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

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6201 Reported in Senate (RS)]

<DOC>

                                                       Calendar No. 513
117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 6201

                          [Report No. 117-171]

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 27, 2022

   Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                           Natural Resources

                           September 27, 2022

               Reported by Mr. Manchin, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To extend the authority for the establishment of a commemorative work 
  to honor enslaved and free Black persons who served in the American 
                  Revolution, 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 ``National Liberty Memorial 
Preservation Act''.

SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMEMORATIVE WORK.

    Notwithstanding section 8903(e) of title 40, United States Code, 
the authority provided by section 2860 of the Military Construction 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (division B of Public Law 112-
239; 126 Stat. 2164; 40 U.S.C. 8903 note) shall continue to apply 
through September 30, 2027.

SEC. 3. DETERMINATION OF BUDGETARY EFFECTS.

    The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of complying 
with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, shall be determined by 
reference to the latest statement titled ``Budgetary Effects of PAYGO 
Legislation'' for this Act, submitted for printing in the Congressional 
Record by the Chairman of the House Budget Committee, provided that 
such statement has been submitted prior to the vote on passage.
                                                       Calendar No. 513

117th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 6201

                          [Report No. 117-171]

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To extend the authority for the establishment of a commemorative work 
  to honor enslaved and free Black persons who served in the American 
                  Revolution, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                           September 27, 2022

