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

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3768

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 31, 1996

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs

AN ACT

To designate a United States Post Office to be located in

Groton, Massachusetts, as the ‘‘Augusta ‘Gusty’ Hornblower United States Post Office’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 3768 RFS

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

2 The United States Post Office to be located at 80

3 Boston Road in Groton, Massachusetts, shall be des4 ignated and known as the ‘‘Augusta ‘Gusty’ Hornblower

5 United States Post Office’’.

6 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

7 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

8 paper, or other record of the United States to the United

9 States Post Office referred to in section 1 shall be deemed

10 to be a reference to the ‘‘Augusta ‘Gusty’ Hornblower

11 United States Post Office’’.

Passed the House of Representatives July 30, 1996.

Attest: ROBIN H. CARLE,

Clerk.
Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 333-102593, 333-104958, 333-107756 and 333-108889
on Form S-3 and Registration Statement Nos. 333-35751, 333-88635, 333-43834, 333-70952, 333-96963, 333-107008
and 333-121533 on Form S-8 of our reports dated March 14, 2005, relating to the financial statements and the financial statement schedule of Dot Hill Systems Corp. and
management's report on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting (which expresses an adverse opinion on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting) appearing
in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Dot Hill Systems Corp. for the year ended December 31, 2004.

/s/
DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

San
Diego, California
March 15, 2005

---



QuickLinks
EXHIBIT 32.1







CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF
FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002






The undersigned, Steve Harding, the Chief Executive Officer
and Brian Manko, Chief Financial Officer of American Exploration
Corporation, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to their
knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of American Exploration
Corporation for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2010, fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial
condition and results of operations of American Exploration
Corporation.






Date: May 24, 2010




/s/   "Steve Harding"Steve Harding
              President, Chief Executive Officer




/s/   "Brian Manko"Brian Manko
              Chief Financial Officer, Principal Accounting
      Officer




A signed original of this written statement required by
Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise
adopting the signatures that appear in typed form within the electronic version
of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to American
Resources Corporation and will be retained by American Resources Corporation and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                               12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         368,490
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  208,143
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     29,807
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,758,222
<PP&E>                                         518,937
<DEPRECIATION>                                  73,595
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              10,076,753
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,393,921
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    10,131,400
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,914,403
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                10,076,753
<SALES>                                      5,105,969
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,105,969
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,231,313
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (340,699)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               106,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              12,075
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                215,355
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   215,355
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0





</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1

                                                                   Exhibit 23.1


                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

The Board of Directors
Citadel Broadcasting Company:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statement filed
(No. 333-92593) on Form S-3 of Citadel Broadcasting Company of our report dated
February 29, 2000, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Citadel
Broadcasting Company and subsidiary as of December 31, 1998 and 1999, and the
related consolidated statements of operations, shareholder's equity and cash
flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 1999,
which report appears in Form 10-K of Citadel Broadcasting Company dated
March 30, 2000.


                                       /s/ KPMG LLP


Phoenix, Arizona
March 30, 2000
ACCEPTED

06-14-00182-CR

SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS

TEXARKANA, TEXAS

1/26/2015 4:09:02 PM

DEBBIE AUTREY

CLERK

 FILED IN 6th COURT OF APPEALS TEXARKANA, TEXAS 1/26/2015 4:09:02 PM DEBBIE AUTREY Clerk
Exhibit
32.2





CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


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 accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Ecoland
International, Inc. for the fiscal quarter ending August 31, 2009, I, David
Wallace, Chief Financial Officer of Ecoland International, Inc., hereby certify
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief,
that:





1.       Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for
the fiscal quarter ending August 31, 2009, 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 such
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ending August 31, 2009,
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of Ecoland International, Inc.





Date: December 21,
2009


/s/ David WallaceDavid
      Wallace, Chief Financial Officer of Ecoland International,
      Inc.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

CHRISTOPHER ST. JOHN,

Petitioner,

CASE NO. 08-14524

v.

PAUL D. BORMAN

DEBRA SCUTT, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Respondent.

