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

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 68 Agreed to House (ATH)]

  1st Session
H. J. RES. 68

Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2002, and 
                          for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 11, 2001

 Mr. Young of Florida introduced the following joint resolution; which 
            was referred to the Committee on Appropriations

                            October 11, 2001

Committee on Appropriations discharged; which was considered and agreed 
                                   to

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2002, and 
                          for other purposes.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That Public Law 107-44 is 
amended by striking ``October 16, 2001'' in section 107(c) and 
inserting in lieu thereof ``October 23, 2001''; by adding the following 
before the semicolon in section 101(b)(1) ``: Provided, That the rate 
for operations of the Defense Health Program may exceed the current 
rate as may be necessary to fund a pro rata share of the program 
expansion authorized by section 712(a) of the Floyd D. Spence National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-398)''; 
by striking section 115 and adding the following:
    ``Sec. 115. Notwithstanding the dates specified in section 7 of the 
Export-Import Bank Act of 1945 (12 U.S.C. 635f) and section 1(c) of 
Public Law 103-428, the Export-Import Bank of the United States shall 
continue to exercise its functions in connection with and in 
furtherance of its objects and purposes through the date specified in 
section 107(c) of this joint resolution.''; and adding the following 
new section:
    ``Sec. 123. Notwithstanding section 107, funds shall be available 
and obligations for mandatory payments due on or about November 1, 
2001, may continue to be made.''.
                                 <all>
```
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Dwayne A. Reddick

v. 05-cv-256-SM

United States Department

of Justice, et al. 

O R D E R

I herewith approve the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge

Muirhead dated May 11, 2006, no objection having been filed, for the reasons set

forth therein. The Plaintiff has alleged a collateral due process claim against the

DOJ and DEA arising from the inadequate notice with regard to the administrative

forfeiture of his property. All other claims are hereby dismissed.

SO ORDERED.

July 24, 2006 _________________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

Chief Judge

cc: Dwayne A. Reddick, pro se

Jean Weld, AUSA

Case 1:05-cv-00256-SM Document 18 Filed 07/24/06 Page 1 of 1
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 69 

To make daylight savings time permanent, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 4, 2021 

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

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To make daylight savings time permanent, and for other 

purposes. 

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 ‘‘Sunshine Protection 

5 Act of 2021’’. 

6 SEC. 2. MAKING DAYLIGHT SAVINGS TIME PERMANENT. 

7 (a) REPEAL OF TEMPORARY PERIOD FOR DAYLIGHT

8 SAVINGS TIME.—Section 3 of the Uniform Time Act of 

9 1966 (15 U.S.C. 260a) is hereby repealed. 

10 (b) ADVANCEMENT OF STANDARD TIME.— 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 69 IH

1 (1) IN GENERAL.—The second sentence of sub2 section (a) of section 1 of the Act of March 19, 

3 1918 (commonly known as the ‘‘Calder Act’’) (15 

4 U.S.C. 261), is amended— 

5 (A) by striking ‘‘4 hours’’ and inserting ‘‘3 

6 hours’’; 

7 (B) by striking ‘‘5 hours’’ and inserting ‘‘4 

8 hours’’; 

9 (C) by striking ‘‘6 hours’’ and inserting ‘‘5 

10 hours’’; 

11 (D) by striking ‘‘7 hours’’ and inserting ‘‘6 

12 hours’’; 

13 (E) by striking ‘‘8 hours’’ and inserting 

14 ‘‘by 7 hours’’; 

15 (F) by striking ‘‘9 hours’’ and inserting ‘‘8 

16 hours’’; 

17 (G) by striking ‘‘10 hours;’’ and inserting 

18 ‘‘9 hours;’’; 

19 (H) by striking ‘‘11 hours’’ and inserting 

20 ‘‘10 hours’’; and 

21 (I) by striking ‘‘10 hours.’’ and inserting 

22 ‘‘11 hours.’’. 

23 (2) STATE EXEMPTION.—Such section is fur24 ther amended by— 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 69 IH

1 (A) redesignating subsection (b) as sub2 section (c); and 

3 (B) inserting after subsection (a) the fol4 lowing: 

5 ‘‘(b) STANDARD TIME FOR CERTAIN STATES AND

6 AREAS.—The standard time for a State that has exempted 

7 itself from the provisions of section 3(a) of the Uniform 

8 Time Act of 1966 (15 U.S.C. 260a(a)), as in effect on 

9 the day before the date of the enactment of the Sunshine 

10 Protection Act of 2021, pursuant to such section, or an 

11 area of a State that has exempted such area from such 

12 provisions pursuant to such section, shall be, as such State 

13 considers appropriate— 

14 ‘‘(1) the standard time for such State or area, 

15 as the case may be, pursuant to subsection (a) of 

16 this section; or 

17 ‘‘(2) the standard time for such State or area, 

18 as the case may be, pursuant to subsection (a) of 

19 this section as it was in effect on the day before the 

20 date of the enactment of the Sunshine Protection 

21 Act of 2021.’’. 

22 (3) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Such section 

23 is further amended, in the second sentence of sub24 section (a), by striking ‘‘Except as provided in sec25 tion 3(a) of the Uniform Time Act of 1966 (15 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
4 

•HR 69 IH

1 U.S.C. 260a),’’ and inserting ‘‘Except as provided in 

2 subsection (b),’’. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

 v. Case No. 05-cr-89-01-SM

Ioan Emil Codarcea

O R D E R

Defendant's assented-to motion to continue the trial (document no. 30) is granted.

Trial has been rescheduled for the February 2006 trial period. Defendant shall file a Waiver

of Speedy Trial Rights not later than November 3, 2005. On the filing of such waiver, his

continuance shall be effective.

The court finds that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance outweigh

the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, 18 U.S.C. §

