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

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5179 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

<DOC>
118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5179

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 19, 2024

     Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
   To require the maintenance of the country of origin markings for 
    imported goods produced in the West Bank or Gaza, 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 ``Anti-BDS Labeling Act''.

SEC. 2. CONTINUATION IN EFFECT OF COUNTRY OF ORIGIN MARKING POLICY FOR 
              IMPORTED GOODS PRODUCED IN THE WEST BANK OR GAZA.

    The policy of the Government of the United States with respect to 
country of origin marking of imported goods produced in the West Bank 
or Gaza, notice of which was published by U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection in the Federal Register on December 23, 2020 (85 Fed. Reg. 
83984), shall remain in effect until repealed by an Act of Congress.

SEC. 3. PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS TO RESCIND OR CHANGE THE COUNTRY OF 
              ORIGIN MARKING POLICY FOR IMPORTED GOODS PRODUCED IN THE 
              WEST BANK OR GAZA.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, none of the funds 
authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available for the 
Department of State or U.S. Customs and Border Protection on or after 
the date of the enactment of this Act may be obligated or expended to 
prepare or promulgate any policy; guidance; regulation; notice; or 
Executive order or to otherwise implement, administer, or enforce any 
policy that rescinds or changes the policy of the Government of the 
United States with respect to country of origin marking of imported 
goods produced in the West Bank or Gaza, notice of which was published 
by U.S. Customs and Border Protection in the Federal Register on 
December 23, 2020 (85 Fed. Reg. 83984).

            Passed the House of Representatives September 18, 2024.

            Attest:

                                             KEVIN F. MCCUMBER,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15

- 40630 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
FRANCIS DAVID SALCIE

- DE LOS SANTOS , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 2:14

- CR

- 884

- 1

Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
Francis David Salcie

- De Los Santos appeals the 18

- month sentence he received following his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry. His sole argument, raised f or the first time on appeal, is that the district court erred in assessing an eight

- level increase under U. S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C) based on his prior convic tions for aggravated felonies. Because Salcie did not raise this argument below, review is for plain error only. See United States v. Peltier ,

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED March 3, 2016 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 15-40630 Document: 00513405312 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/03/2016No. 15

- 40630

2 505 F.3d 389, 391 (5th Cir. 2007). To demonstrate plain error , Salcie must
show a clear or obvious error that affects his substantial rights; even if he makes this showing, this court has the discretion to correct the error but only if it seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial

pr oceedings

. P uckett v. United States , 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009). Salcie has failed to satisfy this burden. See id ; United States v. Trejo , 610 F.3d 308, 319 (5th Cir. 2010) ; see also 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a), 841(b)(1)(C); U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2, comment. (n.3(A)); United States v. Arces

- Ve nes v. Mukasey , 512 F.3d 167, 171 (5th Cir. 2007). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. Case: 15-40630 Document: 00513405312 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/03/2016
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

December 28, 2018

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-7620

Global Trade Works, LLC:

I am pleased to notify you that the United States Trade Representative has determined to 

grant the above-referenced exclusion request submitted pursuant to the notice published at 83 FR 

32181 (‘July 11 notice’). The exclusion determination is set out in a formal notice which has 

been submitted to Office of the Federal Register for publication (‘the exclusion notice’). A prepublication version of the exclusion notice has been posted on the USTR website, at 

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/12.21.18_Notice_of_Product_E

xclusions.pdf.

The scope of the exclusion is governed by the formal HTSUS language in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice, and not by the product descriptions set out in any particular request 

for exclusion. An exclusion in response to your request has been granted by excluding from the 

additional tariffs the 10-digit HTSUS subheading under which your request was filed. 

In accordance with the July 11 notice, the exclusion applies as of the July 6, 2018 

effective date of the tariff action, and will extend for one year after the exclusion notice is 

published in the Federal Register. As stated in the exclusion notice, U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection will issue additional instructions on entry guidance and implementation.

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel
EXHIBIT 3.2



ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT

TO THE

ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION

OF

FIRST STATE BANCORPORATION

Pursuant to the
provisions of Section 53-13-4 of the New Mexico Business Corporation Act (Chapter 53, Articles 11 through 18 NMSA 1978), FIRST STATE BANCORPORATION hereby adopts the following Articles of Amendment to its Articles of Incorporation:

ARTICLE I.

The name of the corporation
is FIRST STATE BANCORPORATION (the Company).

ARTICLE II.

The following amendment to the Companys articles of incorporation was adopted by the shareholders of the Company on June 6, 1997, in the
manner prescribed by the New Mexico Business Corporation Act:

Article 4

Section 4.1 Authorized Shares. The total number of shares that the corporation shall have authority to issue is twenty-one million
(21,000,000) shares, of which twenty million (20,000,000) shares shall be common stock, no par value and one million (1,000,000) shares shall be preferred shares as determined pursuant to Section 4.3 hereof.

