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

Calendar No. 673

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2386

[Report No. 106–338]

To extend the Stamp Out Breast Cancer Act.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

APRIL 11, 2000

Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, Mrs. HUTCHISON, Mr. BAUCUS, Mr. MURKOWSKI, Mr. CLELAND, Mr. DURBIN, Ms. LANDRIEU, Mr. SMITH of Oregon, Mr. LAUTENBERG, Mr. JOHNSON, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. EDWARDS,

Mr. CAMPBELL, Mr. ABRAHAM, Mr. KERRY, Mr. FEINGOLD, Mr.

SANTORUM, Mr. LEAHY, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. WELLSTONE, Mr. BINGAMAN,

Mr. MOYNIHAN, Mr. HATCH, Ms. SNOWE, Mr. HAGEL, Mr. BIDEN, Mr.

MACK, Mr. GRASSLEY, Mr. ASHCROFT, Mr. BRYAN, Mrs. MURRAY, Mrs.

BOXER, Ms. MIKULSKI, Mr. REID, Mr. BREAUX, Mr. DODD, Mr.

LIEBERMAN, Mr. KERREY, Mr. DASCHLE, Mr. JEFFORDS, Mr. ROTH,

Mr. VOINOVICH, Mr. WARNER, Mr. BURNS, Mr. CONRAD, Mr. SCHUMER,

Mr. GRAHAM, Mr. TORRICELLI, Mr. L. CHAFEE, Mr. HELMS, Mr. THOMAS, Mr. GRAMM, Mr. SARBANES, Mr. SPECTER, Mr. HARKIN, Mr.

DOMENICI, Mr. MCCAIN, Mr. INOUYE, Mr. ENZI, Mr. DEWINE, Ms. COLLINS, Mr. ROBB, Mr. WYDEN, and Mrs. LINCOLN) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs

JULY 12, 2000

Reported by Mr. THOMPSON, without amendment

A BILL

To extend the Stamp Out Breast Cancer Act.
2

•S 2386 RS

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 ‘‘Breast Cancer Re5 search Stamp Reauthorization Act of 2000’’.

6 SEC. 2. BREAST CANCER STAMP EXTENSION.

7 Section 414(g) of title 39, United States Code, is

8 amended by striking ‘‘2-year’’ and inserting ‘‘4-year’’.

Calendar No. 673

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2386

[Report No. 106–338]

A BILL

To extend the Stamp Out Breast Cancer Act.

JULY 12, 2000

Reported without amendment
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, 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.

 March 4, 2016

Order 

Clerk

March 4, 2016

153140 & (17)(18)

D’ALESSANDRO CONTRACTING 

GROUP, LLC, and SAFECO INSURANCE

COMPANY OF AMERICA, Plaintiffs-Appellants, SC: 153140

v COA: 328366

Genesee CC: 10-095065-CK

JEFFREY WRIGHT, GENESEE COUNTY DRAIN

COMMISSIONER, DIVISION OF WATER & 

WASTE SERVICES, Defendant-Appellee. 

___________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the stipulation signed by counsel for the parties 

agreeing to the dismissal of this application for leave to appeal and the accompanying 

motions is considered, and the application and motions are DISMISSED with prejudice 

and without costs.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-41152

Summary Calendar

ROBERT W. ANDERSON,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

JOE BUTLER; JOHNNY ABRAHAM; PAUL JUNG; DIANNA ETON; PETER

HEINE; JAMES W. MOSSBARGER; ALPHONSO L. JAMES, JR.; CHARLES

H. JAMES; MICHAEL FINKBEINER; ANITHA CHERIAN; NURSE BOONE;

ROBERT G. BEARD; WILLIAM MCWHORTER; GUY SMITH; VIJAYA K.

KARTRAGADDA; JAMES L. JONES,

Defendants-Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:06-CV-784

Before JOLLY, GARZA, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

*

Robert W. Anderson, Texas prisoner # 1289121, appeals the district court’s

dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint arising from an incident on October

5, 2006, during which he was injured when a ceiling tile in the prison’s

gymnasium fell on his head. Anderson argues that the district court erred in

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

June 7, 2011

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not *

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

Case: 09-41152 Document: 00511501061 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/07/2011
No. 09-41152

dismissing his claims, which he contends are properly exhausted and

meritorious.

This court must examine the basis of its jurisdiction, on its own motion if

necessary. Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir. 1987). The notice of

appeal in a civil case must be filed within 30 days of entry of judgment. FED. R.

APP. P. 4(a)(1) (2008). In this § 1983 action, the district court entered final

judgment dismissing the complaint on October 22, 2008. Therefore, the final day

for filing a timely notice of appeal was Friday, November 21, 2008. See FED. R.