3161(h)(8)(B)(iv), in that failure to grant a continuance would unreasonably deny the

defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation taking into account the

exercise of due diligence under the circumstances.

Case 1:05-cr-00089-PB Document 31 Filed 10/25/05 Page 1 of 2
2

Final Pretrial Conference: January 27, 2006 at 4:30 PM 

Jury Selection: February 7, 2006 at 9:30 AM

SO ORDERED.

October 25, 2005 _________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

Chief Judge

cc: Robert Kinsella, Esq.

 Bjorn Lange, Esq. 

 U. S. Probation

 U. S. Marshal

Case 1:05-cr-00089-PB Document 31 Filed 10/25/05 Page 2 of 2
<PAGE>

                                                                 Exhibit 10.20

            SUMMARY OF COMPENSATION OF NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTORS OF
                       ANHEUSER-BUSCH COMPANIES, INC.

Each non-employee director of Anheuser-Busch Companies, Inc. (the "Company")
is entitled to:

       1.     An annual retainer of $60,000, which such director may elect
              to receive in stock, cash or a combination of stock and cash
              under the Anheuser-Busch Companies, Inc. Non-Employee Director
              Elective Stock Acquisition Plan amended and restated as of
              March 1, 2000;

       2.     A fee of $2,000 per meeting for each meeting of the Board or
              any committee of the Board or other meeting of the directors
              of the Company at which less than a quorum is present;

       3.     An annual fee of $60,000 less any board service fees that the
              director is paid by an affiliate company for service as a
              representative of the Company's Board of Directors on the
              Board of an affiliated company;

       4.     An annual fee of $10,000 for serving as the chair of the
              Compensation, Conflict of Interest, Corporate Governance,
              Finance and Pension Committees of the Board; and

       5.     An annual fee of $15,000 for serving as the chair of the Audit
              Committee of the Board.

Under the Anheuser-Busch Companies, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan for
Non-Employee Directors amended and restated as of March 1, 2000, each such
director may elect to defer payment of part or all of their directors' fees.

The Company pays for the travel and accommodation expenses of such director
(and spouse when requested by the Company) to attend meetings or corporate
functions; the Company will also pay the taxes related to such payments.
Such travel is by Company aircraft if available. As part of their continuing
education, such directors are encouraged to visit Company facilities and the
Company pays their expenses related to such visits. The Company reimburses
such directors for their expenses incurred in attending director education
courses. The Company provides each such director group term life insurance
coverage of $50,000.

Under the Anheuser-Busch Companies, Inc. Stock Plan for Non-Employee
Directors as amended and restated, each such director receives an annual
grant of options to purchase 5,000 shares of the Company's common stock (or
5,000 stock appreciation rights if a director is unable to own the Company's
common stock due to possible conflicts with state alcoholic beverage control
laws).

The directors are eligible to participate in the Anheuser-Busch Foundation
Matching Gift Program. The maximum gift total for a participant in this
Program is $10,000 in any calendar year.
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

**CERTIFICATIONOF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

 

I, William D. Larsson, certify that:

 

1.     I have reviewed this quarterlyreport on Form 10-Q of Precision Castparts Corp.;

 

2.     Based on my knowledge, thisreport does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.     Based on my knowledge, thefinancial statements, and other financial information included in this report,fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;

 

4.     The registrant’s othercertifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

a)     Designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

 

b)    Evaluated the effectiveness ofthe registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in thisreport our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

 

c)     Disclosed in this report anychange in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.     The registrant’s othercertifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation ofinternal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent function):

 

a)     All significant deficienciesand material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and

 

b)    Any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significantrole in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 
| Date: November 5, 2004     |
|----------------------------|
|                       |
| /s/ William D. Larsson     |   |
| William D. Larsson         |
| Senior Vice President  and |
| Chief Financial  Officer   |

 

----
| 1.   | to                  the best of our knowledge, the Report fully complies with the requirements                  of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;                  and |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2.   | to                  the best of our knowledge, the information contained in the Report                  fairly                  presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and                  results of                  operations of Registrant. |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:                  November 14, 2008 | /s/                  Burton Katz         |
|------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------|
|                                     | Burton                  Katz             |
|                                     | Chief                  Executive Officer |
|                                     |                                     |
| Date:                  November 14, 2008 | /s/                  Andrew Zaref        |
|                                     | Andrew                  Zaref            |