_______________________________/

ORDER 

(1) DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION

REQUESTING DENIAL OF RESPONDENT’S ANSWER;

(2) DIRECTING THE CLERK OF COURT TO PROVIDE PETITIONER

WITH A COPY OF RESPONDENT’S ANSWER TO THE PETITION

Petitioner Christopher St. John has filed a pro se habeas corpus petition pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 2254. On May 1, 2009, respondent Debra Scutt filed an answer to the petition and

urged the Court to deny relief. Pending before the Court is Petitioner’s motion to deny

Respondent’s answer on the ground that Petitioner never received a copy of the answer. 

Respondent filed a timely responsive pleading, and although she should have served a

copy of her answer on Petitioner, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(a)(1)(B), Petitioner essentially seeks to

have the Court strike Respondent’s answer. Such a drastic remedy is not appropriate under the

circumstances. The better solution is to provide Petitioner with a copy of Respondent’s answer

and to give him additional time in which to file a reply. Accordingly, Petitioner’s motion [Dkt.

#12] is DENIED. The Clerk of Court, however, is ORDERED to send Petitioner a copy of

Respondent’s answer, along with a copy of this order. Petitioner shall have forty-five (45) days

from the date of receipt of Respondent’s answer to file a reply to the answer.

2:08-cv-14524-PDB-MKM Doc # 13 Filed 01/13/10 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 980
2

SO ORDERED.

S/Paul D. Borman 

PAUL D. BORMAN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: January 13, 2010

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Copies of this Order were served on the attorneys of record by electronic means or U.S. Mail on

January 13, 2010.

S/Denise Goodine 

Case Manager

2:08-cv-14524-PDB-MKM Doc # 13 Filed 01/13/10 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 981
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1075 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1075

To designate 4 counties in the State of New York as high-intensity drug 
trafficking areas, and to authorize funding for drug control activities 
                            in those areas.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 19, 2009

Mr. Schumer (for himself and Mrs. Gillibrand) introduced the following 
    bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the 
                               Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To designate 4 counties in the State of New York as high-intensity drug 
trafficking areas, and to authorize funding for drug control activities 
                            in those areas.

    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 ``New York/New Jersey High-Intensity 
Drug Trafficking Area Expansion Act of 2009''.

SEC. 2. DESIGNATION OF HIGH-INTENSITY DRUG TRAFFICKING AREAS IN NEW 
              YORK.

    The counties of Clinton, Franklin, Jefferson, and St. Lawrence in 
the State of New York are designated as high-intensity drug trafficking 
areas and shall be part of the New York/New Jersey high-intensity drug 
trafficking area under the program administered by the Office of 
National Drug Control Policy.

SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary 
for each of the fiscal years 2010 through 2015 to carry out drug 
control activities in the areas designated by this Act.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1



              CHASE MANHATTAN MARINE OWNER TRUST 1997-A
                          ANNUAL OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE

                          COMPLIANCE WITH AGREEMENT


         The undersigned certifies that he is an Executive Vice President of The
CIT Group/Sales Financing, Inc., a corporation organized under the laws of
Delaware ("CITSF"), and that as such he is duly authorized to execute and
deliver this certificate on behalf of CITSF in connection with Section 4.9(a) of
the Sale and Servicing Agreement, dated as of October 1, 1997 (the "Agreement"),
among CITSF, Chase Manhattan Bank USA, National Association and The Chase
Manhattan Bank, as Sellers, and Chase Manhattan Marine Owner Trust 1997-A , for
which Wilmington Trust Company acts as Owner Trustee and Wells Fargo Bank
Minnesota, N.A. formerly Norwest Bank Minnesota, NA acts as Indenture Trustee
(all capitalized terms used herein without definition having the respective
meanings specified in the Agreement). The undersigned further certifies to the
Owner Trustee and to the Indenture Trustee that a review of the activities of
CITSF during the preceding calendar year and of its performance under the
Agreement has been made under his supervision and to the best of his knowledge,
based on such review, CITSF has fulfilled its obligations under the Agreement
during the 2003 calendar year.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have affixed hereto my signature this 30th
day of March 2004.

