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

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 395

To designate the United States courthouse and Federal building to be constructed at the southeastern corner of Liberty and South Virginia Streets

in Reno, Nevada, as the ‘‘Bruce R. Thompson United States Courthouse

and Federal Building’’.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 4, 1995

Mrs. VUCANOVICH introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

A BILL

To designate the United States courthouse and Federal

building to be constructed at the southeastern corner

of Liberty and South Virginia Streets in Reno, Nevada,

as the ‘‘Bruce R. Thompson United States Courthouse

and Federal Building’’.

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

4 The United States courthouse and Federal building

5 to be constructed at the southeastern corner of Liberty

6 and South Virginia Streets in Reno, Nevada, is designated
2

•HR 395 IH

1 as the ‘‘Bruce R. Thompson United States Courthouse

2 and Federal Building’’.

3 SEC. 2. LEGAL REFERENCES.

4 Any reference in any law, regulation, document,

5 record, map, or other paper of the United States to the

6 courthouse and Federal building referred to in section 1

7 is deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Bruce R. Thompson

8 United States Courthouse and Federal Building’’.

Æ
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 420 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 420

To amend the Social Security Act to provide, in the case of any person 
 who is a party in interest with respect to an employee benefit plan, 
   that information requested from the Secretary of Health and Human 
 Services to assist such person with respect to the administration of 
       such plan shall be provided at least once without charge.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 1995

Mr. Kanjorski introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Social Security Act to provide, in the case of any person 
 who is a party in interest with respect to an employee benefit plan, 
   that information requested from the Secretary of Health and Human 
 Services to assist such person with respect to the administration of 
       such plan shall be provided at least once without charge.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED AT LEAST ONCE WITHOUT 
              CHARGE.

    Subsection (c) of section 1106 of the Social Security Act is 
amended to read as follows:
    ``(c) Notwithstanding sections 552 and 552a of title 5, United 
States Code, or any other provision of law, whenever the Secretary 
determines--
            ``(1) that a request for any type of information is made in 
        order to assist a party in interest (as defined in section 3 of 
        the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C. 
        102)) with respect to the administration of an employee benefit 
        plan (as so defined) and that information of such type has 
        previously been provided by the Secretary pursuant to a request 
        made in order to so assist such party in interest, or
            ``(2) that a request for information is made for any 
        purpose (other than a purpose described in paragraph (1)) which 
        is not directly related to the administration of the program or 
        programs under this Act to which such information relates,
the Secretary may require the requestor to pay the full cost, as 
determined by the Secretary, of providing such information.''.

SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendment made by section 1 shall apply with respect to 
information requested on or after the date of the enactment of this 
Act.
                                 <all>
```
I

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4242

To amend the Act commonly known as the ‘‘Antiquities Act’’ to limit further

extension or establishment of national monuments in California.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 27, 1996

Mr. DOOLITTLE (for himself, Mr. HERGER, Mrs. SEASTRAND, Mr. POMBO,

Mr. CALVERT, Mr. PACKARD, Mr. DORNAN, Mr. CUNNINGHAM, Mrs.

CHENOWETH, and Mr. COOLEY of Oregon) introduced the following bill;

which was referred to the Committee on Resources

A BILL

To amend the Act commonly known as the ‘‘Antiquities

Act’’ to limit further extension or establishment of national monuments in California.

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

3 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON FURTHER EXTENSION OR ES4 TABLISHMENT OF NATIONAL MONUMENTS IN

5 CALIFORNIA.

6 The Act entitled ‘‘An Act for the preservation of

7 American antiquities’’, approved June 8, 1906 (16 U.S.C.

8 431 et seq.; commonly known as the ‘‘Antiquities Act’’),

9 is amended by adding at the end the following new section:
2

•HR 4242 IH

1 ‘‘SEC. 5. After the effective date of this section, no

2 extension or establishment of any national monument in

3 California may be undertaken except by express authoriza4 tion of Congress.’’.

Æ
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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Great Lakes Aviation, Ltd. (Company) for the period ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Michael O. Matthews, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 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, as amended; and

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

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.



|                      |  |  |  |     |  |                                              |  | 
|--------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | -------------------------------------------- |  | 
|Dated: March 30, 2007 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ Michael O. Matthews                      |  | 
|                      |  |  |  |     |  | Michael O. Matthews                          |  | 
|                      |  |  |  |     |  | Vice President and Chief Financial Officer   |  | 
|                      |  |  |  |     |  | (Principal Accounting and Financial Officer) |  |
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. William R. DOWNS, Appellant.

Nos. WD 49813, WD 51230.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Feb. 11, 1997.

Susan L. Hogan, Appellate Defender, Kansas City, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Attorney General, David R. Truman, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before ULRICH, C.J.,P.J., and BRECKENRIDGE and SPINDEN, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM:

William Downs appeals from his convictions of one count of assault in the second degree, § 565.060, RSMo 1994, and one count of armed criminal action, § 571.015, RSMo 1994, for which he received two consecutive terms of two and three years, respectively. Mr. Downs contends that the trial court erred by refusing to instruct the jury on the lesser included offense of assault in the third degree because the evidence provided a basis for conviction of that offense. Mr. Downs also appeals from the denial, after an evident tiary hearing, *of*his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief, claiming ineffective assistance of counsel in that his trial counsel failed to file a motion to suppress an identification of him as the assailant and failed to properly object to the state’s closing argument.

The judgments of the trial court and motion court are affirmed. Rules 84.16(b) and 30.25(b).
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4172 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4172

 To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to provide an exemption 
    from the overtime requirements of that Act for law enforcement 
employees while at a police academy or other training facility pursuant 
 to an agreement between the public agency employing such employee and 
                   representatives of such employee.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 25, 1996

  Mr. Condit (for himself, Mr. Cunningham, Mr. McKeon, Mr. Riggs, Mr. 
  Fazio of California, Ms. Lofgren, and Mr. Campbell) introduced the 
  following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Economic and 
                       Educational Opportunities

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to provide an exemption 
    from the overtime requirements of that Act for law enforcement 
employees while at a police academy or other training facility pursuant 
 to an agreement between the public agency employing such employee and 
                   representatives of such employee.

    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 ``Save Law Enforcement Training Act''.

SEC. 2. OVERTIME EXEMPTION FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT EMPLOYEES AT TRAINING 
              FACILITY.

    Section 13(b) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 
213(b)) is amended by striking the period at the end of paragraph (30) 
and inserting ``; or'' and by adding at the end the following:
            ``(31) any employee who is employed in law enforcement 
        activities by a public agency which is a State or an interstate 
        governmental agency while such employee is in attendance--
                    ``(A) at apprenticeship training programs certified 
                and approved by the Bureau of Apprenticeship Training 
                of the Department of Labor, and
                    ``(B) pursuant to applicable provisions of a 
                collective bargaining agreement, memorandum of 
                understanding, or other agreement between the public 
                agency and representatives of such employee.
For purposes of paragraph (31), an employee is employed in law 
enforcement activities if such employee is a uniformed or plainclothed 
member of a body of officers and subordinates who are empowered by 
State statute or local ordinance to enforce laws designed to maintain 
public peace and order, to protect both life and property from 
accidental or willful injury, and to prevent and detect crimes and who 
has the power to arrest. Such term includes any employee working in a 
correctional facility.''.
                                 <all>
```
In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-12-00067-CR

BILLY JOE SMITH, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 8th District Court

Hopkins County, Texas

Trial Court No. 0518104

Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Moseley
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Billy Joe Smith was on deferred adjudication community supervision for the offense of 

aggravated sexual assault of a child. The State filed a motion for adjudication and revocation, 

alleging that Smith failed to pay fees, fines, and costs assessed as part of his supervision and that 

he violated the terms and conditions of his supervision by being in the direct presence of or 

having personal contact with children. The trial court found the allegations true, adjudicated him 

guilty, and sentenced him to life in prison. 

Based on the reasoning and analysis in our opinion in cause number 06-12-00065-CR, 

issued on even date herewith, we overrule Smith’s points of error.

We affirm the trial court’s judgment and sentence. 

Bailey C. Moseley

Justice

Date Submitted: January 10, 2013

Date Decided: January 23, 2013

Do Not Publish
* 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 June 26, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-60123 Summary Calendar

THOMAS JOHNSON, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; ADRIENNE CROFT, Correctional Officer Trainee Pin #0913; MARYLEN REECE, “Sho” Chairperson, Defendants-Appellees.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 4:05-CV-250

-------------------- Before JOLLY, GARZA, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Thomas Johnson, Mississippi prisoner # K6003, appeals the district court’s sua sponte dismissal of his in forma pauperis civil rights complaint on the ground that he failed to exhaust administrative remedies as required by 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). Johnson asserted in his complaint that he was prevented from exhausting the Administrative Remedy Program steps by prison officials’ failure to pick up his Step 2 grievance in a timely fashion. In dismissing the complaint for failure to exhaust, theNo. 06-60123 -2- district court relied on Johnson’s assertion that his administrative appeal was denied as untimely without considering Johnson’s stated reasons for such denial. The Supreme Court recently held “that failure to exhaust is an affirmative defense under the [Prison Litigation Reform Act], and that inmates are not required to specifically plead or demonstrate exhaustion in their complaints.” Jones v. Bock , 127 S. Ct. 910, 921 (2007). Accordingly, the district court’s judgment is VACATED and the case is REMANDED for further proceedings.
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15** 
**- 7337** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ,
Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v.

