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

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1133 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1133

  To amend the impact aid program under the Elementary and Secondary 
Education Act of 1965 relating to the calculation of payments for small 
                      local educational agencies.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 20, 2001

Mr. Watts of Oklahoma introduced the following bill; which was referred 
            to the Committee on Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the impact aid program under the Elementary and Secondary 
Education Act of 1965 relating to the calculation of payments for small 
                      local educational agencies.

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

SECTION 1. CALCULATION OF PAYMENT UNDER IMPACT AID PROGRAM FOR SMALL 
              LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES.

    Section 8003(b)(3)(B)(iv) of the Elementary and Secondary Education 
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7703(b)(3)(B)(iv)) is amended by inserting after 
``of the State in which the agency is located'' the following: ``or 
less than the average per pupil expenditure of all the States''.
                                 <all>
```
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 02-40314

Conference Calendar

 

MARCO ANTONIO ZAPATA-RODRIGUEZ,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

MICHAEL PURDY,

Respondent-Appellee.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. C-01-CV-205

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

December 12, 2002

Before JOLLY, JONES, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Marco Antonio Zapata-Rodriguez, who was convicted of several

drug-related charges, appeals the district court’s dismissal of

his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas corpus petition. He argued that his

conviction and sentence were invalid under Apprendi v. New

Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000). Apprendi does not apply

retroactively to cases on collateral review, and an Apprendi

claim does not satisfy the test for filing a 28 U.S.C. § 2241
No. 02-40314

-2-

petition under the savings clause of 28 U.S.C. § 2255. See

Wesson v. U.S. Penitentiary, Beaumont, TX, 305 F.3d 343, 347-48

(5th Cir. 2002). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court

is AFFIRMED.
Case 1:04-cv-00390-SM Document 1 Filed 10/19/04 Page 1 of 3
Case 1:04-cv-00390-SM Document 1 Filed 10/19/04 Page 2 of 3
Case 1:04-cv-00390-SM Document 1 Filed 10/19/04 Page 3 of 3
#### The State, ex rel. Codispoti, *v.*Industrial Commission of Ohio et al.

(No. 24131

Decided October 18, 1933.)

*Mr. Paul Blasie*and *Messrs. Buonpane £ Buonpane,*for relator.

*Mr. John W. Brieher,*attorney general, *Mr. R. R. Zurmehly*and *Messrs. Amerman £ Mills,*for respondents.

It is ordered and adjudged that writ of mandamus be denied for the reason that the relator was awarded and accepted full compensation under the statute for the injuries sustained.

*Writ denied.*

Weygandt, C. J., Allen, Stephenson, Jones, Matthias, Beyis and Zimmerman, JJ., concur.
#### Anna M. Schlosberg, Appellant, v Clifford L. Schlosberg, Respondent.

In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the plaintiff wife appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Putnam County (Hickman, J.), entered July 26, 1989, as limited her award of maintenance to the sum of $500 per week for a period of two years and failed to award her interest on her share of the appreciation of certain limited partnership interests.

Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, by deleting from the fifteenth decretal paragraph thereof the words "two (2)” and, by substituting therefor the words "seven (7)”; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs to the plaintiff.

The Supreme Court awarded the plaintiff (1) sole ownership and exclusive possession of the marital home, which had a net value of approximately $347,000, and (2) a distributive award in the amount of $129,600. In addition, she is able to support herself as a registered nurse. Under these circumstances, the plaintiff is not entitled to permanent maintenance *(see, Maloney v Maloney,*137 AD2d 666; *Lord v Lord,*124 AD2d 930). However, in light of "the marked disparity between the income and resources of the respective parties”, we are of the view that the duration of the defendant’s obligation to pay maintenance should be increased from a period of 2 years to a period of 7 years *(see, Denholz v Denholz,*147 AD2d 522, 524; *Pressman v Pressman,*143 AD2d 555; *Panaggio v Panaggio,*133 AD2d 526; *see also, Sperduto v Sperduto,*145 AD2d 476).

We have examined the plaintiff’s remaining argument and find it to be without merit *(cf., Largiader v Largiader,*151 AD2d 724). Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Rubin and Rosenblatt, 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.

April 29, 2020

t0420 

# Order

Clerk April 29, 2020

159758

KICKHAM HANLEY PLLC,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v SC: 159758

COA: 341076

Oakland CC: 2017

- 159351

- CZ

OAKLAND COUNTY MICHIGAN,

Defendant,

and

GEORGE W. KUHN DRAINAGE DISTRICT,

Defendant

- Appellee.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Cou rt, the application for leave to appeal the May 2, 2019

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

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
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.
 Department of Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
 Docket Nos.Reliant Energy Mandalay, Inc
EG08-1-000Arlington Wind Power Project LLC
EG08-2-000Forked River Power LLC
EG08-3-000( print page 6953)FPL Energy Oliver Wind II, LCC
EG08-4-000Marble River, LLC
EG08-5-000Santa Rosa Energy Center, LLC
EG08-6-000Long Beach Peakers LLC
EG08-7-000Plum Point Energy Associates, L.L.C
