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

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3461 Placed on Calendar Senate (PCS)]

<DOC>

                                                       Calendar No. 241
117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3461

To provide that the rule submitted by the Department of Labor relating 
 to ``COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing; Emergency Temporary Standard'' 
         shall have no force or effect, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 10, 2022

 Mr. Braun introduced the following bill; which was read the first time

                            January 18, 2022

            Read the second time and placed on the calendar

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide that the rule submitted by the Department of Labor relating 
 to ``COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing; Emergency Temporary Standard'' 
         shall have no force or effect, 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. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Prohibiting Private Sector Vaccine 
Mandates Act of 2022''.

SEC. 2. OSHA COVID-19 VACCINATION MANDATE.

    No funds appropriated, or otherwise made available, may be used to 
implement, finalize, or otherwise carry out the rule submitted by the 
Department of Labor relating to ``COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing; 
Emergency Temporary Standard'' (86 Fed. Reg. 61402 (November 5, 2021)), 
and such rule shall have no force or effect.
                                                       Calendar No. 241

117th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                                S. 3461

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

To provide that the rule submitted by the Department of Labor relating 
 to ``COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing; Emergency Temporary Standard'' 
         shall have no force or effect, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                            January 18, 2022

            Read the second time and placed on the calendar
```
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.01

                         Consent of Independent Auditors

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
Form S-8 (Nos. 333-20057, 333-20073, 333-31398, 333-76096, 333-76654, 333-85518,
333-106270 and 333-106271) of Education Management Corporation and Subsidiaries
of our report dated August 1, 2003, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements and schedule of Education Management Corporation and Subsidiaries
included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2003.

                                                 /s/  ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
September 26, 2003
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-3214

DUREMEA ANN BUGGS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; THE AMERICAN RED

CROSS; SAINT ELIZABETH'S HOSPITAL; GWENDOLYN

L. BUGGS; DEBORAH E. ROBERTSON; JAMES LOVETT;

ANNE B. SALISBURY,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, District

Judge. (CA-95-766-5-BR)

Submitted: May 16, 1996 Decided: May 28, 1996

Before RUSSELL, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Duremea Ann Buggs, Appellant Pro Se. Phillip J. Anthony, PATTERSON, DILTHEY, CLAY & BRYSON, Raleigh, North Carolina; Virginia Anne

Gibbons, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's orders dismissing

her civil complaint as frivolous, denying her motion for reconsideration, and denying her motion to vacate. We have reviewed the

record and the district court's opinions and find no abuse of

discretion and no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the

reasoning of the district court. Buggs v. United States, No. CA-95-

766-5-BR (E.D.N.C. Oct. 18, 1995; Nov. 7, 1995; and Dec. 26, 1995).

We also deny Appellant's motions for correction of the record on

appeal. 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
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas October 13, 2022 No. 04-22-00310-CR Julio C. RIVERON , Appellant
v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 227th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2021CR2932 Honorable Kevin M. O'Connell, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R Appellant’s brief was originally due to be filed on August 25, 2022, and after we granted two motions for extension of time, the deadline was extended to October 11, 2022. However, to date, the brief has not been filed. Appellant’s attorney is ORDERED to respond to this court in writing by October 18, 2022 . The response should state a reasonable explanation for failing to timely file the brief and demonstrate the steps being taken to remedy the deficiency. If appellant’s attorney fails to file an adequate response by October 18, 2022, this appeal will be abated to the trial court for an abandonment hearing, and the trial court will be asked to consider whether sanctions are appropriate. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 38.8(b)(2).

_________________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 13th day of October, 2022.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
| Skip to contentSocial Security Online | Benefit Calculators |
|---------------------------------------|---------------------|

| www.socialsecurity.gov |  | **Search**  |
|------------------------|--|------------------|

| Office of the Chief Actuary | Social Security Quick Calculator |
|-----------------------------|----------------------------------|
Exhibit 99.1
 
  
  SUBJECT:
    
    Evaluation of Oil and Gas ReservesTo the Interests of Belden & Blake CorporationIn Certain Properties Located in
Various StatesPursuant to the Requirements of theSecurities and Exchange CommissionEffective January 1, 2010 Job 09.1136
