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

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 628

To amend title 18, United States Code, to extend certain protections now

accorded various Federal officials to the staffs of those officials.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 23, 1995

Mr. HORN (for himself, Mr. ABERCROMBIE, Mr. BERMAN, Mr. FATTAH, Mr.

EHLERS, Mr. ENGLISH, Mr. FARR, Mr. FROST, Mr. PETE GEREN of

Texas, Ms. JOHNSON of Connecticut, Mr. KING, Mr. LEACH, Mr. NEY,

Mr. POSHARD, Mr. SENSENBRENNER, Mr. SKEEN, Mr. SMITH of Texas,

Mr. TUCKER, Mr. WALSH, Ms. PELOSI, and Ms. ESHOO) introduced the

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To amend title 18, United States Code, to extend certain

protections now accorded various Federal officials to the

staffs of those officials.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Staff Protection Act

5 of 1995’’.

6 SEC. 2. PROTECTIONS FOR STAFF OF CERTAIN OFFICIALS.

7 Section 115 of title 18, United States Code, is

8 amended—
2

•HR 628 IH

1 (1) in subsection (a)(1)(A), by inserting ‘‘a

2 member of the staff or’’ before ‘‘a member of the

3 immediate family’’;

4 (2) in subsection (a)(1)(B), by inserting ‘‘or a

5 member of the staff of such an official, judge, or law

6 enforcement officer; ’’ after ‘‘under such section,’’;

7 (3) in the matter following subparagraph (B) in

8 subsection (a)(1), by striking ‘‘or law enforcement

9 officer’’ each place it appears and inserting ‘‘law en10 forcement officer, or member of the staff’’; and

11 (4) in subsection (c)—

12 (A) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of para13 graph (3);

14 (B) by striking the period at the end of

15 paragraph (4) and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and

16 (C) by adding at the end the following:

17 ‘‘(5) ‘member of the staff ’ includes any person

18 acting in a staff capacity, whether on a paid or un19 paid basis.’’.

Æ
```

                                                                    Exhibit 35.1

                       AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORPORATION
                          ANNUAL COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE
       PURSUANT TO SECTION 3.11(A) OF THE SALE AND SERVICING AGREEMENT AND
                           ITEM 1123 OF REGULATION AB

     I, Paul Honda, do hereby certify that I am the Assistant Vice President,
Assistant Secretary and Compliance Officer of American Honda Finance
Corporation, a California corporation (the "Company"), and further certify on
behalf of the Company in its capacity as servicer (the "Servicer" and "Sponsor")
under the Sale and Servicing Agreement (the "Agreement") dated as of March 1,
2006 among the Servicer and Sponsor, American Honda Receivables Corp., as
Seller, and Honda Auto Receivables 2006-1 Owner Trust as follows:

     (i) A review of the activities of the Servicer during the 4 day period
     ended March 31, 2006, and of its performance under the Agreement has been
     made under my supervision;

     (ii) To the best of my knowledge and information, based upon such review,
     the Servicer has fulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement
     throughout such period in all material respects; and

     (iii) To the best of my knowledge and information, no event of default nor
     any event which with the giving of notice or lapse of time, or both, would
     become an event of default the Agreement, has occurred or is continuing.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 26th day of June,
2006.

                                   /s/ Paul C. Honda
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                                   Paul C. Honda
                                   Assistant Vice President, Assistant Secretary
                                   and Compliance Officer
```
Exhibit
99.4








CERTIFICATE
PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








In
connection with the Quarterly Report (the “Report”) on the Form 10-Q of Sona
Resources Inc. (the “Company”) for the nine months ended June 30, 2009 and for
the period from January 18, 2007 (date of inception) to June 30, 2009, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Monika Sagar,
Chief Accounting Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Director, 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 my knowledge and
belief:





1.    The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the
Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





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








August
11,
2009                                                MONIKA SAGAR


Monika
Sagar


Chief
Accounting Officer,


Chief
Financial Officer and Director











-1-
#### Frank H. Malone, Respondent, v. Elizabeth Lyons, Appellant.

Judgment of the Municipal Court affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Woodward, Jenks, Hooker, Rich and Miller, JJ., concurred.
Exhibit 31(ii)
                                 --------------



                                 CERTIFICATIONS
                                 --------------

      I, Steve Bailey, 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 Alternative Loan Trust 2006-11CB (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.   I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the
               servicer(s) and based on my knowledge and the compliance
               review(s) conducted in preparing the servicer compliance
               statement(s) required in this report under Item 1123 of
               Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act
               periodic reports, the servicer(s) have fulfilled their
               obligations under the servicing agreement(s) in all material
               respects; 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 parties: The
          Bank of New York, as Trustee.

        Date: March 27, 2007


           /s/ Steve Bailey
           -------------------------
           Steve Bailey
           Senior Managing Director, Loan Administration
#### John H. Pohlman, Sheriff and Receiver, Respondent, v. Grant Tilden, Appellant.

St. Louis Court of Appeals,

April 21, 1891.