                       Reported without amendment
```
#### A. A. Tipton v. State.

No. 24667.

March 1, 1950.

*McCarthy, Collins & Snodgrass*and *George S. McCarthy,*Amarillo, for appellant.

*George P. Blackburn,*State’s Attorney, Austin, for the state.

WOODLEY, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of the offense of transporting whiskey in a dry area, and his punishment was assessed by the jury at 75 days’ confinement in the county jail and a fine of $600.

The record is before us without a statement of facts and there are no bills of exception.

Appellant contends that the information is fatally defective for failure to allege that the election which resulted in fixing the status of Hockley County as a dry area was properly ordered by the commissioners’ court.

We overrule such contention.

The information alleges the transportation of whiskey in Hockley County “after an election had been held by the qualified voters of said county in accordance with law to determine whether or not the sale of such intoxicating liquor should be prohibited in said county and such election had resulted in favor of prohibiting the sale of such intoxicating liquor in said county and the commissioners’ court of said county had canvassed the election returns, and had duly made, passed and entered its order declaring the result of said election prohibiting *336the sale of such intoxicating liquor in said county, as required by law, which said order had been published for the time and in the manner required by law in force at the time of said, election; said election having heretofore been held on the 28th day of December, A. D. 1940, and the sale of said type of alcoholic beverage has not been legalized in said political subdivision by any local option election held in such political subdivision since said time.”

Such form of pleading was suggested by this court as correct and proper in the case of Shaffer v. State, 131 Tex. Cr. R. 427, 99 S. W. 2d 929. See also Humphreys v. State, 131 Tex. Cr. R. 383, 99 S. W. 2d 600.

As stated by Judge Davidson in Spencer v. State, 154 Tex. Cr. R. 106, 225 S. W. 2d 174:

> “We cannot find ourselves in the position of saying that the Commissioners’ Court * * * canvassed the returns and declared the result of an election which they had not called.”

Our attention is directed to the case of Brown v. State, 135 Tex. Cr. R. 3, 117 S. W. 2d 107, and to the more recent case of Whatley v. State, 151 Tex. Cr. R. 358, 207 S. W. 2d 402.

Such cases, in so far as they may be construed as announcing a rule of pleading contrary to that here approved, are overruled.

The judgment is affirmed.

Hawkins, Presiding Judge, absent.

Opinion approved by the court.
Exhibit
31.1




CERTIFICATION




I, James
Whang, certify that:




1.           I
have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to
be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of
STRATS(SM) Trust
For Allstate Corporation Securities, Series 2006-3 (the “Exchange Act periodic
reports”);




2.           Based
on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not
contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact
necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which
such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by
this report;




3.           Based
on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information
required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is
included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;




4.           Based
on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement required in this report
under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act
periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing
agreement; and




5.           All
of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for
asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of
compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be
included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and
Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this
report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report.  Any material
instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this
report on Form 10-K.




In giving
the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me
by the following unaffiliated party: The Bank of New York Mellon, as
Trustee.






Dated:
      March 30, 2009
                  By:
                  /s/ James
      WhangJames
      WhangDirector(senior
      officer of depositor in charge of securitization)
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-2537

CALVIN EARL BROWN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versusPITT COUNTY SCHOOLS; DORIS R. GRUBBS, Coordinator Classified Personnel; JODI RITTENHOUSE, Teacher, Stokes Elementary Schools; STEVE JONES, Principal; SHIRLEY GRIMSLEY, Teacher,Ayden Middle School; CLIFTON G. MOORE, Principal, Ayden Middle School, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-00-21-4-H) Submitted: January 17, 2002 Decided: January 25, 2002 Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Calvin Earl Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Kenneth Alexander Soo, Lisa M. Lukasik, THARRINGTON, SMITH, L.L.P., Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.2 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Calvin Earl Brown appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion to reconsider, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b), thedismissal of his employment discrimination action. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Brown v. Pitt County Sch. , No. CA-00-21-4-H (E.D.N.C. Nov. 16, 2000). We dispense with oral argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### Dana L. RICE, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Leslie RYDER; et al., Defendants—Appellees.

No. 02-35489.

D.C. No. CV-01-00260-JCC.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 10, 2003.*

Decided March 19, 2003.

Before CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges.

*

This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Dana L. Rice, a Washington state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court’s judgment dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging prison officials subjected him to non-consensual medical experimentation and a female corrections officer beat and raped him. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, *Wyatt v. Terhune*315 F.3d 1108, 1117 (9th Cir. 2003), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Rice’s action without prejudice because he failed to exhaust available prison grievance procedures before commencing suit in federal court. *See McKinney v. Carey,*311 F.3d 1198, 1199-1200 (9th Cir.2002) (holding that a prisoner must exhaust administrative remedies before, not after, filing suit in federal court). The exhaustion requirement is mandatory. *See Booth v. Churner,*532 U.S. 731, 740-41, 121 S.Ct. 1819,149 L.Ed.2d 958 (2001).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
18330.

#### Green *v.*Dawson.

Argued September 14, 1953

Decided October 14, 1953.

*Gilbert E. Johnson, Oscar C. Burnett, Jr.,*for plaintiff in error.

*Kennedy & Sognier,*contra.

Head, Justice.

Fannie Green filed a habeas corpus petition against Josh Dawson for the custody of the granddaughter of the plaintiff. At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial judge entered an order as follows: “The above and foregoing case coming on to be heard, after evidence submitted and considered, it is ordered and adjudged that the child be returned to her maternal grandmother, Fannie Green. It is further ordered that the child, Frankie Dawson, if she so desires, have the right and privilege of visiting Josh Dawson at his house any afternoon; on every other week-end, the said child may visit Josh Dawson on Saturday afternoon, spend Saturday night and all day Sunday and return to her grandmother before dark Sunday night. This order is of a temporary nature and shall remain in full force and effect until September 1, 1953, unless amended or changed by further order of this court.” The plaintiff, Fannie Green, excepts to this order. *Held:*

*The law*of *Georgia does not*authorize a trial judge to enter an order which in effect permits a minor child, thirteen years of age, to determine or select the place of her residence. If the trial court will strike this provision of the order, and the further provision that the order is of a temporary nature, within ten days of the return of the remittitur of this court, the judgment is affirmed; otherwise, it is reversed.

*Judgment affirmed on condition, with direction.*

*All the Justices concur.*
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002.

In connection with the annual report of Surfect Holdings, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Steven Anderson, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

1.

