function of the Company (the "Senior Financial Officers").

To the  best of  their  knowledge  and  ability,  the CEO and  Senior  Financial
Officers of the Company performing accounting, auditing, financial management or
similar functions must:

|_|  Act with  honesty and  integrity,  avoid  actual or apparent  conflicts  of
     interest in personal and professional relationships.

|_|  Provide  colleagues,  the SEC  and  the  public  with  information  that is
     accurate, complete, objective, relevant, timely and understandable.

|_|  Comply with applicable laws,  rules and regulations of federal,  state, and
     local  governments  and other  appropriate  private  and public  regulatory
     agencies.

|_|  Act in good  faith,  with  due  care,  competence  and  diligence,  without
     misrepresenting  material  facts or  allowing  independent  judgment  to be
     subordinated.

|_|  Respect  the  confidentiality  of  information  acquired  in the  course of
     employment.

|_|  Share knowledge and maintain skills necessary and relevant to the Company's
     needs.

|_|  Proactively  promote  ethical  and honest  behavior  within  the  Company's
     environment.

|_|  Assure  responsible  use  of  and  control  of all  assets,  resources  and
     information of the Company.

|_|  Report  violations of this Code of Ethics the Audit  Committee of the board
     of managers of the Company promptly after learning of any such violation.

All Senior  Financial  Officers are expected to adhere to the Company's  Code of
Ethics  for the CEO and Senior  Financial  Officers  at all times.  The board of
managers shall have the sole and absolute discretionary authority to approve any
deviation  or waiver  from the Code of Ethics for the CEO and  Senior  Financial
Officers.  Any change of this Code of Ethics or waiver and the  grounds for such
waiver for a Senior  Financial  Officer  shall be promptly  disclosed  through a
filing with the SEC on Form 8-K.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 224 (Wednesday, November 21, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 65634]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-5765]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration


Second Meeting, RTCA Special Committee 216: Aeronautical System 
Security

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of RTCA Special Committee 216 meeting Aeronautical 
Systems Security.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a 
meeting of RTCA Special Committee 216: Aeronautical Systems Security.

DATES: The meeting will be held on December 11-13, 2007, from 9 a.m. to 
5 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at ARINC Riva Road, Annapolis, MD.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: RTCA Secretariat, 1828 L Street, NW., 
Suite 805, Washington, DC 20036-5133; telephone (202) 833-9339; fax 
(202) 833-9434; Web site http://www.rtca.org.

    Note: Please e-mail Sarah Parpana (<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#b0e3e0f1e2e0f1fef1f0d1c2d9ded39ed3dfdd"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="025152435052434c434263706b6c612c616d6f">[email protected]</span></a>) if you 
plan to attend, so that security arrangements can be made for the 
meeting. The following information will be needed by ARINC security 
personnel. Please respond by December 4th.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act (P.L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice is 
hereby given for a Special Committee 216 meeting. The agenda will 
include:
December 11-13
 <bullet> Opening Session (Welcome, Introductory and Administrative 
Remarks, Agenda Overview Minutes and Action Items from First Meeting).
<bullet> Presentations WG-72 topics.
<bullet> Presentations on ATS topics.
<bullet> Presentations on Existing Regulatory topics.
<bullet> Presentations on Special topics.
<bullet> Organization of Work, Assign Tasks and Workgroups.
    <bullet> Presentation, Discussion, Recommendations.
    <bullet> Assignment Action Items.
<bullet> Assignment of Responsibilities.
     <bullet> Closing Session (Other Business, Assignment/Review of 
Future Work, Establish Agenda, Date and Place of Next Meeting, Closing 
Remarks, Adjourn).
    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space 
availability. With the approval of the chairmen, members of the public 
may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present 
statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in 
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may 
present a written statement to the committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 13, 2007.
Francisco Estrada C.,
RTCA Advisory Committee.
[FR Doc. 07-5765 Filed 11-20-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
**EXHIBIT 99.1**ANNUAL SERVICER’S CERTIFICATEBARCLAYS BANK PLCGRACECHURCH CARD FUNDING (NO. 5) PLC     The undersigned, a duly authorized representative of Barclays Bank PLC (the “Bank”), asServicer, pursuant to the Beneficiaries Servicing Agreement, dated as of November 23, 1999 (the“Agreement”), among the Bank, as Servicer and Barclaycard Funding PLC, as Investor Beneficiary,does hereby certify that:     1. The Bank is, as of the date hereof, the Servicer under the Agreement.Capitalized terms used in this Certificate have their respective meanings asset forth in the Agreement.     2. The undersigned is duly authorized pursuant to the Agreement to execute and deliver this Certificate.     3. A review of the activities of the Servicer during the calendar year ended December 31, 2005 was conducted under my supervision.     4. Based on such review, the Servicer has, to the best of my knowledge,performed in all material respects its obligations under the Agreementthroughout such calendar year and no material default in the performance ofsuch obligations has occurred or is continuing except as set forth in theParagraph 5 below.     5. The following is a description of each material default in the performanceof the Servicer’s obligations under the provisions of the Agreement known tothe undersigned to have been made by the Servicer during the calendar yearended December 31, 2005, which sets forth in detail (i) the nature of each suchdefault, (ii) the action taken by the Servicer, if any, to remedy each suchdefault and (iii) the current status of each such default:     None.     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Annual Servicer’s Certificate this23rd day of June, 2006.           Barclays Bank PLC    as Servicer      By: /s/ Paul Gerard Turner      **Name:** **Paul Gerard Turner**      **Title:** **Finance Director**        **Barclaycard UK Consumer Finance Division**
 - 32 -
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

DARRELL ANTHONY WARD, JR.,

Plaintiff, 

vs. CASE NO. 3:10cv24/RS-MD

ESCAMBIA COUNTY JAIL, et al,

Defendants.

________________________________/

ORDER

Before me is the Magistrate Judges Report and Recommendation (Doc. 9). 

Plaintiff has not filed objections.

IT IS ORDERED:

1. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation is approved and

incorporated in this Order.

2. This case is dismissed without prejudice because of Plaintiff’s failure to

comply with an order of this court and for Plaintiff’s failure to keep the

court informed of his current address.

3. The clerk is directed to close the file.

ORDERED on June 11, 2010.

/S/ Richard Smoak 

RICHARD SMOAK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
<PAGE>

                                                                Exhibit 31.2

                               CERTIFICATIONS

         I, Marc S. Hermelin, certify that:

         1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of KV
Pharmaceutical Company;

         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
quarterly 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
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: November 14, 2003       /s/  Marc S. Hermelin
                              --------------------------------------------------
                              Marc S. Hermelin
                              Vice Chairman and Chief Executive Officer