.Practice, Appellate: weighing the evidence. Where there is substantial evidence in support of the verdict in an action at law, the finding will, upon appeal, be treated as conclusive.

*Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Court.*— Hon. Jacob Klein, Judge.

Affirmed.

*Dodge & Mulvihill,*for appellant.

*Ford*Smith, for respondent.

Rombauer, P. J.

The books of account of one Reynolds, an examiner of land titles, were seized under a writ of attachment, and the plaintiff sheriff was appointed receiver under the statute. Among the items on the books were two of $10 each, and two of $5 each, for certificates of title, and the plaintiff, claiming that the defendant was legally chargeable with the payment of these items, caused bills for them to be made out against defendant. The defendant refused to pay *570these bills, whereupon the plaintiff brought this suit, wherein he recovered judgment.

The defendant now complains that the court erred in refusing his instruction, and that the verdict is opposed to the evidence and weight of evidence. The cause was tried by the court without a jury. The defendant’s instruction, which the court refused, raised the defense of the statute of fraud as to the two $10 items. On what conception of law this instruction was asked is not apparent, for, conceding that this is a sale of chattels, yet the amount and value of the items challenged by the instruction was only $20. On the other hand if the action were one to hold the defendant liable for the debt, default or miscarriage of another, the judgment could, not stand, writing or no writing, as even a written promise in those cases is bound to be supported by a valid consideration.

The only question submitted by the evidence for the consideration of the trial court as to these items was, as declared by the court in an instruction given of its own motion, whether the work sued for was done upon the defendant’s request, and for his account. The court upon substantial evidence decided this question in the affirmative, and, as the weight of that evidence is not for our consideration, its finding is conclusive. As to the two $5 items it suffices to say that there was evidence tending to show that the defendant had admitted his liability for them to the plaintiff’s collector upon presentation of the bill.

All the judges concurring, the judgment is affirmed.
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 on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 of BreitBurn Energy Partners L.P (the “Partnership”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Halbert S. Washburn, Chief Executive Officer of BreitBurn GP, LLC, the general partner of the Partnership, 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 my knowledge:





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





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





/s/ Halbert S. WashburnHalbert S. WashburnChief Executive Officer of BreitBurn GP, LLCDated: March 9, 2011
Order entered July 3, 2018

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-18-00702-CV

PHILIPS JACOB VALLAKALIL AND REEJA SUSAN PHILIPS, Appellants

V.

JEREMY ERIC LARSEN AND TEXAS REAL ESTATE COMMISSION, Appellees

On Appeal from the 193rd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-17-10734

ORDER

Appellee Jeremy Eric Larsen has filed a Suggestion of Bankruptcy stating that he has 

filed for bankruptcy in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas. 

This automatically suspends further action in this appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 8.2.

Accordingly, we ABATE this appeal. It may be reinstated on prompt motion by any 

party complying with Rule 8.3 and specifying what further action, if any, is required from this 

Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 8.3.

/s/ ADA BROWN 

JUSTICE
```

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 162 (Wednesday, August 20, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 49223]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-19283]

[[Page 49223]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

Notice of Meeting of the Industry Trade Advisory Committee on 
Small and Minority Business (ITAC-11)

AGENCY: Office of the United States Trade Representative.

ACTION: Notice of a partially opened meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Industry Trade Advisory Committee on Small and Minority 
Business (ITAC-11) will hold a meeting on Monday, September 15, 2008, 
from 9 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. The meeting will be closed to the public from 
9 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. and opened to the public from 12:30 p.m. to 3:30 
p.m.

DATES: The meeting is scheduled for September 15, 2008, unless 
otherwise notified.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the U.S. Department of Commerce-
Herbert C. Humphrey Building, B841-B, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura Hellstern, DFO for ITAC-11 at 
(202) 482-3222, Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: During the opened portion of the meeting, 
the following agenda items will be considered.
     Results of Americas Competitiveness Forum.
     Results of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) 
Ministerial Meetings.
     FY08 vs. FY07 U.S./ Export-Import Bank of the United 
States (EXIM) Loans Issued to Small and Minority Business.
     World Bank Programs for Small Business/IFC.
     Gold Key Service in Latin America.
     U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (UPTO) Work that Helps to 
Promote U.S. Exports.

Colleen J. Litkenhaus,
Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Intergovernmental Affairs and 
Public Liaison.
[FR Doc. E8-19283 Filed 8-19-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3190-W7-P
```
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.1

                      Consent of Independent Accountants

  We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-3 (No. 333-33938 and No. 333-43196) and on Form S-8 (No.
33-76324, No. 333-09135, No. 333-57141 and No. 333-40940) of Natural
MicroSystems Corporation of our report dated January 19, 2001, relating to the
financial statements and financial statement schedule of Natural MicroSystems
Corporation, which appears in this Form 10-K.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Boston, Massachusetts
March 14, 2001
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-4855

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

JESSIE SCOTT,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, District

Judge. (CR-04-453)

Submitted: February 28, 2006 Decided: March 16, 2006

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Bruce A. Johnson, Jr., BRUCE A. JOHNSON, JR., L.L.C., Bowie,

Maryland, for Appellant. Paul J. McNulty, United States Attorney,

Owen M. Kendler, Special Assistant United States Attorney, G. David

Hackney, Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia,

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Jessie Scott appeals his conviction by a jury of

conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute more than fifty

grams of crack cocaine and more than five kilograms of cocaine, in

violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (2000), and possession of a firearm in

furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, in violation of 18

U.S.C.A. § 924(c)(1) (West 2000 & Supp. 2005). He contends that

the district court erred by denying his motion for judgment of

acquittal pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 29, and that the Government

failed to prove that venue was proper. We affirm.