EG08-8-000Wharton County Generation, LLC
EG08-9-000Macquarie Bank Limited
FC08-1-000
 Take notice that during the month of December 2007, the status of the above-captioned entities as Exempt Wholesale Generators or Foreign Utility Companies became effective by operation of the Commission's regulations. 18 CFR 366.7(a). Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary.


[FR Doc. E8-2109 Filed 2-5-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
#### Fosdick, a Taxpayer, *v.*Dykstra, City Manager, et al.

(No. 24553

Decided February 21, 1934.)

*Mr. Robert Fosdick*and *Mr. Earry F. Kwnler,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. John D. Ellis,*city solicitor, and *Mr. Leonard Shore,*for defendants in error.

It is hereby ordered and adjudged that said petition in error be, and the same hereby is, dismissed for the *596reason no debatable constitutional question is involved in said cause.

*Petition in error dismissed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Allen, Stephenson, Jones, Matthias, Bevis and Zimmerman, JJ., concur.
#### Joseph Richard Ralph ROY, Petitioner, v. Marlon Colvin Tolles ROY, Respondent.

Supreme Court of Florida. Division A.

Jan. 21, 1955.

Joseph A. Scarlett and Carmelita B. Tar-tarí, De Land, for petitioner.

J. Kermit Coble, Daytona Beach, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The record and the briefs in this cause have been examined and petition for cer-tiorari is denied *on*authority of Todd v. Todd, 151 Fla. 134, 9 So.2d 279.

It is so ordered.

MATHEWS, C. J., and TERRELL, SE-BRING and ROBERTS, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           1,498
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  163,020
<ALLOWANCES>                                     4,671
<INVENTORY>                                     98,259
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               307,206
<PP&E>                                         455,025
<DEPRECIATION>                               (226,429)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 861,579
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          170,710
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        35,929
<OTHER-SE>                                     290,691
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   861,579
<SALES>                                        890,595
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               896,385
<CGS>                                          479,010
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  611,329
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               244,917
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   347
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               7,059
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 32,733
<INCOME-TAX>                                    13,100
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             19,633
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    19,633
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.58
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.57
        

</TABLE>
CERTIFICATIONI, Kokmeng Koh, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-Drequired to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K ofPrincipal Life Income Fundings Trust 19 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);  2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as whole, donot contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which suchstatements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;  3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and otherinformation required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by thisreport is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;  4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement(s) required inthis report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the ExchangeAct period reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicingagreement(s) in all material respects; and  5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria forasset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment ofcompliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be includedin this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwisedisclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in suchreports 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 thefollowing unaffiliated parties: Citibank, N.A. and Bankers Trust Company, N.A.Date: March 28, 2007   /s/ Kokmeng Koh     Kokmeng Koh  Second Vice President
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, April 11, 2019. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, April 11, 2019 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A19I0202. DAILY UNDERWRITERS OF AMERICA v. VERONICA WILLIAMS.
Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of this order. The Clerk of Superior Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record transmitted to the Court of Appeals.
LC NUMBERS: 16CV00363
Amendment No. 2 to The PMI Group, Inc. Retirement Plan



 EXHIBIT 10.4a 
  
 AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO 
 THE PMI GROUP, INC. RETIREMENT PLAN 
 (July 30, 2002 Restatement) 
  
 THE PMI GROUP, INC. (the “Company”), having established The
PMI Group, Inc. Retirement Plan (the “Plan”) effective as of April 1, 1995, having amended and restated the Plan in its entirety most recently effective as of July 30, 2002, and having amended the restated Plan on one subsequent
occasion, hereby again amends the restated Plan, as follows: 
  

	 	1.	Section 9.02 is amended in its entirety to read as follows: 

  

	 	9.02	Involuntary Lump Sum Payment. If at any time a Participant has incurred a Termination but has not begun to receive benefit payments, and is entitled to a benefit (whether