The annual 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 annual report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: April 15, 2009



| |                                                              
| | -------------------------------------------------------------
| | /s/ Steven Anderson                                          
| | Steven Anderson                                              
| | Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer          
| | (Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer)
##### 



Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the Quarterly Report of Otter Tail Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Kevin
G. Moug, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer 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; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company. /s/ Kevin G. MougKevin G. MougChief Financial Officer and TreasurerMay 7, 2004
* Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions

that have no precedential value and merely decide particular

cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes

needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal

profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published. 

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-20018

Conference Calendar

__________________

JERRY E. EASLEY,

 Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

NORMA GAIL BURWICK EASLEY,

a/k/a Norma Gail Burwick Bone,

a/k/a Norma Gail Burwick Webb,

 Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas 

USDC No. CA-H-94-1717

- - - - - - - - - -

June 28, 1995

Before JONES, WIENER, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jerry E. Easley requests that he be allowed to proceed in

forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal. 

"An order remanding a case to the state court from which it

was removed is not reviewable on appeal or otherwise, except in

certain civil rights cases." Vatican Shrimp Co. v. Solis, 820

F.2d 674, 679 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 953 (1987). 

Easley has the burden of establishing his right to removal. 
No. 95-20018

-2-

State of Tex. v. Gulf Water Benefaction Co., 679 F.2d 85, 86 (5th

Cir. 1982). 

To gain removal to federal court under 28 U.S.C.

§ 1443, the defendant must show both that (1) the right

allegedly denied [him] arises under a federal law

providing for specific rights stated in terms of racial

equality; and (2) the removal petitioner is denied or

cannot enforce the specified federal rights in the

state courts due to some formal expression of state

law.

Id. (citing Johnson v. Mississippi, 421 U.S. 213, 219 (1975)).

Easley does not allege facts, either in the district court

or on appeal, to support his contention that removal was proper

under § 1443; he has not alleged the denial of a right arising

"under a federal law providing for specific rights stated in

terms of racial equality." See Gulf Water, 679 F.2d at 86-87. 

Easley fails to mention racial equality at all. Therefore, this

is not a case removed under § 1443, the civil rights-jurisdiction

statute.

IT IS ORDERED that Easley's motion for leave to proceed IFP

on appeal is DENIED. Because we lack jurisdiction to hear the

appeal, it is DISMISSED.
Exhibit 32.1





Certification by Chief Executive 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 Annual Report of The Pantry, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Terrance M. Marks, President and Chief Executive 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, to my knowledge, 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.








/s/    Terrance M. MarksTerrance M. MarksPresident and Chief Executive OfficerDate: December 14, 2010





This Certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and shall not be deemed “filed” by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and shall not 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 this Report, irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other documents authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version 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.
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 163 (Thursday, August 21, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 49474]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-19389]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[F-14941-A, F-14941-A2; AK-965-1410-KC-P]


Alaska Native Claims Selection

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of decision approving lands for conveyance.

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

SUMMARY: As required by 43 CFR 2650.7(d), notice is hereby given that 
an appealable decision approving lands for conveyance pursuant to the 
Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act will be issued to The Kuskokwim 
Corporation, Successor in Interest to Stony River Limited. The lands 
are in the vicinity of Stony River, Alaska, and are located in:

T. 20 N., R. 41 W.,
    Secs. 4 to 9, inclusive.

    Containing 3,757.97 acres.

T. 20 N., R. 42 W.,
    Secs. 25 and 35.

    Containing 1,280 acres.
    Total Aggregating 5,037.97 acres.

    The subsurface estate in these lands will be conveyed to Calista 
Corporation when the surface estate is conveyed to The Kuskokwim 
Corporation. Notice of the decision will also be published four 
times in the Tundra Drums.

DATES: The time limits for filing an appeal are:
    1. Any party claiming a property interest which is adversely 
affected by the decision shall have until September 22, 2008 to file an 
appeal.
    2. Parties receiving service of the decision by certified mail 
shall have 30 days from the date of receipt to file an appeal.
    Parties who do not file an appeal in accordance with the 
requirements of 43 CFR Part 4, Subpart E, shall be deemed to have 
waived their rights.

ADDRESSES: A copy of the decision may be obtained from: Bureau of Land 
Management, Alaska State Office, 222 West Seventh Avenue, <greek-i>13, 
Anchorage, Alaska 99513-7504.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Bureau of Land Management by phone 
at 907-271-5960, or by e-mail at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#6e0f05400c0203400d0100180b170f000d0b2e0f05400c020340090118"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="1b7a7035797776357874756d7e627a75787e5b7a7035797776357c746d">[email protected]</span></a>. Persons 
who use a telecommunication device (TTD) may call the Federal 
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8330, 24 hours a day, 
seven days a week, to contact the Bureau of Land Management.

Robert Childers,
Land Law Examiner, Land Transfer Adjudication II.
[FR Doc. E8-19389 Filed 8-20-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-JA-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

DEC 17, 2008

THOMAS K. KAHN

CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 08-11532

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 04-02075-CV-BBM-1

ROSS GLENN MOORMAN, JR.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

UNUMPROVIDENT CORPORATION,

a Delaware corporation, in its individual capacity

and as controlling parent of its wholly owned subsidiary,

Unum Life Insurance Company of America, a Maine corporation,

UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA,

a Maine corporation, in its individual capacity

and as a wholly owned and controlled subsidiary of

UmumProvident Corporation, UNUM CORPORATION,

a Maine corporation merged to form UnumProvident

Corporation, in its individual capacity and as controlling

parent company of its wholly owned subsidiary, Unum Life

Insurance Company of America, A Maine corporation,

Defendants-Appellees.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Georgia

_________________________

(December 17, 2008)
Before BIRCH and PRYOR, Circuit Judges, and STROM, District Judge.

*

PER CURIAM:

This appeal presents issues about an insurer’s decision to terminate a

policyholder’s long-term disability benefits. Unum Life Insurance Company of

America terminated the long-term disability benefits of Ross Glenn Moorman Jr.

after twelve months because there was no medical evidence that Moorman

continued to qualify for benefits. Moorman sued Unum under the Employee

Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001 et seq., and the

Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization Act of 1970, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961 et seq.

The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Unum and this appeal

followed. After oral argument and a thorough review of the record and the parties’

briefs, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion or commit any

reversible error.

The summary judgment in favor of Unum is AFFIRMED.

 Honorable Lyle E. Strom, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska, 

*

sitting by designation.

2