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

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 8 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                       January 6, 2009.
    Resolved, That the following named Members be and are hereby elected to the 
following standing committees of the House of Representatives:
            (1) Committee on agriculture.--Mr. Peterson of Minnesota, Chairman.
            (2) Committee on appropriations.--Mr. Obey, Chairman.
            (3) Committee on armed services.--Mr. Skelton, Chairman.
            (4) Committee on the budget.--Mr. Spratt, Chairman.
            (5) Committee on education and labor.--Mr. George Miller of 
        California, Chairman.
            (6) Committee on energy and commerce.--Mr. Waxman, Chairman.
            (7) Committee on financial services.--Mr. Frank of Massachusetts, 
        Chairman.
            (8) Committee on foreign affairs.--Mr. Berman, Chairman.
            (9) Committee on homeland security.--Mr. Thompson of Mississippi, 
        Chairman.
            (10) Committee on house administration.--Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania, 
        Chairman.
            (11) Committee on the judiciary.--Mr. Conyers, Chairman.
            (12) Committee on natural resources.--Mr. Rahall, Chairman.
            (13) Committee on oversight and government reform.--Mr. Towns, 
        Chairman.
            (14) Committee on rules.--Ms. Slaughter, Chairman; Mr. McGovern, Mr. 
        Hastings of Florida, Ms. Matsui, Mr. Cardoza, Mr. Welch, Ms. Castor of 
        Florida, Mr. Arcuri, Ms. Sutton.
            (15) Committee on science and technology.--Mr. Gordon of Tennessee, 
        Chairman.
            (16) Committee on small business.--Ms. Velazquez, Chairman.
            (17) Committee on transportation and infrastructure.--Mr. Oberstar, 
        Chairman.
            (18) Committee on veterans' affairs.--Mr. Filner, Chairman.
            (19) Committee on ways and means.--Mr. Rangel, Chairman.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Curtis JONES, Appellant. Curtis JONES, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

Nos. WD 48188, WD 49454.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

April 11, 1995.

*675Raymund J. Capelovitch, Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, Philip M. Koppe, Asst. Atty. Gen., Kansas City, for respondent.

Before FENNER, C.J., P.J., and BERREY and ULRICH, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM:

Appeal from conviction and sentence and denial of Rule 29.15 motion to vacate both.

Affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
EXHIBIT
32.2
 
 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO
 RULE
13a-14(1) OR RULE 15d-14(b) AND 18 U.S.C. SEC. 1350,
 AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
 SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002
 
 
 In
connection with the quarterly report of Axis Technologies Group, Inc., (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2008 as filed with
the Securities Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, James
Erickson, Chief Accounting Officer and Principal Financial Officer of the
Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
 
 
 (1)
              The
      report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
and
 (2)
              The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the
      company.
 
 
 Date:
November 18, 2008
 
 
 By:
                  /s/ James EricksonJames
      EricksonChief
      Accounting Officer andPrincipal
      Financial Officer
<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 Annual Report of iLinc Communications, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-K for the period ending March 31, 2008, as filed with the
Securities Exchange Commission on the date here of (the Report). I, James M.
Powers, Jr., Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

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

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



By: /s/ James M. Powers, Jr.
----------------------------
James M. Powers, Jr.,
Chairman of the Board, President and
Chief Executive Officer
June 27, 2008
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1195 

To require the Secretary of Agriculture to carry out the Philadelphia universal 

feeding pilot program until the last day of the 2012–2013 school year 

of the School District of Philadelphia. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 4, 2009 

Mr. SPECTER (for himself and Mr. CASEY) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, 

and Forestry 

A BILL 

To require the Secretary of Agriculture to carry out the 

Philadelphia universal feeding pilot program until the 

last day of the 2012–2013 school year of the School 

District of Philadelphia. 

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

3 SECTION 1. PHILADELPHIA UNIVERSAL FEEDING PILOT 

4 PROGRAM. 

5 The Secretary of Agriculture shall carry out the pilot 

6 program described in section 18(c)(2)(A) of the Richard 

7 B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 

8 1769(c)(2)(A)) in the city of Philadelphia until the last 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

•S 1195 IS

1 day of the 2012–2013 school year of the School District 

2 of Philadelphia, as determined by the city of Philadelphia. 

Æ 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
Exhibit 10.3
 EXHIBIT B ADDENDUM #1
to
CENTRAL IOWA ENERGY, LLC TOLL PROCESSING AGREEMENT
 Tenaska High FFA Canola Oil
  Recitals
     Additional Feedstock Specifications
 Yield Requirement for Additional Feedstock
  ***
    
    Portions omitted pursuant to a request for confidential treatment and filed separately with the
SEC.




---



##### 



Economic Adjustment to Agreement
 Incremental By-Product Payment
 A.
    