Scott contends that the evidence did not support his

conspiracy and § 924(c) convictions. We review de novo the

district court’s denial of a Rule 29 motion. United States v.

Alerre, 430 F.3d 681, 693 (4th Cir. 2005). Where, as here, the

motion was based on a claim of insufficient evidence, “[t]he

verdict of a jury must be sustained if there is substantial

evidence, taking the view most favorable to the Government, to

support it.” Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60, 80 (1942). We

have reviewed the trial testimony in the joint appendix and are

convinced that the evidence was sufficient to convict Scott. See

United States v. Strickland, 245 F.3d 368, 384-85 (4th Cir. 2001)

(discussing elements of conspiracy offense); United States v.

Wilson, 135 F.3d 291, 305 (4th Cir. 1998) (upholding § 924(c)

conviction based on acts of co-conspirator); see also United
- 3 -

States v. Sun, 278 F.3d 302, 313 (4th Cir. 2002) (“[W]e do not

review the credibility of the witnesses and assume the jury

resolved all contradictions in the testimony in favor of the

government.”).

Scott also asserts that the Government failed to prove

that venue was proper in the Eastern District of Virginia. The

trial testimony belies his claim. See United States v. Bowens, 224

F.3d 302, 311 n.4 (4th Cir. 2000) (recognizing that “in a

conspiracy charge, venue is proper for all defendants wherever the

agreement was made or wherever any overt act in furtherance of the

conspiracy transpires”).

Accordingly, we affirm Scott’s convictions. 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.

AFFIRMED
Exhibit 32.2  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   I, Chris Hobbs, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:  (1) The Annual Report on Form 10-K/A (Amendment No. 1) of American Lithium Minerals, Inc. (the Company) for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2009 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of § 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 as of and for the periods covered in the Report.  Date:    January 6, 2010   /s/ Chris Hobbs Chris Hobbs, Chief Financial Officer
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-63,775-25

EX PARTE THOMAS WAYNE FLORENCE, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 10CR1217-83-10 IN THE 56TH DISTRICT COURT

FROM GALVESTON COUNTY

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of sexual assault

of a child and sentenced to seventy years’ imprisonment.

In his present application, Applicant raises three grounds. This application, however,

presents a more serious question. This Court’s records reflect that Applicant has filed six prior

applications pertaining to this conviction. It is obvious from the record that Applicant continues to

raise issues that have been presented and rejected in previous applications or that should have been
2

presented in previous applications. The writ of habeas corpus is not to be lightly or easily abused. 

Sanders v. U.S., 373 U.S. 1 (1963); Ex parte Carr, 511 S.W.2d 523 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974). 

Because of his repetitive claims, we hold that Applicant’s claims are barred from review under

Article 11.07, § 4, and are waived and abandoned by his abuse of the writ. This application is

dismissed.

Therefore, we instruct the Honorable Abel Acosta, Clerk of the Court of Criminal Appeals,

not to accept or file the instant application for a writ of habeas corpus, or any future application

pertaining to this conviction unless Applicant is able to show in such an application that any claims

presented have not been raised previously and that they could not have been presented in a previous

application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte Bilton, 602 S.W.2d 534 (Tex. Crim. App. 1980).

Copies of this order shall be sent to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice-Correctional

Institutions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division.

Filed: March 1, 2017

Do not publish
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 Trius Therapeutics, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John Schmid ,
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, 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,
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.



|                                                     
|-----------------------------------------------------
|/S/    JOHN
SCHMID                                   
|John Schmid                                          
|Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)

March 24, 2011

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.
#### Margaret McArthur, as Administratrix, etc., of Rosalie McArthur, Deceased, Respondent, v. Central Union Gas Company, Appellant.

Judgment and order reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event, unless plaintiff stipulates to reduce verdict to $1,500, in which event judgment as so modified and order affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Settle order on notice.
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 this Quarterly Report of Uplift Nutrition, Inc. (the "Registrant") as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the " Report"), I, Gary C. Lewis, 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 the best of my knowledge and belief:  (1) This 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Registrant.  Date:May 10, 2011/s/Gary C. LewisGary C. Lewis
President and Chief Executive Officer (CEO)  Date:May 10, 2011/s/Gary C. LewisGary C. Lewis
Principal Financial Officer (CFO) and Principal Accounting Officer