  Total
    
    
    Total
    
    
    TotalProved Developed
    
    
    Proved
    
    
    Proved
    
    
    Proved
    
    
    TotalBelden & Blake Corporation
    
    Producing
    
    
    Nonproducing
    
    
    Developed
    
    
    Undeveloped
    
    
    (PDP, PDNP
    
    
    UnprovedSEC Parameters
    
    (PDP)
    
    
    (PDNP)
    
    
    (PDP & PDNP)
    
    
    (PUD)
    
    

& PUD)
    
    
    (Probable)Net Reserves to the
Evaluated InterestsOil, MbbI:
    
    
    3,396.259
    
    
    
    41.342
    
    
    
    3,437.601
    
    
    
    1,010.544
    
    
    
    4,448.145
    
    
    
    29.691Gas, MMcf:
    
    
    147,074.375
    
    
    
    4,920.931
    
    
    
    151,995.266
    
    
    
    10,980.055
    
    
    
    162,975.328
    
    
    
    93.357Gas Equivalent, MMcfe
(6 Mcf = 1 bbl)
    
    
    167,451.929
    
    
    
    5,198.983
    
    
    
    172,620.872
    
    
    
    17,043.319
    
    
    
    189,664.198
    
    
    
    271.503Cash Flow (BTAX), M$Undiscounted:
    
    
    471,773.938
    
    
    
    13,887.985
    
    
    
    485,661.906
    
    
    
    37,490.254
    
    
    
    523,152.250
    
    
    
    1,139.071Discounted at 10% Per
Annum:
    
    
    215,201.141
    
    
    
    4,031.734
    
    
    
    219,232.797
    
    
    
    8,266.571
    
    
    
    227,499.391
    
    
    
    540.986
 It should be noted that some minor differences between the total summaries may exist due to rounding
techniques in the ARIES software program.
 




---



##### 



12-month




---



##### 








---



##### 



Very truly yours,
Wright & Company, Inc.By:
    /s/ D. Randall WrightD. Randall WrightPresident
#### B. T. POLLOCK v. CARRIE KINSEY, CARRIE KINSEY, Administratrix of GUY T. KINSEY, and CARRIE KINSEY, Guardian of Children of GUY T. KINSEY.

(Filed 30 September, 1925.)

Appeal by Carrie Kinsey, from *Barnhill, J.,*and a jury, April Term, 1925, of JoNes. No error.

The issues submitted to the jury and their answers thereto were as follows:

“1. Did the plaintiff furnish merchandise to S. E. Garner and J. E. Lovitt during the year 1920, at the request and upon the promise of the defendant to pay therefor? Answer: Yes.

“2. If so, in what amount, if any,- is the defendant indebted to the plaintiff? Answer: $1,313.26, with interest from 1 January, 1921.”

*857Tbe court below rendered judgment for plaintiff against Carrie Kinsey, exceptions and assignments of error were duly made by defendant, Carrie Kinsey, to tbe exclusion of certain evidence during tbe trial, tbe charge of tbe court and judgment, and sbe appealed to tbe Supreme Court.

*J. K. Warren and Cowper, Whitaleer & Allen for plaintiff.*

*Rouse & Rouse for defendant.-*

Per Cueiam.

¥e beard tbe oral arguments and read tbe record and

-tbe carefully prepared briefs of counsel. We tbink tbat tbe court below made no error in excluding tbe evidence, and tbe charge of tbe court below was in accordance with law. From tbe entire record we can find no prejudicial or reversible error. We tbink tbe case governed by tbe principle laid down in *Taylor v. Lee,*187 N. C., p. 393, and cases cited.

No error.
**EXHIBIT32.2**

 

**Certification by the Chief Financial Officer Pursuantto**

**18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

Inconnection with the quarterly report of Northwest Airlines Corporation (the “Company”)on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2008 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, DavidM. Davis, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

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

 

(2) Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

Date:July 30, 2008

 
| /s/  David M. Davis           |   |
|-------------------------------|--------|
| David  M. Davis               |
| Executive  Vice President and |
| Chief  Financial Officer      |

 

Thiscertification accompanies this Report on Form 10-Q pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent requiredby such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”).  Such certification will not be deemed to beincorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, asamended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Companyspecifically incorporates it by reference.

 

1

----
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3409 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 3409

     To amend the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer 
 Protection Act to require the appropriate Federal banking agencies to 
 develop a Community Bank Leverage Ratio that is between 8 percent and 
  8.5 percent for calendar years 2022, 2023, and 2024, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           December 15, 2021

 Mr. Moran (for himself and Mr. Tester) introduced the following bill; 
which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, 
                           and Urban Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To amend the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer 
 Protection Act to require the appropriate Federal banking agencies to 
 develop a Community Bank Leverage Ratio that is between 8 percent and 
  8.5 percent for calendar years 2022, 2023, and 2024, 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. COMMUNITY BANK LEVERAGE RATIO.

    Section 201 of the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer 
Protection Act (12 U.S.C. 5371 note) is amended by striking subsection 
(b) and inserting the following:
    ``(b) Community Bank Leverage Ratio.--
            ``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the 
        appropriate Federal banking agencies shall, through notice and 