    For any Order or Nomination, muliply the number of pounds of Additional
Feedstock delivered by REG Marketing to CIE for processing, times the aberage free
fatty acid compoistion of such Additional Feedstock as a percentage in excess of 4%
(the composition to be based upon suppliers Certificate of Analysis, or as otherwise
agreed by the Parties).B.
    
    Divide the result from A above by 80%.
 C.
    
    Multiply the result from B above by the price received for the free fatty
acids sold from such Order or Nomination, which yields the rquired By-Product Payment.
 D.
    
    CIE agrees to pay such By-Product Payment to REG Marketing by wired funds to
REG Marketing within one (1) business day of delivery of the Biodiesel to REG Marketing
with respect to such Order or Nomination.
 Other Terms Unchanged.
 Miscellaneous
  CENTRAL IOWA ENERGY, LLC
    
    
    
    REG MARKETING & LOGISTICS GROUP, LLCBy:
    
    /s/James Johnston
    
    
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Nile D. RamsbottomName: James Johnston
    
    
    
    
    
    Name: Nile D. RamsbottomTitle:   Chairman
    
    
    
    
    
    Title:   President




---



##### 



Free Fatty Acids as
    
    WIJS Iodine(Oleic)
    
    Value
    
    Mosture
    
    PhosphorousAnalytical Method
    
    AOCS Ca 5a-40
    
    AOCS Method
    
    AOCS Ca 2c-25
    
    AOCS Ca 12-55Units
    
    % (w/w)
    
    Cql/q
    
    % (w/w)
    
    PpmFeedstock TypeTenaska High FFA
Canola
    
    8.5
    
    <120
    
    1.5
    
    NA
#### CITY OF BEVERLY HILLS, Texas, Petitioner, v. David GUEVARA, Respondent.

No. 95-0014.

Supreme Court of Texas.

June 22, 1995.

Rehearing Overruled Sept. 14, 1995.

*656David G. Tekell, Keith C. Cameron, Waco, for petitioner.

Darren Obenoskey, Waco, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

David Guevara sued the City of Beverly Hills, alleging that one of its police officers injured him. Guevara did not sue the officer individually. The City moved for summary judgment on several theories, including the common-law doctrine of official immunity. The trial court denied the motion, and the City appealed pursuant to section 51.014(5) of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, which authorizes interlocutory appeals of motions for summary judgment based on official immunity. The court of appeals concluded that because the City could not rely on the officer’s official immunity, section 51.014(5) did not confer jurisdiction over the interlocutory appeal. Consequently, the court of appeals did not reach the merits of the City’s appeal.

Section 51.014(5) authorizes interlocutory appeals for claims “based on an assertion of immunity by an individual....” The City’s motion for summary judgment was clearly “based on” official immunity within the meaning of section 51.014(5). Whether the claim of official immunity was valid should have been decided on the merits. Further, this Court’s decision in *DeWitt v. Harris County,*904 S.W.2d 650, clarifies that a city can rely on the official immunity of its employees and agents. Pursuant to Rule 170 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, a majority of the Court, without hearing oral argument, grants the application for writ of error, reverses the decision of the court of appeals and remands the ease to the court of appeals for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-18-0000805

29-JAN-2019

08:25 AM
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 Annual Report of Akesis Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2007, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Jay B. Lichter, President, Chief Executive Officer and Director (Principal Executive Officer) of the Company, and John T. Hendrick, Chief
Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) of the Company, each certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of 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.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     
|---------------------
|Date: March 31, 2008 
|                     
|/s/    JAY B. LICHTER
|Jay B. Lichter       

President, Chief Executive Officer and Director (Principal Executive Officer)



|                       
|-----------------------
|Date: March 31, 2008   
|                       
|/s/    JOHN T. HENDRICK
|John T. Hendrick       

Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)



THIS CERTIFICATION ACCOMPANIES THE ANNUAL REPORT, IS NOT
DEEMED FILED WITH THE SEC AND IS NOT TO BE INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE INTO ANY FILING OF THE COMPANY UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933, AS AMENDED, OR THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED (WHETHER MADE BEFORE OR AFTER THE DATE OF THE ANNUAL
REPORT), IRRESPECTIVE OF ANY GENERAL INCORPORATION LANGUAGE CONTAINED IN SUCH FILING. A SIGNED ORIGINAL OF THIS CERTIFICATION HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO THE COMPANY AND WILL BE RETAINED BY THE COMPANY AND FURNISHED TO THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION OR ITS STAFF UPON REQUEST.
---

Exhibit 10.20











PROJECT ASSIGNMENT





This Project Assignment is issued under the Independent Contractor Services Agreement (“Original Agreement”) dated April 17, 2003, between Scientific Learning Corporation of Oakland, California (“SLc”) and Dr. Paula Tallal of New York, New York (“Contractor”).





