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

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4912 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4912

To limit Department of Defense funds to support United States or Iraqi 
      combat activities in or around Iraq, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 19, 2014

  Mr. Nolan introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To limit Department of Defense funds to support United States or Iraqi 
      combat activities in or around Iraq, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FUNDS TO SUPPORT UNITED 
              STATES OR IRAQI COMBAT ACTIVITIES IN OR AROUND IRAQ.

    (a) Limitation.--
            (1) In general.--None of the funds made available to the 
        Department of Defense may be obligated or expended after the 
        date of the enactment of this Act to support, directly or 
        indirectly, any United States or Iraqi combat activities in or 
        around Iraq.
            (2) Exception.--Funds made available to the Department of 
        Defense may be made available until 90 days after the date of 
        the enactment of this Act to protect the safety and or evacuate 
        United States nationals, including military, diplomatic, and 
        contractor personnel.
    (b) Combat Activities Defined.--For purposes of subsection (a), the 
term ``combat activities'' includes the use of United States military 
personnel or equipment in direct physical conflict, or in combat 
supporting roles, including trainers or advisors.
    (c) Rule of Construction Relating to Asylum.--Nothing in this 
section shall be construed to preclude the President from arranging 
asylum or other means of protection for Iraqi nationals who may be 
physically endangered because of associations with the Government of 
the United States.
    (d) Rule of Construction Relating to Intelligence Activities.--
Nothing in this section shall be construed to preclude the President 
from conducting such intelligence activities as may be necessary to 
protect the interests of the United States.
    (e) Rule of Construction Relating to Humanitarian Assistance.--
Nothing in this section shall be construed to preclude the President 
from providing humanitarian assistance with respect to Iraq.
                                 <all>
```
1259836.1

EXHIBIT A

TO WITHDRAWAL OF

503(b)(9) PROOF OF CLAIM

In re PG&E CORPORATION and PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY,

Debtors and Debtors-in-Possession

Case No. 19-30088-DM/19-30089-DM

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2413-1 Filed: 06/05/19 Entered: 06/05/19 17:19:07 Page 1

of 7
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2413-1 Filed: 06/05/19 Entered: 06/05/19 17:19:07 Page 2

of 7
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2413-1 Filed: 06/05/19 Entered: 06/05/19 17:19:07 Page 3

of 7
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2413-1 Filed: 06/05/19 Entered: 06/05/19 17:19:07 Page 4

of 7
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2413-1 Filed: 06/05/19 Entered: 06/05/19 17:19:07 Page 5

of 7
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2413-1 Filed: 06/05/19 Entered: 06/05/19 17:19:07 Page 6

of 7
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2413-1 Filed: 06/05/19 Entered: 06/05/19 17:19:07 Page 7

of 7
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 1969 Filed: 05/10/19 Entered: 05/10/19 10:14:48 Page 1 of

2
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 1969 Filed: 05/10/19 Entered: 05/10/19 10:14:48 Page 2 of

2
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2650 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2650

 To suspend temporarily the duty on machines, and their parts, for use 
         in the manufacture of digital versatile discs (DVDs).

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 25, 2000

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To suspend temporarily the duty on machines, and their parts, for use 
         in the manufacture of digital versatile discs (DVDs).

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

SECTION 1. TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF DUTY.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

      

``    9902.84.07    Laser Encoder     Free              No change         No change         On or before 12/
                     Machines,                                                               31/03            ''
                     whether                                                                                   .
                     imported as an
                     entirety, or in
                     components, or
                     parts thereof,
                     for use in the
                     manufacture of
                     digital
                     versatile discs
                     (DVDs)
                     (provided for
                     in subheading
                     8479.89.97)....

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### EDWIN GILL, Commissioner of Revenue of the STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, v. F. D. SMITH, Alias GEORGE SMITH and Wife, MRS. F. D. SMITH, J. B. WEBSTER, JR., and Wife, HELEN S. WEBSTER, and HUGER S. KING, Trustee.

(Filed 13 December, 1950.)

Appeal and Error § 2—

Tbe trial court overruled demurrer and, in tbe exercise of its discretion, allowed plaintiff time to amend tbe complaint. Defendants excepted and appealed. *HelcL:*Tbe exception is, in effect, to tbe refusal to dismiss the action, from which no appeal lies, and tbe appeal will be dismissed as premature.

Appeal by defendant from *Bennett, Special Judge,*March Term, 1950, Guilford.

*87Civil action to have defendant Smith declared the true owner of certain property, title to which is in the name of defendant J. B. "Webster, Jr., and to have same sold under execution to satisfy tax certificate judgment, heard on demurrer.

The defendants demurred to the complaint for that it fails to state a cause of action. The demurrer particularizes the alleged defects in the complaint. The court overruled the demurrer and, in the exercise of its discretion, allowed plaintiffs twenty days in which to file an amended complaint. Defendants excepted to that part of the judgment which allows plaintiff to amend and appealed.