APP. P. 26(a) (2008). Anderson’s pro se notice of appeal is dated November 7,

2009, and was filed on November 12, 2009. Because the notice of appeal is dated

November 7, 2009, it could not have been deposited in the prison’s mail system

within the prescribed time. See FED. R. APP. P. 4(c) (2008) (stating that a

prisoner’s pro se notice of appeal is deemed timely filed if deposited in the

prison’s internal mail system on or before the last day for filing). The time

limitation for filing a notice of appeal in a civil case is jurisdictional. Bowles v.

Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 212-13 (2007). The lack of a timely notice mandates

dismissal of the appeal. Robbins v. Maggio, 750 F.2d 405, 408 (5th Cir. 1985).

2

Case: 09-41152 Document: 00511501061 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/07/2011
II

★(Star Print)

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2299

To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to continue State Medicaid

disproportionate share hospital (DSH) allotments for fiscal year 2001

at the levels for fiscal year 2000.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 27, 2000

Mr. L. CHAFEE (for himself, Ms. SNOWE, Mr. HELMS, Mr. MACK, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, Mrs. HUTCHISON, Mrs. BOXER, Mr. GRAMS, Mr. ROBERTS, and

Mr. LEVIN) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to continue

State Medicaid disproportionate share hospital (DSH)

allotments for fiscal year 2001 at the levels for fiscal

year 2000.

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 ‘‘Medicaid DSH Preser5 vation Act of 2000’’.
2

S 2299 IS1S

1 SEC. 2. CONTINUATION OF MEDICAID DSH ALLOTMENTS AT

2 FY FISCAL YEAR 2000 LEVELS FOR FISCAL

3 YEAR 2001.

4 Section 1923(f) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.

5 1396r–4(f)), as amended by section 601 of the Medicare,

6 Medicaid, and SCHIP Balanced Budget Refinement Act

7 of 1999, as enacted into law by section 1000(a)(6) of Pub8 lic Law 106–113 (113 Stat. 1501A–394), is amended—

9 (1) in paragraph (2)—

10 (A) in the heading, by striking ‘‘2002’’ and

11 inserting ‘‘2001’’;

12 (B) in the matter preceding the table—

13 (i) by striking ‘‘2002’’ and inserting

14 ‘‘2001’’; and

15 (ii) by inserting ‘‘(and the DSH allot16 ment for a State for fiscal year 2001 is the

17 same as the DSH allotment for the State

18 for fiscal year 2000 as determined under

19 the following table)’’ before the semicolon;

20 and

21 (C) in the table in such paragraph, by

22 striking the columns labeled ‘‘FY 01’’ and ‘‘FY

23 02’’ relating to fiscal years 2001 and 2002; and

24 (2) in paragraph (3)—

25 (A) in the heading, by striking ‘‘2003’’ and

26 inserting ‘‘2002’’; and
3

S 2299 IS1S

1 (B) in subparagraph (A), by striking

2 ‘‘2003’’ and inserting ‘‘2002’’.

Æ
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.3


                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

      We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement on
Form S-8 (File No. 333-11409), Registration Statement on Form S-8 (File No.
333-18467), Registration Statement on Form S-8 (File No. 333-49817),
Registration Statement on Form S-8 (File No. 333-66361), Registration Statement
on Form S-8 (File No. 333-66367), Amendment No. 1 to Registration Statement on
Form S-3 (File No. 333-33421) and Amendment No. 1 to Registration Statement on
Form S-3 (File No. 333-52433) of our report on National Teleservice, Inc. dated
July 28, 1997, appearing in this Form 10-K/A of IXC Communications, Inc.

                                       /s/  DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Minneapolis, Minnesota
   August 20, 1999
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7131

ANTONIO KENON,

Petitioner – Appellant,

v.

MIKE HARDEE,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, 

Chief District Judge. (5:13-hc-02245-D)

Submitted: December 16, 2014 Decided: February 3, 2015

Before SHEDD, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Antonio Kenon, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Antonio Kenon seeks to appeal the district court’s 

orders dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012)

petition and denying his motion for reconsideration. The orders 

are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a 

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012). 

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) (2012). 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 petition states a debatable 

claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. 

at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude 

that Kenon has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 

deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in 

forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 
3

presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 31.1

                                 CERTIFICATIONS

      I, Charles C. Jacobs, certify that:

      1. I have reviewed this Form 10-Q of First McMinnville Corporation;

      2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

      3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects,
the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant
as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

      4. The registrant's other certifying officer 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 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 and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of
directors:

      (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.

November 12, 2004

/s/ Charles C. Jacobs
---------------------------
Chairman and CEO
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Labor

###### Office of the Secretary

# AGENCY:

Office of the Secretary (OSEC), Department of Labor.

# ACTION:

Notice of final finding of no significant impact.