        comment rule making under section 553 of title 5, United States 
        Code--
                    ``(A) develop a Community Bank Leverage Ratio of 
                not less than 8 percent and not more than 10 percent 
                for qualifying community banks; and
                    ``(B) establish procedures for treatment of a 
                qualifying community bank that has a Community Bank 
                Leverage Ratio that falls below the percentage 
                developed under subparagraph (A) after exceeding the 
                percentage developed under subparagraph (A).
            ``(2) Calendar years 2022, 2023, and 2024.--The appropriate 
        Federal banking agencies shall, through notice and comment rule 
        making under section 553 of title 5, United States Code develop 
        a Community Bank Leverage Ratio to apply during the period 
        beginning on January 1, 2022, and ending on December 31, 2024, 
        that is not less than 8 percent and not more than 8.5 percent 
        for qualifying community banks.''.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATIONS**I, Mark N. Schwartz, certify that:1. I have reviewed this Form 10-QSB of Hypertension Diagnostics, Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded 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 periodspresented in this report;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining 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 disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial 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 hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likelyto adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.   Date: November 14, 2005       /s/ Mark N. Schwartz     Mark N. Schwartz
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT 

________________________

 No. 12-10163

Non-Argument Calendar 

________________________

 D.C. Docket No. 1:10-cr-20425-MGC-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JOSE L. CAZAS,

llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllDefendant-Appellant.

________________________

 Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Florida

 ________________________

(September 25, 2012)

Before CARNES, PRYOR and BLACK, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:

Case: 12-10163 Date Filed: 09/25/2012 Page: 1 of 3 
Jose Cazas appeals the district court’s denial of his pro se “motion for

reconsideration of restitution pursuant to Rule 60(b),” which followed his

conviction and sentence for conspiracy to commit wire fraud, in violation of 18

U.S.C. §§ 1343, 1349. Cazas contends that the district court erred in failing to

construe his Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) (Rule 60(b)) motion as a

motion under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act (MVRA). 

The district court did not err in denying Cazas’s motion on the basis of a lack of

subject matter jurisdiction, given that Rule 60(b) provides no relief in criminal

proceedings. See United States v. Mosavi, 138 F.3d 1365, 1366 (11th Cir. 1998). 

Moreover, Cazas’s contention that the district court erred in failing to construe his

motion as one brought under the MVRA is without merit because, even liberally

construed, Cazas’s motion did not state grounds for relief under the MVRA. 

Specifically, Cazas’s motion did not make any argument regarding changed

economic circumstances that affected his ability to pay. See 18 U.S.C. § 3664(k);

Cani v. United States, 331 F.3d 1210, 1215 (11th Cir. 2003). Furthermore, to the

extent Cazas was attempting to challenge the district court’s calculation of

restitution, his motion did not raise any exceptional circumstances that would

excuse his failure to challenge the calculation on direct appeal or to raise the

arguments advanced by his motion at his restitution hearing. See Cani, 331 F.3d

2

Case: 12-10163 Date Filed: 09/25/2012 Page: 2 of 3 
at 1215. Thus, we affirm the decision of the district court. 

AFFIRMED.

3

Case: 12-10163 Date Filed: 09/25/2012 Page: 3 of 3
#### Matter of Last Will of Eva J. Banks.

Decree of surrogate affirmed, with costs.

Opinion by

Barnard, P. J.
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 99-11184

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ROSENDO NAVA,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:97-CR-306-ALL-G

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

June 14, 2000

Before JOLLY, DAVIS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

 The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Rosendo

Nava has moved to withdraw and filed a brief as required by

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Although he was

informed of counsel’s motion, Nava has not filed a response. Our

independent review of the brief and the record discloses no

nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is

GRANTED. Counsel is excused from further responsibilities

herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
EXHIBIT 31.2SECTION 302 CERTIFICATIONSenior Vice President and Chief Financial OfficerI, Paula J. Meiler, certify that: 1 I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of CSB Bancorp, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded 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 periodspresented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining 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 disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this annual report is being prepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarterthat has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.Date: March 5, 2008                                                                              /s/ Paula J. Meiler   Paula J. Meiler   Senior Vice President andChief Financial Officer