*Attorney-General McMullan, Assistant Attomeys-General Tuclcer and Abbott, and T. G. Hoyle, Jr., and George G. Hampton, Jr., for plaintiff, appellee.*

*Hughes & Hines and Welch Jordan for defendant appellants.*

Per Curiam.

The order allowing time to amend had the effect of retaining the cause on the docket. So then, the taproot of defendants’ exception is the refusal to dismiss the action. But no appeal lies from a refusal to dismiss. *Johnson v. Insurance Co.,*215 N.C. 120, 1 S.E. 2d 381. The order entered was interlocutory and discretionary. G.S. 1-131, 162. That there was no motion to be allowed to amend, if such be required, is not made to appear. *Teague v. Oil Co.,*232 N.C. 469. Appeal therefrom was premature, *Johnson v. Insurance Co., supra; Utilities Com. v. R. R.,*223 N.C. 840, 28 S.E. 2d 490; *Privette v. Privette,*230 N.C. 52, 51 S.E. 2d 925, and will be dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4921 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4921

   To provide for the revision of certification requirements for the 
 labeling of certain electronic products under the Energy Star program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 19, 2014

 Mr. Womack (for himself, Mr. Kinzinger of Illinois, and Mr. Matheson) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                          Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To provide for the revision of certification requirements for the 
 labeling of certain electronic products under the Energy Star program.

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

SECTION 1. THIRD-PARTY CERTIFICATION UNDER ENERGY STAR PROGRAM.

    Section 324A of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 
6294a) is amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(e) Third-Party Certification.--
            ``(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), not later than 
        180 days after the date of enactment of this subsection, the 
        Administrator shall revise the certification requirements for 
        the labeling of consumer, home, and office electronic products 
        for program partners that have complied with all requirements 
        of the Energy Star program for a period of at least 18 months.
            ``(2) Administration.--In the case of a program partner 
        described in paragraph (1), the new requirements under 
        paragraph (1)--
                    ``(A) shall not require third-party certification 
                for a product to be listed; but
                    ``(B) may require that test data and other product 
                information be submitted to facilitate product listing 
                and performance verification for a sample of products.
            ``(3) Third parties.--Nothing in this subsection prevents 
        the Administrator from using third parties in the course of the 
        administration of the Energy Star program.
            ``(4) Termination.--
                    ``(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), an 
                exemption from third-party certification provided to a 
                program partner under paragraph (1) shall terminate if 
                the program partner is found to have violated program 
                requirements with respect to at least 2 separate models 
                during a 2-year period.
                    ``(B) Resumption.--A termination for a program 
                partner under subparagraph (A) shall cease if the 
                program partner complies with all Energy Star program 
                requirements for a period of at least 3 years.''.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1


                                  CERTIFICATION
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
              (CHAPTER 63, TITLE 18 U.S.C. Section 1350(A) AND (B))


     Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Chapter 63,
Title 18 U.S.C.  Section  1350(a) and (b)), each of the undersigned hereby
individually certifies in his capacity as an officer of Metaldyne Corporation
(the "Company") that the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the
period ended March 30, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained
in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company at the end of and for the
periods covered by  such Report.

Date: May 7, 2003                               /s/ Timothy D. Leuliette
                                                ------------------------
                                                Timothy D. Leuliette
                                                Chief Executive Officer

     The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Chapter 63, Title 18 U.S.C.  Section
1350(a) and (b)), is not a part of the Form 10-Q to which it refers and is, to
the extent permitted by law, provided by each of the above signatories to the
extent of his respective knowledge.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-7560

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

versus

JOSEPH NATHANIEL BROWN, JR., a/k/a Joe Jr.,

Defendant - Appellant,

versus

CHARLES DAVID WHALEY,

Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge.

(CR-93-151)

Submitted: January 11, 1996 Decided: January 24, 1996

Before RUSSELL, HALL, and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joseph Nathaniel Brown, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Charles David

Whaley, MORCHOWER, LUXTON & WHALEY, Richmond, Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2
3

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his

request for monetary sanctions from his attorney if his attorney

failed to comply with a court order by a certain date. We have

reviewed the record and the district court's opinion, and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the

district court. United States v. Brown, No. CR-93-151 (E.D. Va.