# SUMMARY:

                        Pursuant to the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations (40 CFR part 1500-08) implementing procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Department of Labor, Office of the Secretary (OSEC), in accordance with 29 CFR 11.11(d), gives final notice of the proposed construction of a small vertical axis wind turbine and solar cells at the Paul Simon Job Corps                               ( print page 27584)                            Center, and that this project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment. In accordance with 29 CFR 11.11(d) and 40 CFR 1501.4(e)(2), a preliminary Environmental Assessment was presented through a public meeting held on 5/4/2010 at the Paul Simon Job Corps Center. No comments were received regarding the Environmental Assessment (EA). OSEC has reviewed the conclusion of the EA, and agrees with the finding of no significant impact. This notice serves as the Final Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for Small Vertical Wind Turbine and Solar Installation at the Paul Simon Job Corps Center located at 3348 South Kedzie Avenue, Chicago, IL 60623. The preliminary EA are adopted in final with no change.                    

Dated: May 10, 2010.

Edna Primrose,

National Director of Job Corps.

[FR Doc. 2010-11662 Filed 5-14-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Alton Thomas Davis, Justices

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. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

September 29, 2010 

d0922 

Order 

 

September 29, 2010 

140808 

PAUL G. GREEN II, as Personal 

Representative of the Estate of PAUL 

GERALD GREEN, Deceased, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v SC: 140808 

 COA: 289588 

Berrien CC: 2004-003044-NH 

CHARLES PIERSON, M.D., BARBARA 

CARLSON, M.D., SOUTHWESTERN 

MEDICAL CLINIC, P.C., RICHARD 

KAMMENZIND, M.D., THOMAS POW, 

M.D., GREAT LAKES HEART & VASCULAR 

INSTITUTE, P.C., and LAKELAND 

MEDICAL CENTER ST. JOSEPH, 

Defendants-Appellees, 

and 

HEALTHCARE MIDWEST INTERNAL 

MEDICINE, 

Defendant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the February 9, 2010 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered. We direct the Clerk to schedule oral 

argument on whether to grant the application or take other peremptory action. MCR 

7.302(H)(1). The parties shall submit supplemental briefs within 42 days of the date of 

this order addressing whether MCL 600.2301 applies to cases initiated before the 

amendment of MCL 600.5856 in 2004 and whether the plaintiff in this case should have 

been allowed to amend his notice of intent. The parties should not submit mere 

restatements of their application papers. 

 The Michigan Association for Justice and the Michigan Defense Trial Counsel, 

Inc. are invited to file briefs amicus curiae. Other persons or groups interested in the 

determination of the issues presented in this case may move the Court for permission to 

file briefs amicus curiae.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-40680

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

SOBEC LOPEZ-URGELL,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:19-CR-163-1

Before GRAVES, DUNCAN, and ENGELHARDT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Sobec Lopez-Urgell

has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with 

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 

229 (5th Cir. 2011). Lopez-Urgell has not filed a response. We have reviewed 

counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We 

concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 25, 2020

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 19-40680 Document: 00515358804 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/25/2020
No. 19-40680

2

issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw 

is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the 

APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 19-40680 Document: 00515358804 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/25/2020
<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 Amended Annual Report of Columbia Bancorp (the
"Company") on Form 10-K/A for the year ending December 31, 2004, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Roger L. Christensen, the 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:

      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 for the period certified.

    Date:  May 6, 2005                     /s/ ROGER L. CHRISTENSEN
                                           ------------------------
                                           Roger L. Christensen
                                           President and Chief Executive Officer

                                       10
v150341_10-719 -- Converted by SECPublisher 2.1.1.8, created by BCL Technologies Inc., for SEC Filing


     

    Exhibit
10.71.6
II

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2231

To provide for the placement at the Lincoln Memorial of a plaque commemorating the speech of Martin Luther King, Jr., known as the ‘‘I Have

A Dream’’ speech.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 9, 2000

Mr. COVERDELL introduced the following bill; which was read twice and

referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

A BILL

To provide for the placement at the Lincoln Memorial of

a plaque commemorating the speech of Martin Luther

King, Jr., known as the ‘‘I Have A Dream’’ speech.

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

3 SECTION 1. PLACEMENT OF PLAQUE AT LINCOLN MEMO4 RIAL.

5 (a) PLACEMENT OF PLAQUE.—

6 (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Inte7 rior shall install on the steps of the Lincoln Memo8 rial in the District of Columbia a suitable plaque to
2

•S 2231 IS

1 commemorate the speech of Martin Luther King,

2 Jr., known as the ‘‘I Have A Dream’’ speech.

3 (2) EXACT PLACEMENT.—The plaque shall be

4 placed at the location on the steps where Martin Lu5 ther King, Jr., delivered the ‘‘I Have A Dream’’

6 speech on August 28, 1963.

7 (b) ACCEPTANCE OF CONTRIBUTIONS.—

8 (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Inte9 rior may accept contributions to help pay the cost of

10 preparing the plaque and installing the plaque on

11 the steps of the Lincoln Memorial as required by

12 subsection (a).

13 (2) FUNDS FOR PLAQUE.—Amounts under

14 paragraph (1) shall be credited to the appropriation

15 supporting the maintenance and operation of the

16 Lincoln Memorial.

Æ