ARTICLE III

The number of shares of the
Companys common stock outstanding on June 6, 1997, was 2,553,380 and the number of shares entitled to vote on the amendment was 2,553,380. No shares of any class were entitled to vote as a class.

ARTICLE IV.

The number of shares voted for
the amendment was 2,070,783. The number of shares voted against the amendment was 26,894.

DATED: October 2, 1997



FIRST STATE BANCORPORATIONBy:

/s/ Michael StanfordMichael Stanford, PresidentBy:

/s/ H. Patrick DeeH. Patrick Dee, Secretary




---

Under the penalty of perjury, the undersigned declares that the foregoing document executed by the
corporations and that the statements contained therein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge.



/s/ Michael StanfordMichael Stanford
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

May 29, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number USTR-2018-0025-7392

Nissan North America, Inc:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20.

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request concerns a product strategically important or related to 

“Made in China 2025” or other Chinese industrial programs.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

December 28, 2018

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-6216

Yanfeng US Automotive Interior Systems I LLC:

I am pleased to notify you that the United States Trade Representative has determined to 

grant the above-referenced exclusion request submitted pursuant to the notice published at 83 FR 

32181 (‘July 11 notice’). The exclusion determination is set out in a formal notice which has 

been submitted to Office of the Federal Register for publication (‘the exclusion notice’). A prepublication version of the exclusion notice has been posted on the USTR website, at 

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/12.21.18_Notice_of_Product_E

xclusions.pdf.

The scope of the exclusion is governed by the formal HTSUS language in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice, and not by the product descriptions set out in any particular request 

for exclusion. An exclusion in response to your request has been granted by excluding from the 

additional tariffs the 10-digit HTSUS subheading under which your request was filed. 

In accordance with the July 11 notice, the exclusion applies as of the July 6, 2018 

effective date of the tariff action, and will extend for one year after the exclusion notice is 

published in the Federal Register. As stated in the exclusion notice, U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection will issue additional instructions on entry guidance and implementation.

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

September 17, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number USTR-2018-0025-2218

Puronics, Inc: 

I am pleased to notify you that the United States Trade Representative has determined to 

grant the above-referenced exclusion request submitted pursuant to the notice published at 83 FR 

32181 (‘July 11 notice’). The exclusion determination is set out in a formal notice which has 

been submitted to Office of the Federal Register for publication (‘the exclusion notice’). A prepublication version of the exclusion notice has been posted on the USTR website, at 

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/%2434_Billion_Exclusions_Gr

anted_September.pdf. 

The scope of the exclusion is governed by the formal HTSUS language in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice, and not by the product descriptions set out in any particular request 

for exclusion. An exclusion in response to your request has been granted by excluding from the 

additional tariffs products covered by a specially drafted description contained in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice. 

In accordance with the July 11 notice, the exclusion applies as of the July 6, 2018 

effective date of the tariff action, and will extend for one year after the exclusion notice is 

published in the Federal Register. As stated in the exclusion notice, U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection will issue additional instructions on entry guidance and implementation

Sincerely,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A15D0261. RUTH FALLS-MILLER v. SAVANNAH-CHATHAM COUNTY

BOARD OF EDUCATION.

In this administrative appeal, Ruth Falls-Miller seeks discretionary review of

the superior court’s order affirming the agency’s decision. The superior court’s order

was entered on August 15, 2014, and Falls-Miller filed her application on February 7,

2015.

1

 We lack jurisdiction because the application is untimely.

An application for discretionary appeal must be filed within 30 days of the

entry of the order or judgment to be appealed. See OCGA § 5-6-35 (d). The

requirements of OCGA § 5-6-35 are jurisdictional, and this Court cannot accept an

application for appeal not made in compliance therewith. See Boyle v. State, 190 Ga.

App. 734 (380 SE2d 57) (1989). Here, Falls-Miller filed her application 176 days

after entry of the order she seeks to appeal. Therefore, her application is untimely,

and it is hereby DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

1 Falls-Miller previously filed a direct appeal from the superior court’s order,

which we dismissed because she failed to follow the discretionary appeals procedure. 

See Case No. A15A0901 (dismissed on January 21, 2015).

March 03, 2015
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

03/03/2015
exv10w2






Exhibit 10.2



May 6, 2010




Mr. James A. Milton

2508 Beacon Crest Drive

Plano, Texas 75093



Re: Amendment to Employment Offer Letter dated April 21, 2009



Dear Jim:



This letter is delivered in connection with your employment offer letter dated April 21, 2009 (the
“Offer Letter”) from SoundBite Communications, Inc. (“SoundBite”).



