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

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2283 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide an investment 

tax credit for waste heat to power technology. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 25, 2019 

Mr. CARPER (for himself and Mr. CARDIN) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 

an investment tax credit for waste heat to power technology. 

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 ‘‘Waste Heat to Power 

5 Investment Tax Credit Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. INVESTMENT CREDIT FOR WASTE HEAT TO POWER 

7 PROPERTY. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 48(a)(3)(A) of the Inter9 nal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended— 

10 (1) at the end of clause (vi), by striking ‘‘or’’; 


jspears on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2283 IS

1 (2) at the end of clause (vii), by inserting ‘‘or’’ 

2 after the comma; and 

3 (3) by adding at the end the following: 

4 ‘‘(viii) waste heat to power property,’’. 

5 (b) DEFINITIONS AND LIMITATIONS.—Section 48(c) 

6 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by add7 ing at the end the following: 

8 ‘‘(5) WASTE HEAT TO POWER PROPERTY.— 

9 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘waste heat 

10 to power property’ means property— 

11 ‘‘(i) comprising a system which gen12 erates electricity through the recovery of a 

13 qualified waste heat resource, and 

14 ‘‘(ii) the construction of which begins 

15 before January 1, 2027. 

16 ‘‘(B) QUALIFIED WASTE HEAT RE17 SOURCE.—The term ‘qualified waste heat re18 source’ means— 

19 ‘‘(i) exhaust heat or flared gas from 

20 an industrial process that does not have, 

21 as its primary purpose, the production of 

22 electricity, and 

23 ‘‘(ii) a pressure drop in any gas for an 

24 industrial or commercial process. 

25 ‘‘(C) LIMITATIONS.— 


jspears on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 2283 IS

1 ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of 

2 subsection (a)(1), the basis of any waste 

3 heat to power property taken into account 

4 under this section shall not exceed the ex5 cess of— 

6 ‘‘(I) the basis of such property, 

7 over 

8 ‘‘(II) the fair market value of 

9 comparable property which does not 

10 have the capacity to capture and con11 vert a qualified waste heat resource to 

12 electricity. 

13 ‘‘(ii) CAPACITY LIMITATION.—The 

14 term ‘waste heat to power property’ shall 

15 not include any property comprising a sys16 tem if such system has a capacity in excess 

17 of 50 megawatts.’’. 

18 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

19 this section shall apply to periods after the date of enact20 ment of this Act, in taxable years ending after such date, 

21 under rules similar to the rules of section 48(m) of the 

22 Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (as in effect on the day 

23 before the date of the enactment of the Revenue Reconcili24 ation Act of 1990). 

Æ 


jspears on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 10.5


 





AMENDMENT NO. 1


 


TO


 


STRATEGIC CONSULTING AGREEMENT


 


This
Amendment No. 1 to Strategic Consulting Agreement (this “Amendment”) is made as of April 4, 2020, by and among
GL Brands, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the “Company”) and Merida Advisor, LLC, a Delaware limited liability
company (the “Consultant”).


 


WHEREAS,
the Company and the Consultant are parties to that certain Strategic Consulting Agreement, dated as of November 18, 2019 (the
“Agreement”), pursuant to which the Consultant would be paid $5,000 per month in cash beginning January 1,
2020 (the “Monthly Cash Consulting Fee”);


 


WHEREAS,
the Company has not paid the Consultant any Monthly Cash Consulting Fee to date;


 


WHEREAS,
the parties desire to now amend certain of the terms of the Consultant Agreement on the terms set forth herein; and


 


NOW, THEREFORE, the Company and the Consultant
hereby agree as follows:


 


1.              
Capitalized Terms. Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings given to them in the Agreement.


 


2.              
Amendment. The Agreement is hereby amended to remove in its entirety the Company’s requirement to pay the
Consultant the Monthly Cash Consulting Fee, effective as of the date of the original Agreement. For clarity, no Monthly Cash Consulting
Fee for any period, including dates prior to the date hereof, shall be due to the Consultant pursuant to the Agreement.