Early, Normal, or Postponed) or to a Deferred Vested Benefit, or a Beneficiary is entitled to a death benefit hereunder, that has an Actuarial Equivalent value of $1,000 or less, the Actuarial Equivalent value shall be paid to such Participant or
Beneficiary in a lump sum in lieu of, and in full satisfaction of, his benefit under this Plan. Neither the consent of the Beneficiary, the Participant nor of his Spouse shall be necessary to make such payment. Upon the making of such payment,
neither the Beneficiary, the Participant nor his Spouse shall have any further benefit under this Plan. Participants deemed to have a zero accrued account benefit at Termination shall be deemed to have been cashed out under this Section 9.02.”


  

	 	2.	This Amendment No. 2 to the restated Plan shall be effective as of March 28, 2005. 

  
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company, by its duly authorized officer, has executed this Amendment No. 2 to the restated Plan on
the date indicated below. 
  
  

			
	THE PMI GROUP, INC.
		
	 By:
	 	 /s/ Charles Broom

	 Its:
	 	 Senior Vice President

	 Dated:
	 	 March 10, 2005
Exhibit 32.1



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 of NeoVolta,
Inc. (the “registrant”) on Form 10-K/A for the year ended June 30, 2022, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Brent S. Willson, Chief Executive Officer of the registrant, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of this 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 and 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 registrant at the dates and for the periods indicated.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | By: /s/ Brent S. Willson     
| | -----------------------------
| | Brent S. Willson             
| | Chief Executive Officer      
| | (Principal Executive Officer)
| | October 28, 2022
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 175 (Tuesday, September 9, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 52350]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-20858]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. EG08-71-000; EG08-72-000; EG08-73-000; EG08-74-000; FC08-
3-000; FC08-4-000; FC08-5-000]


UniSource Energy Development Company, Locust Ridge II, LLC, 
Lempster Wind, LLC, Happy Jack Windpower, LLC,Arasmeta Captive Power 
Company Private Limited, Sitapuram Power Limited, Regency Power 
Corporation Private Limited; Notice of Effectiveness of Exempt 
Wholesale Generator or Foreigen Utility Company Status

September 3, 2008.
    Take notice that during the month of March 2008, the status of the 
above captioned entities as Exempt Wholesale Generators or Foreign 
Utility Companies became effective by operation of the Commission's 
regulations 18 CFR 366.7(a).

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-20858 Filed 9-8-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
IA

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 9

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution to provide for a balanced budget

for the United States Government and for greater accountability in

the enactment of tax legislation.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 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 to provide for

a balanced budget for the United States Government

and for greater accountability in the enactment of tax

legislation.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That the following article is proposed as an amendment

4 to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be

5 valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitu6 tion if ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the

7 several States within seven years after its submission to

8 the States for ratification:
2

HJ 9 IH

1 ‘‘ARTICLE—

2 ‘‘SECTION 1. Prior to each fiscal year, the Congress

3 and the President shall agree on an estimate of total re4 ceipts for that fiscal year by enactment into law of a joint

5 resolution devoted solely to that subject. Total outlays for

6 that year shall not exceed the level of estimated receipts

7 set forth in such joint resolution, unless three-fifths of the

8 total membership of each House of Congress shall provide,

9 by a rollcall vote, for a specific excess of outlays over esti10 mated receipts.

11 ‘‘SECTION 2. Whenever actual outlays exceed actual

12 receipts for any fiscal year, the Congress shall, in the en13 suing fiscal year, provide by law for the repayment of such

14 excess. The public debt of the United States shall not be

15 increased unless three-fifths of the total membership of

16 each House shall provide by law for such an increase by

17 a rollcall vote.

18 ‘‘SECTION 3. Prior to each fiscal year, the President

19 shall transmit to the Congress a proposed budget for the

20 United States Government for that fiscal year in which

21 total outlays do not exceed total receipts.

22 ‘‘SECTION 4. No bill to increase revenue shall become

23 law unless approved by a majority of the total membership

24 of each House by a rollcall vote.
3

HJ 9 IH

1 ‘‘SECTION 5. The provisions of this article are waived

2 for any fiscal year in which a declaration of war is in ef3 fect.

4 ‘‘SECTION 6. Total receipts shall include all receipts

5 of the United States except those derived from borrowing.

6 Total outlays shall include all outlays of the United States

7 except for those for repayment of debt principal.

8 ‘‘SECTION 7. This article shall take effect beginning

9 with the second fiscal year after its ratification.’’.

Æ
EXHIBIT
  32.5

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

I,
Thomas M. OFlynn, Chief Financial 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 quarter ended September 30, 2003 (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 PSEG Power LLC.

| | /s/ Thomas
  M. OFlynn  
| | -------------------------
| |                          
| | Thomas M.
  OFlynn      
| | PSEG Power
  LLC         
| | Chief
  Financial Officer
| | October 30,
  2003