Services to be performed:


Consulting services related to SLc’s customer relationships and research planning, specifically:


(1)
public speaking to the speech and language professional community and to the education community;


(2)
assisting with SLc’s relationship with private providers of Fast ForWord products; and


(3)
assisting with the relationship between the scientific community and SLc.





During the calendar year 2011, Contractor agrees to provide an aggregate of one half day per week, on average, for consulting activities under this Agreement.





Services will be performed on a schedule mutually agreed upon by SLc and Contractor.





Time Period during which Services will be performed:


The term of this contract will begin January 1, 2011 and end December 31, 2011, subject to termination as provided in Section 6a of the Agreement.





Fees for Services:


Fee will be based on the schedule below:


Monthly fee:
Commencing:
Ending:$3,648
1/1/11
12/31/11


Expenses:


SLc will reimburse Contractor for reasonable business expenses incurred in connection with providing services requested by SLc, in accordance with SLc’s regular business expense reimbursement policies.





Note:           This Project Assignment is governed by the terms of an Independent Contractor Services Agreement in effect between SLc and Contractor.  Any item in this Project Assignment which is inconsistent with that Agreement is invalid.





Signed:
/s/ David Myers

/s/ Paula TallalFor Client Hiring Manager

For ContractorDated:
January 31, 2011

December 31, 2010
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

SANDRA K. STUART,

Plaintiff, Case No. 08-14591

v. Hon. Nancy G. Edmunds

CVS CORPORATION, HARTFORD 

LIFE AND ACCIDENT INSURANCE 

CO.,

Defendant.

_______________________________/

ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This matter has come before the Court on the Magistrate Judge’s January 21, 2010

Report and Recommendation. Being fully advised in the premises and having reviewed the

record and the pleadings, including Plaintiff’s Objections if any, the Court hereby ACCEPTS

and ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. It is further ordered

that Plaintiff’s motion for judgment is GRANTED and Defendants’ motion for entry of

judgment is DENIED, and the case is hereby DISMISSED.

SO ORDERED.

s/Nancy G. Edmunds 

Nancy G. Edmunds

United States District Judge

Dated: March 10, 2010

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record

on March 10, 2010, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

s/Carol A. Hemeyer 

Case Manager
**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**
 
 
 I,
William E. Hitselberger, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of
PMA Capital Corporation, do hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, the information contained in the Annual Report of PMA Capital
Corporation on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission, fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the
information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of PMA Capital Corporation. A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
 
 
 
 /s/ William
      E. HitselbergerWilliam
      E. HitselbergerExecutive
      Vice President and Chief Financial OfficerMarch
      16, 2005
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-40425 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus MICHAEL L. YOUNG, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. C-95-CR-136-2

- - - - - - - - - - October 29, 1996 Before GARWOOD, JOLLY and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Michael L. Young challenges his conviction for delivery of 5.5 grams of cocaine base. He argues that the district court abused its discretion by denying his motion for new trial based on newly discovered evidence, specifically, Ralph Anderson’s testimony concerning what Gary Reed, a key witness at Young’s trial, told Anderson approximately one month after Young’s trial. We have carefully reviewed the arguments and appellate record.No. 96-40425 - 2 - We detect no abuse of discretion. See United States v. Nixon , 881 F.2d 1305, 1311-12 (5th Cir. 1989); United States v. Hamilton , 559 F.2d 1370, 1374-75 (5th Cir. 1977).
AFFIRMED.
**AMENDMENT
      NUMBER ONE TO**


**MASTER
      AGREEMENT FOR SUBCONTRACTED SERVICES**


**IBM
      AS PRIME CONTRACTOR**


**#** **4902A20003**








International
      Business Machines Corporation (“IBM”) and Chordiant Software, Inc. (“Chordiant”)
      hereby agree to amend the Master Agreement for Subcontracted Services IBM as
      Prime Contractor # 4902A20003  between
      the Parties dated June 14, 2002 ( called
      the “Subcontractor Agreement”), as
      described below in this amendment agreement (“this Amendment” or “Amendment
      One”). This Amendment shall be effective June 13, 2005.





**Section
      11. Term and Termination.**





The
      first paragraph of Section 11. Term and Termination is deleted in its entirety
      and replaced with the following:





This
      Subcontractor Agreement shall remain in effect until June 13, 2008, unless
      earlier terminated pursuant to the provisions herein. This Subcontractor
      Agreement may be extended upon conclusion of the term by agreement of the
      Parties.