                                       THE CIT GROUP/SALES
                                       FINANCING, INC., as Servicer


                                            /s/ William L. Schumm
                                       -------------------------------
                                       Name:  William L. Schumm
                                       Title: Executive Vice President
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 367

To repeal the Cuban Democracy Act of 1992.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 4, 1995

Mr. SERRANO introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on International Relations

A BILL

To repeal the Cuban Democracy Act of 1992.

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

3 SECTION 1. REPEAL OF CUBAN DEMOCRACY ACT.

4 The Cuban Democracy Act of 1992 (22 U.S.C. 6001

5 et seq.) is repealed.

Æ
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 131 (Monday, July 8, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35808-35809]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-17225]


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


DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Ruffe Control Committee Meeting

AGENCY: Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Ruffe Control 
Committee, a committee of the Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force. The 
Committee will meet to develop action plans to meet three new 
objectives of the Ruffe Control Program. These are: bait fish 
management; fish community management; and, Chicago Ship and Sanitary 
Canal. The meeting is open to the public. Interested persons may make 
oral statements to the Committee or may file written statements for 
consideration.

DATES: The Ruffe Control Committee will meet from 1:00 to 5:00 p.m. on 
Tuesday, July 30, 1996, and 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. on Wednesday, July 
31, 1996.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Holiday Inn, 1000 U.S. 23 
North, Alpena, Michigan 49707.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Tom Busiahn, Ruffe Control Committee Chairperson, U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service, at (715) 682-6185.


[[Page 35809]]


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App. I), this notice announces a 
meeting of the Ruffe Control Committee, a committee of the Aquatic 
Nuisance Species Task Force established under the authority of the 
Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 (P.L. 
101-646, 104 Stat. 4761, 16 U.S.C. 4701 et seq., November 29, 1990). 
Minutes of meeting will be maintained by Coordinator, Aquatic Nuisance 
Species Task Force, Room 840, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Arlington, 
Virginia 22203 and the Chairperson, Ruffe Control Committee, U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service, Fishery Resources Office, 2800 Lake Shore Drive 
East, Ashland, Wisconsin 54806, and will be available for public 
inspection during regular business hours, Monday through Friday within 
30 days following the meeting.

    Dated: June 21, 1996.
Gary Edwards,
Co-Chair, Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force.
[FR Doc. 96-17225 Filed 7-5-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-M
Filed 6/26/08 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2008 ND 118

Roland C. Riemers, Plaintiff and Appellant

and

Johnathan P. Riemers, Plaintiff

v.

State of North Dakota, 

Douglas Herman, 

Gerald W. VandeWalle, 

Carol Ronning Kapsner, 

Mary Muehlen Maring, and 

Dale V. Sandstrom, Defendants and Appellees

No. 20070307

Appeal from the District Court of Grand Forks County, Northeast Central Judicial District, the Honorable Debbie Gordon Kleven, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Roland C. Riemers, pro se, 108 Cairns Avenue, Emerado, N.D. 58201.

Douglas Alan Bahr, Solicitor General, Office of Attorney General, 500 North 9th Street, Bismarck, N.D. 58501-4509, for defendants and appellees.

Riemers v. State

No. 20070307

Per Curiam.

[¶1]Roland Riemers appeals from a district court judgment awarding attorney fees for a prior appeal.

[¶2]Riemers sued the State, a district court judge, and four justices of the North Dakota Supreme Court, claiming his legal and constitutional rights were denied during his divorce proceedings.  The district court dismissed the complaint and Riemers appealed.  The North Dakota Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal and, after determining that Riemers’ appeal was frivolous, remanded to the district court for an award of attorney fees.  See Riemers v. State, 2007 ND App 2, 732 N.W.2d 398.  On remand, the district court ordered Riemers to pay attorney fees of $1,752.42, and Riemers appealed.

[¶3]We summarily affirm the judgment under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7) and Riemers v. State, 2008 ND 101.

[¶4]Allan L. Schmalenberger, D.J.

Ronald E. Goodman, S.J.

Richard L. Hagar, D.J.

Robert W. Holte, S.J.

Burt L. Riskedahl, S.J.

