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

107TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 112

Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2003, and for 

other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 1, 2002

Mr. YOUNG of Florida introduced the following joint resolution; which was 

referred to the Committee on Appropriations 

JOINT RESOLUTION

Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 

2003, and for other purposes.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 That Public Law 107–229 is further amended by striking 

4 the date specified in section 107(c) and inserting in lieu 

5 thereof ‘‘October 11, 2002’’.

Æ
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 10 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 10

 Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States with 
                     respect to the right to life.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            Februry 7, 2001

   Mrs. Emerson introduced the following joint resolution; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
 Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States with 
                     respect to the right to life.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That the following article is 
proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, 
which shall be valid only when ratified by the legislatures of three-
fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of 
final passage of this joint resolution:

                              ``Article--

    ``Section 1. With respect to the right to life, the word `person' 
as used in this article and in the fifth and fourteenth articles of 
amendment applies to all human beings irrespective of age, health, 
function, or condition of dependency, including their unborn offspring 
at every state of their biological development.
    ``Section 2. No unborn person shall be deprived of life by any 
person: Provided, however, That nothing in this article shall prohibit 
a law permitting only those medical procedures required to prevent the 
death of the mother of an unborn person: Provided further, That nothing 
in this article shall limit the liberty of a mother with respect to the 
unborn offspring of the mother conceived as a result of rape or incest.
    ``Section 3. The Congress and the several States shall have power 
to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.''.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 47 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 47

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to make 
  eligible for the Office of President a person who has been a United 
                    States citizen for twenty years.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 2, 2001

Mr. Frank (for himself and Mr. Hoekstra) introduced the following joint 
    resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to make 
  eligible for the Office of President a person who has been a United 
                    States citizen for twenty years.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House 
concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an 
amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be 
valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 
ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States 
within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:

                              ``Article--

    ``A person who is a citizen of the United States, who has been for 
twenty years a citizen of the United States, and who is otherwise 
eligible to the Office of President, is not ineligible to that Office 
by reason of not being a natural born citizen of the United States.''.
                                 <all>
```
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Disaster Declaration #11393]

# AGENCY:

U.S. Small Business Administration.

# ACTION:

Amendment 1.

# SUMMARY:

This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of New Mexico (FEMA-1783-DR), dated 08/14/2008.

*Incident:*                         Severe Storms and Flooding.                    

*Incident Period:*                         07/26/2008 through 08/20/2008.                    

*Effective Date:*                         08/20/2008.                    

*Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         10/14/2008.                    

*Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         05/14/2009.                    

# ADDRESSES:

Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing And Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for Private Non-Profit organizations in the State of New Mexico, dated 08/14/2008, is hereby amended to establish the incident period for this disaster as beginning 07/26/2008 and continuing through 08/20/2008.

All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59002 and 59008)

James E. Rivera,

Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.

[FR Doc. E8-20452 Filed 9-3-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
EX-35 (k)
(logo) WELLS FARGO

Corporate Trust Services
MAC N2702-011
9062 Old Annapolis Road
Columbia, MD 21045
410 884-2000
410 715-2380 Fax

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

March 12, 2007

GS Mortgage Securities Corporation
85 Broad Street
New York, NY 10004

RE: Annual Statement As To Compliance for GSR Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-5F

Per Section 3.02a of the Standard Terms to Master Servicing & Trust Agreement,
dated as of 5/1/2006, the undersigned Officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.,
(Master Servicer), hereby certifies the following for the 2006 calendar year or
portion thereof:

(i)     a review of such party's activities during the preceding calendar year
        or portion thereof and of such party's performance under this Agreement,
        or such other applicable agreement in the case of an Additional
        Servicer, has been made under such officer's supervision and

(ii)    to the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, such
        party has fulfilled all its obligations under this Agreement, or such
        other applicable agreement in the case of an Additional Servicer, in all
        material respects throughout such year or portion thereof, or, if there
        has been a failure to fulfill any such obligation in any material
        respect, specifying each such failure known to such officer and the
        nature and status thereof.

Certified By:
/s/ Kristen Ann Cronin
Kristen Ann Cronin, Vice President

Certified By:
/s/ Gordon Johnson
Gordon Johnson, Assistant Secretary
Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18
                            of the United States Code
        ----------------------------------------------------------------

     I, E. James Ferland,  Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive  Officer of
Public  Service  Electric  and Gas Company  (the  "Company"),  to the best of my
knowledge,  certify that (i) the  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q for the Quarter
ended June 30, 2002 (the "Periodic Report") fully complies with the requirements
of Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the  Securities  Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the
information  contained in the Periodic Report fairly  presents,  in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


                               E. JAMES FERLAND
                               -------------------------------------------------
                               E. James Ferland
                               Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
                               August 2, 2002
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Anthony F. Wise, Appellant, v Charles Scully, as Superintendent of Green Haven Correctional Facility, Respondent.

In a habeas corpus proceeding, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Carey, J.), entered January 9, 1989, which, after a hearing, dismissed the writ.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

We have reviewed the record and the petitioner’s *pro se*supplemental brief and agree with the petitioner’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious issues which could be raised on appeal. Habeas corpus does not lie to review claimed errors which were already considered on a direct appeal *(see, Matter of Williams v Scully,*135 AD2d 721; *People ex rel. Jones v Abrams,*114 AD2d 481). Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf., People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Bracken, J. P., Lawrence, Fiber and Harwood, JJ., concur.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 May 27, 2020 b0520

Order 

Clerk

May 27, 2020

160630

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 160630

COA: 346234

Oakland CC: 2018-266958-FH

KEVIN JOHN CARLSON,

Defendant-Appellant.

_____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 10, 2019 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
#### The People of the State of New York, Appellant, v Otilio Serrano, Respondent.

Appeal by the People from an order of the County Court, Orange County (Byrne, J.), dated June 22, 1989, which granted that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to dismiss the indictment.

Ordered that the order is reversed, as a matter of discretion, that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to dismiss the indictment is denied, the indictment is reinstated, and the matter is remitted to the County Court, Orange County, for further proceedings.

*498A court’s discretionary power to dismiss an indictment in the interest of justice is to be exercised sparingly *(see,*CPL 210.40 [1]; *People v McGraw,*158 AD2d 719; *People v Naik,*139 AD2d 535). Such a determination must be predicated " 'upon a "sensitive balancing” of the interests of the individual and the State’ ” *(People v Naik, supra,*quoting from *People v Kwok Ming Chan,*45 AD2d 613, 616; *People v Perez,*156 AD2d 7).

Upon reviewing the record we conclude that the defendant has not demonstrated that his prosecution or conviction would constitute or result in injustice. Although the defendant served in excess of 214 years in various forms of pretrial confinement at the time the application for dismissal in the interest of justice was made and may seek a further competency hearing if the charges are reinstated, that, in and of itself, does not justify dismissal in this case *(see, People v Diggs,*125 AD2d 189, 192; *People v Saunders,*161 AD2d 611).

In view of the circumstances, particularly the serious nature of the crimes charged, which include kidnapping and possession of a loaded firearm *(see,*CPL 210.40 [1] [a]; *People v Saunders, supra; People v Viszokai,*99 AD2d 519), the strong evidence of the defendant’s guilt *(see,*CPL 210.40 [1] [c]), and the deleterious impact upon the public’s confidence *(see,*CPL 210.40 [1] [g]), dismissal of the indictment is not warranted.