FREDRICK DEMOND BATTLE ,
Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh

. James C. Dever, III , Chief District Judge. ( 5:09

- cr
- 00150

- D

- 1 )

Submitted : November 19 , 2014 Decided: November 24, 2015

Before NIEMEYER , KING , and HARRIS , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Fredrick Demond Battle, Appellant Pro Se . Denise Walker, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

Fredrick Demond Ba ttle appeals the district court’ s order
denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (2012) motion. We have reviewed
the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm
for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v.

Battle , No. 5:09

- cr
- 00150

- D

- 1 (E.D.N.C. Aug. 17, 2015)

. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Filed: January 7, 1997

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-6221

(CR-89-391-JFM, CA-95-3272-JFM)

United States of America,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

Colbert Toliver,

Defendant - Appellant.

ORDER

The Court amends its opinion filed October 23, 1996, as

follows:

On the cover sheet, section 3, line 3 -- the district court's

number is corrected to read "CR-89- 391-JFM."

For the Court - By Direction

/s/ Patricia S. Connor

Clerk
2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-6221

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

COLBERT TOLIVER,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Chief District Judge.

(CR-89-391-JFM, CA-95-3272-JFM)

Submitted: October 17, 1996 Decided: October 23, 1996

Before MURNAGHAN and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Colbert Toliver, Appellant Pro Se. Andrea L. Smith, OFFICE OF THE

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
3

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his

28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1994) motion. We have reviewed the record and the

district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly,

we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss on the reasoning

of the district court. United States v. Toliver, Nos. CR-89-891-

JFM; CA-95-3272-JFM (D. Md. Jan. 8, 1996). 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.

DISMISSED
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 Chuma Holdings, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending February 28, 2015, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), Kevin Wright, the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certifies, 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 containing the financial statements 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 the Company.





|                     |     |                                               | 
|-------------------- | --- | --------------------------------------------- | 
|                     |     |                                               | 
|Date: April 20, 2015 | By: | */s/ Kevin Wright*                            | 
|                     |     | Chief Executive Officer, Chuma Holdings, Inc. | 
|                     |     |                                               |
ex102.htm


Exhibit 10.2


 


CONVERTIBLE PROMISSORY NOTE


 


 


$7,622                                                                                                                 January 8, 2012


 


 


FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned, New Century Resources Corporation, a Nevada corporation (“NCR”), promises to pay to the order of Robert J. Nielson, his successors or assigns (“Nielson”) the principal sum of SEVEN THOUSAND TWENTY-TWO ($7,622.00), together with interest thereon at the rate of 10% per annum at 986 E Wheeler Farm Cv, Salt Lake City, UT 84121 on or before the expiration of two years from date.


 


Nielson shall have the option, at any time, commencing upon the execution hereof  to convert the outstanding principal and interest of this Note into fully-paid and nonassessable shares of NCR’s Common Stock. The conversion rate shall be the total principal and accrued interest outstanding or any part thereof as determined solely by Nielson, divided by the par value of NCR ($.001).


 


To exercise any conversion, the holder of this Note shall surrender the Note to NCR during usual business hours at the office of NCR, accompanied by a written notice to convert all or a portion of the principal and interest outstanding. NRC then agrees to direct NCR’s transfer agent to issue certificates for the full number of Shares issuable upon conversion or any subsequent conversion under this note to Nielson, his nominees, successors or assigns.


 


This Note may not be prepaid in whole or in part, at any time, without the prior written consent of Nielson.


 


NCR hereby waives protest, notice of protest, presentment, dishonor and demand. The rights and privileges of Nielson under this Note shall inure to the benefit of his successors and assigns. This Note may not be waived, changed, modifies, or discharged orally, but only in writing.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Convertible Promissory Note as of the date first set forth above.


 


NEW CENTURY RESOURCES CORPORATION


 







 


___________________________


 


By: George Christodoulou


 


Its: President