 


3.              
Agreement. Except as modified by this Amendment, the Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect.


 


4.              
Governing Law. This Amendment shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the internal laws of the State
of New York, without giving effect to the principles of conflicts of law.


 


5.              
Counterparts.This Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an
original, but all of which together will constitute one and the same instrument.


 


 


[Signature page follows]


 


 






    	 	1	 



     


    

 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
the parties hereto have executed this Amendment on the date first written above.


 





	 	 THE COMPANY:


 


GL BRANDS, INC.


 


By:
/s/ Carlos Frias


       Name: Carlos Frias


       Title: CEO


 


THE CONSULTANT:


 


MERIDA ADVISOR, LLC


 


By: /s/ Mitch
Baruchowitz


      Name: Mitch
Baruchowitz


       Title: Managing
Partner






 


 





[Signature Page to Amendment No. 1 to Strategic
Consulting Agreement]


 


 


 






    	 	2
- Button1:
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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Centra Software, Inc. (the Company) for the year ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Paul R. Gudonis, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, to the best knowledge and belief of the signatory, 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: March 16, 2005 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/    PAUL R. GUDONIS
|                     |  |  |  |     |  |                        |  | Paul R. Gudonis President and Chief Executive Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2159 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2159

To repeal the Act entitled ``An Act to confer jurisdiction on the State 
 of North Dakota over offenses committed by or against Indians on the 
                   Devils Lake Indian Reservation''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 18, 2019

Mr. Hoeven (for himself and Mr. Cramer) introduced the following bill; 
  which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To repeal the Act entitled ``An Act to confer jurisdiction on the State 
 of North Dakota over offenses committed by or against Indians on the 
                   Devils Lake Indian Reservation''.

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

SECTION 1. REPEAL.