CPL 210.40 (1) (i), owing to the concerns for the sensibilities of crime victims, contemplates judicial consideration of the victim’s attitude with respect to an application to dismiss the indictment in the interests of justice. CPL 210.40 (1) (i) was enacted as "a response to the legitimate cries of victims of criminal conduct” and "memorializes and mandates recognition from the judicial officer that a complainant * * * has a right, albeit statutorily circumscribed by the discretion of the judge, to have a say in an interest of justice dismissal” (Bellacosa, Practice Commentary, McKinney’s Cons Laws of NY, Book 11 A, CPL 210.40, at 157; *see also,*Henderson, *The Wrongs of Victim’s Rights,*37 Stanford L Rev 937; Cardenas, *The Crime Victim in the Prosecutorial Process,*9 Harv JL & Pub Poly 357; Comment, *Judicially Initiated Prosecution: A Means of Preventing Continuing Victimization in the Event of Prosecutorial Inaction,*76 Cal L Rev 727). Here, the record reveals that no attempt was made to consult the victim about the application. Mangano, P. J., Rubin, Rosenblatt and Miller, JJ., concur.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Kevin Joyner, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Kellam, J.), rendered February 5, 1987, convicting him of attempted robbery in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf., People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Thompson, J. P., Brown, Rubin, Balletta and Miller, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT
32.4

Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 of
Chapter 63 of Title 18
of the United States Code

I,
Ralph Izzo, Chief Executive Officer of PSEG Power LLC, to the best of my
knowledge, certify that (i) the Quarterly Report of PSEG Power LLC on Form 10-Q
for the period ended June 30, 2007 (the Report) fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of PSEG
Power LLC.

| |                        
| | -----------------------
| | /s/ Ralph Izzo         
| |                        
| | Ralph Izzo             
| | PSEG Power LLC         
| | Chief Executive Officer
| | August 1, 2007         

---
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 175 (Tuesday, September 9, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 52297]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-20545]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration


Applications for Duty-Free Entry of Scientific Instruments

    Pursuant to Section 6(c) of the Educational, Scientific and 
Cultural Materials Importation Act of 1966 (Pub. L. 89-651, as amended 
by Pub. L. 106-36; 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR part 301), we invite comments 
on the question of whether instruments of equivalent scientific value, 
for the purposes for which the instruments shown below are intended to 
be used, are being manufactured in the United States.
    Comments must comply with 15 CFR 301.5(a)(3) and (4) of the 
regulations and be postmarked on or before September 29, 2008. Address 
written comments to Statutory Import Programs Staff, Room 2104, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, Washington, DC 20230. Applications may be 
examined between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. at the U.S. Department of 
Commerce in Room 2104.
    Docket Number: 08-043. Applicant: Harvard University, 7 Divinity 
Ave., SF 267C, Cambridge, MA 02138. Instrument: Electron Microscope, 
Model Tecnai G2 F20 TWIN. Manufacturer: FEI Company, the Netherlands. 
Intended Use: The instrument is intended to be used to study 
macromolecular complexes involved in a variety of cellular functions. 
The high-resolution information obtained with the instrument will be 
used to elucidate the chemical structure of these biological molecules 
and connect the structures to their function. Application accepted by 
Commissioner of Customs: August 15, 2008.
    Docket Number: 08-044. Applicant: Pennsylvania University, College 
of Medicine; 500 University Drive, Hershey, PA 17033. Instrument: 
Electron Microscope, Model JEM-1400. Manufacturer: JEOL, Ltd., Japan. 
Intended Use: This instrument will be used to study a wide range of 
biological materials, including biological samples of tissues from a 
variety of vertebrate species and from various organs. Specifically, 
the instrument will be used to identify detailed tissue structures in 
order to understand both normal physiology and pathophysiology. 
Application accepted by Commissioner of Customs: August 15, 2008.
    Docket Number: 08-045. Applicant: University of Texas at Austin, 1 
University Station, A4800, Austin, TX 78712. Instrument: Electron 
Microscope, Tecnai G2 Spirit BioTWIN. Manufacturer: FEI Company, Czech 
Republic. Intended Use: The instrument is intended to be used to 
examine biological specimens using transmission electron microscopy. 
The instrument will be used for a wide variety of samples applications. 
Application accepted by Commissioner of Customs: August 21, 2008.

    Dated: August 28, 2008.
Faye Robinson,
Director, Statutory Import Programs Staff.
[FR Doc. E8-20545 Filed 9-8-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-M
#### National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Appellant-Respondent, v United States Trust Company of New York, Respondent-Appellant. (And a Third-Party Action.)

Order Supreme Court, New York County (Irma Vidal Santaella, J.), entered June 12, 1989, denying plaintiff’s and defendant’s cross motions for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

It is undisputed that, on October 27, 1982, defendant and third-party plaintiff United States Trust Company of New York (U.S. Trust), pursuant to instructions received from third-party defendant Kent Winford, the principal of third-party defendant K.K. Winford & Company, Inc. (Winford), and a customer of the bank, issued a negotiable certificate of deposit (C.D.) due November 30, 1982 in the sum of $100,000. In accordance with its standard practice, no actual certificate was issued, but the C.D. was registered in "book entry” form and held in safekeeping in the name of plaintiff National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pa. (NUFI). The purpose of the C.D. was to provide NUFI with security for *250Winford’s performance in connection with an insurance program which Winford wished to obtain from plaintiff. Winford originally had wanted to set up a $100,000 escrow account for the same purpose, but when United States Trust declined to act as a fiduciary, Winford said, "All right, then I will just put the money in National Union’s name.” Thereafter, on November 11, 1982, NUFI and Winford entered into a security escrow agreement, wherein U.S. Trust was to make payments from the C.D. to NUFI upon its demands as amounts became payable from Winford and U.S. Trust was to be held harmless for any losses or liability if it acted in good faith and without negligence in accordance with terms of the agreement to which U.S. Trust was not a party and of which it had no notice. Upon maturity, the C.D. was rolled over pursuant to instructions received from NUFI, which also directed that the interest due was to be paid to Winford. These instructions continued to be received from NUFI until some time in 1984, when U.S. Trust received no response to its request for instructions. It then contacted Winford for such instructions and the rollovers continued pursuant to Winford’s instructions, until August 8, 1986, when, upon Winford’s instructions, U.S. Trust "broke” the C.D. (paid it out midterm) and paid the proceeds into two of Winford’s corporate checking accounts at U.S. Trust. In response to an inquiry from U.S. Trust’s vice-president, Winford explained that there was no longer a need for the C.D. because his relationship with National Union was going to come to an end.

Under the circumstances, questions of fact exist as to whether U.S. Trust acted properly and in good faith in following instructions given to it by its depositor and whether it was negligent in failing to give notice to NUFI of Winford’s liquidation of the C.D. Accordingly, the IAS court properly denied the cross motions for summary judgment. Concur— Kupferman, J. P., Ross, Ellerin, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.