|                                     | Chief                  Financial Officer |

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997             MAR-31-1996
<CASH>                                           1,687                  10,629
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   20,197                  22,624
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,187                   2,500
<INVENTORY>                                      5,380                   5,182
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                27,173                  38,531
<PP&E>                                         254,474                 243,723
<DEPRECIATION>                                 117,778                 113,282
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 171,476                 176,746
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           27,172                  27,214
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                           181                     181
<OTHER-SE>                                      95,401                  92,837
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   171,476                 176,746
<SALES>                                          5,105                   4,495
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                31,156                  25,165
<CGS>                                            2,729                   2,581
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   15,829                  11,596
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    43                      80
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 956                   1,587
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,173                   1,411
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,655                     215
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,518                   1,196
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,518                   1,196
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .18                     .08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .18                     .08
        

</TABLE>
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13**  **- 6258** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. BRYAN CORNELIUS WATSON , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh
. W. Earl Britt , Senior District Judge. ( 5:10

- cr - 00294

- BR

- 2; 5:11

- cv - 00640

- BR )

Submitted : June 18, 2013 Decided: July 30, 2013

Before MOTZ, WYNN, and DIAZ , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Bryan Cornelius Watson, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. May

Parker, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Bryan Corneliu s Watson seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 201 3 ) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court deni es relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independent ly reviewed the record and conclude that Watson has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal3 contentions are adequately presente d in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Dennis A. Smith

v. Civil No. 05-fp-362

New Hampshire State Prison, Warden

ORDER GRANTING REQUEST TO

PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis is hereby

granted, but only for the purpose of waiving the filing fee. 

This case has been assigned number 05-cv-362-PB. 

SO ORDERED.

_________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge 

Date: October 21, 2005

cc: Dennis A. Smith, pro se

Case 1:05-cv-00362-PB Document 4 Filed 10/21/2005 Page 1 of 1

Smith v. NH Department of Corrections, Commissioner et al Doc. 4

Dockets.Justia.com
Exhibit 32.b



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, 
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of DataJungle Software Inc. (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that:



The Report on Form 10-QSB for the three and six months ended June 30, 2005 (the Form 10-QSB) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in the Form 10-QSB.



|Dated: August 12, 2005 |  | /s/Larry Bruce
Larry Bruce
Vice President Finance, Secretary and Treasurer
|---------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------





The foregoing certification is being furnished as an exhibit to the Form 10-QSB pursuant to Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-B and Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) and, accordingly, is not being filed as part of the Form 10-QSB for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.

Ø
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________ No. 98-2704EM

_____________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the Eastern v. * District of Missouri. * Thomas Brandon Bayer, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. *

_____________ Submitted: November 16, 1998

Filed: November 30, 1998

_____________ Before FAGG, BRIGHT, and BEAM, Circuit Judges.

_____________ PER CURIAM. Tho mas Brandon Bayer appeals the sentence imposed on him following th e revocation of his supervised releas e. Because Bayer raised no objection to the district court's sen tence, we apply the test of plain error review. See United States v
. Prendergast , 4 F.3d 560, 561-62 (8th Cir. 1993) (per curiam). The record shows the district court sentenced Bayer within the suggested guidelines imprisonment range,and well within the statutory maximum, thus we find no error in the district court's analysis, plain or o therwise. Additionally, Bayer's pro se motions for reconsideration of hi s sentence went beyond the district court's authority to correct a sentence for an-2-

arithmetical, technical, or other clear error. SeeFed. R. Crim. P. 35(c). Accordingly, we affirm the district court. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Order entered September 17, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-19-00063-CR

TEKLEA GEBREYESUS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 292nd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F-1855502-V

ORDER

The State’s second motion for extension of time to file its brief is GRANTED. The 

State’s brief is deemed FILED September 11, 2019. 

/s/ DAVID L. BRIDGES 

PRESIDING JUSTICE