    The Act entitled ``An Act to confer jurisdiction on the State of 
North Dakota over offenses committed by or against Indians on the 
Devils Lake Indian Reservation'', approved May 31, 1946 (60 Stat. 229), 
is repealed.
                                 <all>
```
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JUNE 2, 2016

NO. 03-15-00442-CR

Marissa Calderon, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 5 OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE, JUSTICES PEMBERTON AND BOURLAND

AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE PEMBERTON

This is an appeal from the order signed by the trial court. Having reviewed the record and the 

parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in the trial court’s order. 

Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s order. Because appellant is indigent and unable to 

pay costs, no adjudication of costs is made.
#### Caleb King, executor, plaintiff in error, *vs.*John M. King *et al.,*defendants in error.

A bill in equity may be amended when the *remittitur*from this Court is about to be made the judgment of the Court below, and before it is entered on the minutes of that Court.

*Res adjudicata.*Equity practice. Amendments. Before Judge Parrott. Gordon Superior Court. April Term, 1871.

The children of Jonas King, deceased, filed a bill against Caleb King, as executor of their grand-father, Jonathan King, to recover from him their father’s share in said Jonathan’s estate, without averring when their father died. The bill was demurred to for want of equity, and the demurrer was sustained and the bill was dismissed. At January Term, 1871, this Court affirmed the judgment upon the ground that complainants had no right to the relief prayed for, unless their father died during the life of their grand-father.

At April Term, 1871, of said Superior Court, before the *remittitur*from this Court had been filed, they moved to amend said bill by averring the date of their father’s death, so as to show that he died during their grand-father’s lifetime. Caleb King’s counsel objected, upon the ground that until the *remittitur*was filed there was no cause pending in the Superior Court to amend, and that when said *remittitur**196should be so entered and made the judgment of the Court, the bill would be finally dismissed. The Court allowed the amendment of the bill and thus kept it in Court. This is assigned as error.

Underwood & Rowell by R. Fouche, for plaintiffs in error.

A. R. Wright, by Featherston, for defendants.

Warner, Chief Justice.

In this case, there was a general demurrer to the complainants’ bill for want of equity, which demurrer was sustained by the Court. The case was brought up to this Court and the judgment of the Court below was affirmed: See *King vs. King,*42 Georgia Reports, 512. When the *remittitur*from this Court was about to be made the judgment of the Court below, and before it was made, the counsel for the complainants made a motion to amend their original bill, and to make such a case as would give to the Court jurisdiction. The amendment was allowed by the Court, and the defendant excepted. If this was an original question before this Court, I should hold that when a general demurrer had been filed to a bill for want of equity, and that demurrer had been sustained by the Court below and affirmed by the judgment of this Court, without any directions as to the amendment of it, the bill would be out of Court and could not be amended so as to keep it in Court, when the judgment of this Court was about to be made the judgment of the Court below; but the case of *Sullivan, Cabot & Company vs. The Rome Railroad Company,*28 Georgia, 29; and the case of *Cothran vs. Scanian,*34 Georgia Reports, 555, decide that an amendment may be made at that stage of the case, and, upon the authority of these two cases, we affirm the judgment of the Court below.

Judgment affirmed.
#### SECURITY MILLS v. TRUST CO.

No. 7 PC.

Case below: 13 N.C. App. 332.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals allowed 7 March 1972.
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

**STATEMENT OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**OF KNOLOGY, INC.**

**PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350**

**ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**§ 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

The undersigned hereby certifies in his capacity as an officer of Knology, Inc. (the “Company”) that, to his knowledge, this annual report onForm 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (this “Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, and the information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

Dated: March 28, 2006
** **

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 1350 OF CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18,**

**OF THE UNITED STATES CODE (18U.S.C.1350)**

**ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002**

** **

** **

In connection with the Annual Report of CanAlaskaUranium Ltd. (the “Company”) on Form 20-F/A for the year ended April 30, 2013 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Peter Dasler, the 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:

 

(1)	the Report fully complies with the requirementsof section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)	the informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result 	of the operations ofthe Company.

 

 

Date:	March 21, 2014

 

***“Peter Dasler”	***

Chief Executive Officer

** **

** **

** **
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 240 

To require the Internal Revenue Service to establish, incrementally over 

five years, a nationwide program to provide personal identification numbers to taxpayers to help prevent tax-related identity theft. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 28, 2019 

Ms. COLLINS (for herself and Mr. JONES) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To require the Internal Revenue Service to establish, incrementally over five years, a nationwide program to provide 

personal identification numbers to taxpayers to help prevent tax-related identity theft. 

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 ‘‘Taxpayer Identity Pro5 tection Act of 2019’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•S 240 IS

1 SEC. 2. IDENTITY PROTECTION PERSONAL IDENTIFICA2 TION NUMBERS. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subsection (b), the Sec4 retary of the Treasury or the Secretary’s delegate (here5 after referred to in this section as the ‘‘Secretary’’) shall 

6 establish a program to issue, upon the request of any indi7 vidual, a number which may be used in connection with 