Aug. 29, 1995). We dispense with oral argument because the facts

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 1of 29

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 2of 29

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 3of 29

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 4of 29

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 5of 29

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 6of 29

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 7of 29

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 8of 29

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 9of 29

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 10of 29

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 11of 29

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 12of 29

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 13of 29

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 14of 29

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 15of 29

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 16of 29

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 17of 29

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 18of 29

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 19of 29

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 20of 29

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 21of 29

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 22of 29

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 23of 29

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 24of 29

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 25of 29

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 26of 29

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 27of 29

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 28of 29

Case: 19-30088    Doc# 1369-3    Filed: 04/12/19    Entered: 04/12/19 16:09:58    Page 29of 29

- Notice of Perfection
#### Abram Travis, Appellant, v. Robert Post, Respondent.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.

Pratt, J.:

This action was brought, apparently, and tried under those provisions of the Code relating to actions to compel the determination of claims to real estate. The parties own adjoining farms and the only claim litigated was as to the precise line on which the division fence ought to be located. The defendant denied that he made any unjust claim to any of the plaintiff’s farm, and that was the issue submitted to the jury as was proper in this form of action. It seems the plaintiff had put up a fence and that the defendant took it down, claiming it encroached upon his land. Trespass would have been a better form of action, but the case having been tried under another form it must be determined as it is presented at the present time. The complaint did not describe the property which was said to be claimed by the defendant as prescribed in this form of action (Code, § 1511), but it really alleged acts of trespass. The case was submitted to the jury, as I have before stated, under a charge which was not excepted to, and the verdict must stand unless it appears that some error was committed upon the trial. The deeds of both parties coincided in their descriptions, but two surveyors, one on each side, disagreed as to a proper location of the lines according to the courses and distances stated in the deeds, and the jury had to grope their way through the fog of expert testimony. The plaintiff insists that the verdict is against the undisputed facts. This claim cannot avail him, as the defendant testified that he made no claim except that the fence was not located on the right line, and until the plaintiff established the fact that it was not located over upon the defendant’s land it could not be said that defendant claimed any of the land of the plaintiff. The plaintiff makes no points m his brief upon any exception taken upon the trial, and I assume they are abandoned. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Brown, P. J., concurred; Dykman, J., not sitting.
Project Category and Professional Hours

For the Period April 1, 2019 through April 30, 2019

Exhibit B

Position

PG&E Corporation, et al. (Case No. 19-30088 (DM))

PwC LLP - Management, Tax and Advisory Consultants to the Debtors

Total 

Compensation

Fixed Fee Services - Summary of Hours and Fees by Project and Professional 

Claims Services Retention Exhibit #: 01-B

Emily Flinn Kent Partner 3.50

Kristin A Cheek Manager 3.00

William M Colton Manager 38.10

Ilyssa Morgan Zibelli Senior Associate 19.00

Matthew Earl Senior Associate 5.70

Subtotal - Claims Services 69.30 $6,833.00

Internal Audit Assessment Services Retention Exhibit #: 01-F

Zachary Alfred Pucheu Director 10.00

Christine Lui Manager 5.00

Subtotal - Internal Audit Assessment Services 15.00 $21,600.00

Compliance Services Retention Exhibit #: 01-H

Kristin D Rivera Partner 1.30

Tania Fabiani Partner 4.00

Meera Banerjee Director 21.50

Keith J Lucken Manager 15.20

Sumana Lahiry Manager 16.50

Yuliya Foerster Manager 6.50

Praveen Kumar Senior Associate 2.00

Cara Angela Rosengard Associate 44.00

Kailey Sanchez Associate 28.80

Wei Ping Wen Associate 1.80

Subtotal - Compliance Services 141.60 $0.00

Controls Testing Services Retention Exhibit #: 01-I

Lorraine C Wilson Senior Managing Director 8.00

Sarah Thompson Best Director 16.00

Steven Manocchio Director 40.00

Friday, June 28, 2019

Page 1 of 2

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2805-2 Filed: 07/01/19 Entered: 07/01/19 13:58:28 Page 1

of 2
Project Category and Professional Hours

For the Period April 1, 2019 through April 30, 2019

Exhibit B

Position

PG&E Corporation, et al. (Case No. 19-30088 (DM))

PwC LLP - Management, Tax and Advisory Consultants to the Debtors

Total 

Compensation

Fixed Fee Services - Summary of Hours and Fees by Project and Professional 

Christine Lui Manager 212.00

Andrew Joseph Rivera Senior Associate 9.00

Brian Wan Associate 192.50

Melvin Wong Associate 162.50

Niki Keramat Associate 239.00

Subtotal - Controls Testing Services 879.00 $136,250.00

Total - Hours and Compensation - Fixed Fee Services 1,104.90 $164,683.00

Friday, June 28, 2019

Page 2 of 2

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2805-2 Filed: 07/01/19 Entered: 07/01/19 13:58:28 Page 2

of 2
Exhibit
32.1





CERTIFICATIONS
OF THE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002







In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Nutrition 21, Inc., a New York
corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31,
2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”),
Michael A. Zeher, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, does hereby certify,
pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350), that to
his 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.




/s/    
      Michael A. ZeherMichael
      A. Zeher
                        President
      and Chief Executive
Officer


February
12, 2010




A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Nutrition 21, Inc. and will be retained by Nutrition 21, Inc. and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.