The sixth paragraph of the Offer Letter provides that SoundBite will pay, or reimburse you for, up
to $3,000 per month for documented rental expenses you incur for lodging in the Bedford area. In
order to clarify the parties’ intentions and simplify the application of this provision, the sixth
paragraph of the Offer Letter is hereby amended and restated as follows:





“SoundBite will pay you a total of $3,000 per month in light of the lodging and other
expenses you will incur as the result of your working in the Bedford area. This monthly
amount shall be payable regardless of the actual amount you incur for such expenses. The
$3,000 payable with respect to a given month shall be paid contemporaneously with the first
payment of your base salary in that month. In the event you decide (in your discretion) to
move to Massachusetts, SoundBite’s obligations under this paragraph will terminate effective
upon the date of your relocation.”


The foregoing amendment shall be effective retroactively to May 1, 2009. Any “catch-up” payments
due as the result of the amendment shall be paid to you by SoundBite no later than May 31, 2010.



If you agree with the foregoing terms as described above, please sign, date and return to me an
executed copy of this letter.



Sincerely,




	 	 	 	 	 
	SoundBite Communications, Inc.


 	 
	By:  	/s/ Robert C. Leahy
 	 
	 	Chief Operating Officer 	 
	 	and Chief Financial Officer 	 
	 
	 	Understood and Accepted:


 	 
	/s/ James A. Milton 	Dated:  May 6, 2010 
	James A. Milton
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

February 19, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-7540

BYD Motors, Inc:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20.

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request concerns a product strategically important or related to 

‘‘Made in China 2025’’ or other Chinese industrial programs.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel
**Exhibit
      32.1**




**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**




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




**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350**




In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Universal Capital Management, Inc.
      (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending October 31, 2005 as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
      I, Michael D. Queen, President of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section
      906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to my
      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 result of operations of the Company.









/s/
      Michael D. Queen


Michael
      D. Queen


President
      (Principal Executive Officer)


December
      15, 2005










The
      foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of
      the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and shall not be deemed
      filed
      by the Company for the purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act
      of
      1934 (the “Exchange Act”) or otherwise subject to liability under that Section.
      This certification shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into
      any
      filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Exchange Act except to the extent
      that this certification is expressly incorporated by reference into any such
      filing.
**Exhibit
      32.2**


**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 Quarterly Report of Jayhawk Energy, Inc. a Colorado
      corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2007,
      as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
      "Report"), Joseph B. Young, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certifies
      to
      the best of his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted
      pursuant to § 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.





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





/s/
        Joseph B. Young


Joseph
      B.
      Young


Chief
      Financial Officer


August
      13, 2007
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5178 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 5178

To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to investigate and remove 
   aliens providing false information about drug-related grounds of 
                            inadmissibility.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             August 8, 2023

  Mr. Steube introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to investigate and remove 
   aliens providing false information about drug-related grounds of 
                            inadmissibility.

    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 ``Substance and Possession Abuse 
Restrictions for Entrance Act of 2023'' or the ``SPARE Act of 2023''.

SEC. 2. REQUIREMENT TO INVESTIGATE AND REMOVE ALIENS PROVIDING FALSE 
              INFORMATION ABOUT DRUG-RELATED GROUNDS OF 
              INADMISSIBILITY.

    (a) In General.--Not later than 60 days after receiving credible 
information that an alien knowingly provided false information on an 
application for admission to the United States related to whether the 
alien was inadmissible under paragraph (1)(A)(iv) or paragraph 
(2)(A)(i)(II) of section 212(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act 
(8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(1)(A)(iv), (2)(A)(i)(II)), the Secretary of Homeland 
Security shall--
            (1) investigate such information; and
            (2) if the Secretary determines that at the time of the 
        alien's admission the alien was so inadmissible, initiate 
        removal proceedings under section 239 of the Immigration and 
        Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1229).
    (b) Permanent Bar to Reentry.--Notwithstanding any other provision 
of law, an alien who is removed pursuant to subsection (a)(2) may not 
seek admission to the United States at any time after such removal.
    (c) Waivers Subject to FOIA.--A waiver under subsection (d)(3)(A) 
or subsection (h) of section 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act 
(8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(3)(A), (h)) of the ground of inadmissibility under 
paragraph (1)(A)(iv) or paragraph (2)(A)(i)(II) of section 212(a) of 
that Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(1)(A)(iv), (2)(A)(i)(II)) granted by the 
Secretary of Homeland Security for an alien seeking admission to the 
United States shall be subject to section 552 of title 5, United States 
Code (commonly referred to as the ``Freedom of Information Act'').
                                 <all>
```