8 such individual’s social security number (or other identi9 fying information with respect to such individual as deter10 mined by the Secretary) to assist the Secretary in 

11 verifying such individual’s identity. 

12 (b) REQUIREMENTS.— 

13 (1) ANNUAL EXPANSION.—For each calendar 

14 year beginning after the date of the enactment of 

15 this Act, the Secretary shall provide numbers 

16 through the program described in subsection (a) to 

17 individuals residing in such States as the Secretary 

18 deems appropriate, provided that the total number 

19 of States served by such program during such year 

20 is greater than the total number of States served by 

21 such program during the preceding year. 

22 (2) NATIONWIDE AVAILABILITY.—Not later 

23 than 5 years after the date of the enactment of this 

24 Act, the Secretary shall ensure that the program deVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:01 Feb 01, 2019 Jkt 089200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S240.IS S240

kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
3 

•S 240 IS

1 scribed in subsection (a) is made available to any in2 dividual residing in the United States. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
**Exhibit 23.2**

 

### **CONSENT OFINDEPENDENT PETROLEUM ENGINEERS**

 

The undersigned hereby consents to theincorporation by reference by Carbon Energy Corporation Form 10-K to theSEC of data derived from our reserve reports dated February 25, 2003, relatingto the oil and gas reserves of Carbon Energy Corporation (USA) atDecember 31, 2002, February 20, 2002, relating to the oil and gas reservesof Carbon Energy Corporation (USA) at December 31, 2001 andJanuary 19, 2001, relating to the oil and gas reserves of Carbon EnergyCorporation (USA) at December 31, 2000 and to the incorporation byreference of our report included in this Form 10-K into Carbon EnergyCorporation’s previously filed Registration Statements on Form S-8, FileNo. 333-50242 and File No. 333-60444.

 
|                | /s/ RYDER SCOTT COMPANY, L.P. |   |
|---------------------|-------------------------------|--------|
| Denver, Colorado    |                          |
| March 28, 2003 |                          |

 

----
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 203 (Monday, October 22, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 59552]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-5219]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

United States Parole Commission


Sunshine Act Meeting Notice

Public Announcement

    Pursuant to the Government in the Sunshine Act (Public Law 94-409) 
[5 U.S.C. 552b]

Agency Holding Meeting: Department of Justice, United States Parole 
Commission.

Time and Date: 10 a.m., Thursday, October 25, 2007.

Place: 5550 Friendship Blvd., Fourth Floor, Chevy Chase, MD 20815.

Status: Open.

Matters To Be Considered: The following matters have been placed on the 
agenda for the open Parole Commission meeting:
    1. Approval of Minutes of July 2007 Quarterly Business Meeting.
    2. Reports from the Chairman, Commissioners, Chief of Staff, and 
Section Administrators.
    3. Consideration of ``Evaluation and Re-Validation of the U.S. 
Parole Guidelines Risk Instrument'' by James Austin and Roger Ocker.

Agency Contact: Thomas W. Hutchison, Chief of Staff, United States 
Parole Commission, (301) 492-5990.

    Dated: October 17, 2007.
Sharon A. Gervasoni,
Acting General Counsel, U.S. Parole Commission.
[FR Doc. 07-5219 Filed 10-18-07; 11:44 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-31-M
Exhibit 32





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (SUBSECTIONS (A) AND (B) OF SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE)



I, Richard R. Walters, President and Acting Chief Financial Officer of Little Squaw Gold Mining Company, certify that:



1.

This quarterly report for the period ended September 30, 2003 on Form 10-QSB of Little Squaw Gold Mining Company 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 quarterly report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Little Squaw Gold Mining Company.



/s/ Richard R. Walters



Date: October 31, 2003

Richard R. Walters, President and

Acting Chief Financial Officer



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Little Squaw Gold Mining Company and will be retained by Little Squaw Gold Mining Company to be furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# EUR-Lex - - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

#

**Coordination of social security systems ***I European Parliament legislative resolution of 18 April 2012 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems and Regulation (EC) No 987/2009 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 (COM(2010)0794 – C7-0005/2011 – 2010/0380(COD)) - P7_TC1-COD(2010)0380 Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 18 April 2012 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No …/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems and Regulation (EC) No 987/2009 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 **

*
Official Journal C 258 E , 07/09/2013 P. 0125 - 0126 *

Coordination of social security systems ***I

P7_TA(2012)0121

European Parliament legislative resolution of 18 April 2012 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems and Regulation (EC) No 987/2009 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 (COM(2010)0794 – C7-0005/2011 – 2010/0380(COD))

2013/C 258 E/17

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2010)0794),

- having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 48 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7-0005/2011),

- having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

- having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 7 March 2012 to approve Parliament's position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

- having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

- having regard to the report of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (A7-0043/2012),

1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

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

P7_TC1-COD(2010)0380

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 18 April 2012 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) No .../2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems and Regulation (EC) No 987/2009 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation (EC) No 883/2004

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) No 465/2012.)

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