[¶5]The Honorable Allan L. Schmalenberger, D.J., the Honorable Robert W. Holte, S.J., the Honorable Burt L. Riskedahl, S.J., the Honorable Ronald E. Goodman, S.J., the Honorable Richard L. Hagar, D.J., sitting in place of VandeWalle, C.J., Kapsner, J., Maring, J., Sandstrom, J., and Crothers, J., disqualified.
1

The Honorable Ann D. Montgomery, United States District Judge for the

District of Minnesota.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 06-1173

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Minnesota.

Andres Manuel Romero, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: August 30, 2007

Filed: September 6, 2007

___________

Before BYE, RILEY, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Andres Romero appeals the district court’s1

 denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)

motion, in which he sought a reduction of his federal drug sentence based on

Amendment 591 to the Sentencing Guidelines. We agree with the district court that

Amendment 591 does not affect Romero’s sentence, and Romero has not argued any

other basis for modification under § 3582(c)(2). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir.

R. 47B. We also deny Romero’s pending appellate motions.

______________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

WILLARD L. SLOAN, EUGENE J.

WINNINGHAM and JAMES L. KELLEY, 

on behalf of themselves and a similarly 

situated class, Case No. 09-cv-10918

Hon. Paul D. Borman

Plaintiffs, Magistrate Mona K. Majzoub

v. Class Action

BORGWARNER, INC., BORGWARNER 

FLEXIBLE BENEFITS PLANS and

BORGWARNER DIVERSIFIED 

TRANSMISSION PRODUCTS, INC.,

Defendants.

_____________________________________________/

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ UNOPPOSED

MOTION EXTENDING THE TIME TO FILE A

RESPONSE BRIEF TO BORGWARNER’S SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF

This matter having come before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion Extending the

Time to File a Response Brief to BorgWarner’s Supplemental Brief and the Court having been fully

advised in the premises;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion is granted and the time for Plaintiffs to respond

to Defendants’ supplemental Brief is extended until June 4, 2015.

 s/Paul D. Borman 

PAUL D. BORMAN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: May 11, 2015

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM Doc # 143 Filed 05/11/15 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 7583
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served upon each attorney or party

of record herein by electronic means or first class U.S. mail on May 11, 2015.

s/Deborah Tofil 

Case Manager

2

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM Doc # 143 Filed 05/11/15 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 7584
2:09-cv-10454-VAR-LJM Doc # 150 Filed 05/23/13 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 3222
2:09-cv-10454-VAR-LJM Doc # 150 Filed 05/23/13 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 3223
* Of the Southern District of New York, sitting by designation. Not for Publication in West's Federal Reporter Citation Limited Pursuant to 1st Cir. Loc. R. 32.3 

# United Stat es Court of Appeals

For the First C ircuit No. 02-1389 UNITED STATES, Plaintiff, Appellee,

v. ONE PARCEL OF LAND, PARCELA 22, BARRIO LLANOS COSTA, CABO ROJO, P.R., Defendant.

____________________ JORGE L. SUAREZ-MAYA, Claimant, Appellant.

____________________ NAYDA FRANQUI; MUNICIPAL TAX COLLECTION CENTER (CRIM), Claimants.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO [Hon. Robert J. Ward, * Senior U.S. District Judge ]
Before Boudin, Chief Judge , Campbell, Senior Circuit Judge , and Lipez, Circuit Judge . Jorge L. Suarez-Maya on brief pro se. Miguel A. Fernandez , Assistant United States Attorney, Chief, Civil Division, Jose Javier Santos Mimoso , Assistant United States Attorney, H.S. Garcia , United States Attorney, on brief for appellee. July 15, 2003Per Curi am . Having thoroughly reviewed the record and the

parties' briefs on appeal, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to dismiss the government's forfeiture claim based on claimant's delayed transfer to Puerto Rico for his first forfeiture trial. See , e.g. Young v. Gordon , 330 F.3d 76, 81 (lst Cir. 2003)("dismissal should not be viewed either as a sanction of first resort or as an automatic penalty for every failure to abi de by a co urt order."). Apart from English translations of the relevant deeds, claimant failed to adduce any
new evidence to support his claim to the property on retrial. Under these circumstances, we cannot say that th e dist rict court clearly erred in declining to credit fully claimant's testimony regarding the source of t he pur chase money. Accordingly, the district court's forfeiture judgment is affirmed . See Local Rule 27(c).