To
      the extent that there is a conflict between the terms of the Subcontractor
      Agreement and this Amendment, as relates to this Amendment, the terms of this
      Amendment shall govern. All other terms and conditions of the Subcontractor
      Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. Once signed, the Parties agree
      that any reproduction of this Amendment made by reliable means (i.e., photocopy
      or facsimile) shall be considered an original.




**IN
      WITNESS WHEREOF** ,
      the Parties, acting through their authorized representatives, have caused this
      Amendment One to be duly executed and effective as indicated above.





International
      Business Machines Corporation  Chordiant Software, Inc.











By:
      ___ /s/
      Danielle Wexler ____________    
By:
      ___ /s/ Robert Mullen ________




Name:  Danielle
      Wexler  Name:
      Robert
      Mullen




Title:  Global
      Services Procurement Alliances  Title: President, WW Field Operations




Date:  May
      31, 2005        Date:  May 27, 2005
Administrative Office of the United States Courts FOR COURT USE ONLY

TRANSCRIPT ORDER

DUE DATE:

OAO 435

AZ Form (Rev. 1/2015)

1. NAME 2. PHONE NUMBER 3. DATE

4. FIRM NAME

5. MAILING ADDRESS 6. CITY 7. STATE 8. ZIP CODE

9. CASE NUMBER 10. JUDGE DATES OF PROCEEDINGS

11. 12. 

13. CASE NAME LOCATION OF PROCEEDINGS

14. 15. STATE

16. ORDER FOR

9 APPEAL 9 CRIMINAL

9 NON-APPEAL 9 CIVIL

9 CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT

9 

IN FORMA PAUPERIS

BANKRUPTCY

OTHER (Specify)

17. TRANSCRIPT REQUESTED (Specify portion(s) and date(s) of proceeding(s) for which transcript is requested.)

PORTIONS DATE(S) PORTION(S) DATE(S)

9TESTIMONY (Specify)

9PRE-TRIAL PROCEEDING

9OTHER (Specify)

9VOIR DIRE

9OPENING STATEMENT (Plaintiff)

9OPENING STATEMENT (Defendant)

9CLOSING ARGUMENT (Plaintiff)

9CLOSING ARGUMENT (Defendant)

9OPINION OF COURT

9JURY INSTRUCTIONS

9SENTENCING

9BAIL HEARING

18. ORDER

CATEGORY

ORIGINAL + 1

(original to Court,

copy to ordering party)

FIRST

COPY

# OF

ADDITIONAL

COPIES

DELIVERY INSTRUCTIONS

(Check all that apply.)

ESTIMATED COSTS

30 DAYS 9 9 PAPER COPY

PDF (e-mail)

ASCII (e-mail)

14 DAYS 9 9

7 DAYS 9 9

DAILY 9 9

HOURLY 9 9

REALTIME 9 9

CERTIFICATION (19. & 20.)

By signing below, I certify that I will pay all charges

(deposit plus additional).

E-MAIL ADDRESS

NOTE: IF ORDERING MORE THAN ONE FORMAT, 

THERE WILL BE AN ADDITIONAL CHARGE.

19. SIGNATURE

20. DATE

TRANSCRIPT TO BE PREPARED BY

ESTIMATE TOTAL

PROCESSED BY PHONE NUMBER

ORDER RECEIVED DATE BY

DEPOSIT PAID DEPOSIT PAID

TRANSCRIPT ORDERED TOTAL CHARGES

TRANSCRIPT RECEIVED LESS DEPOSIT

ORDERING PARTY NOTIFIED

TO PICK UP TRANSCRIPT

TOTAL REFUNDED

PARTY RECEIVED TRANSCRIPT TOTAL DUE

DISTRIBUTION: COURT COPY TRANSCRIPTION COPY ORDER RECEIPT ORDER COPY

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 349 Filed 10/19/18 Page 1 of 1
#### Larry SCHMIDT, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. 56014.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Dec. 5, 1989.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Jan. 11, 1990.

Application to Transfer Denied Feb. 13, 1990.

Cheryl Rafert, St. Louis, for appellant.

William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., Elizabeth L. Ziegler, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals from the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion after an evidentiary hearing. We affirm. The findings and conclusions of the motion court are not clearly erroneous, and an extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only setting forth the reasons for our order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
**Exhibit 15.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporation by reference inRegistration Statement No. 333-107102 on Form S-8 of our report relating to the consolidated financial statements (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the differences between InternationalFinancial Reporting Standards as adopted by the European Union and accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America) of Mittal Steel Company N.V. dated April 16, 2007, and our report relating to management’s report onthe effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, appearing in Amendment No. 2 to the Annual Report on Form 20-F/A of Mittal Steel Company N.V. and subsidiaries for the year ended December 31, 2006. 

/s/ Deloitte Accountants B.V. 

Rotterdam, The Netherlands 

July 3, 2007