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

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2908 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2908

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to expand eligibility for 
 the refundable credit for coverage under a qualified health plan, and 
                          for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 18, 2014

Mrs. Feinstein introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to expand eligibility for 
 the refundable credit for coverage under a qualified health plan, and 
                          for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Affordable Health Insurance for the 
Middle Class Act''.

SEC. 2. EXPANDING ELIGIBILITY FOR REFUNDABLE CREDIT FOR COVERAGE UNDER 
              A QUALIFIED HEALTH PLAN.

    (a) In General.--Subparagraph (A) of section 36B(c)(1) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``400 percent'' 
and inserting ``600 percent''.
    (b) Conforming Amendments.--
            (1) The table contained in clause (i) of section 
        36B(b)(3)(A) of such Code is amended in the first column of the 
        last row by striking ``400%'' and inserting ``600%''.
            (2) Clause (i) of section 36B(f)(2)(B) of such Code is 
        amended--
                    (A) by striking ``400 percent'' and inserting ``600 
                percent'', and
                    (B) in the first column of the last row of the 
                table contained in such clause, by striking ``400%'' 
                and inserting ``600%''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to taxable years ending after December 31, 2014.

SEC. 3. INCREASE IN EXCISE TAX RATE FOR SMALL CIGARS AND CIGARETTES.

    (a) In General.--
            (1) Small cigars.--Section 5701(a)(1) of the Internal 
        Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``$50.33'' and 
        inserting ``$52.83''.
            (2) Small cigarettes.--Section 5701(b)(1) of such Code is 
        amended by striking ``$50.33'' and inserting ``$52.83''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to articles removed (as defined in section 5702(j) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986) after December 31, 2014.
                                 <all>
```
News United States Air Force
 Around the Air Force: June 13Published June 14, 2018
                        
                        By Airman 1st Class Marquis Williams
                        
                        
                        Air Force TV
                
                **FORT GEORGE G. MEADE, Md. (AFNS)** – On this look Around the Air Force, there's a new parental leave policy and the Air Force wraps up hosting duties for the 2018 DoD Warrior Games. Hosted by Airman 1st Class Marqus Williams.
For previous episodes, click here for the Air Force TV page.**Related links:**
- Parental Leave
- Warrior Games Closing Ceremony
- Reimbursement IncreaseCMSAF 



Warrior Games 



Around the Air Force 



parental leave 



Kaleth Wright 



2018 Warrior Games 



Air ForceTV 



ATAF 



DOD Warrior Games
News United States Air Force
 Update: Air Force BMT graduation and schedulePublished April 7, 2020
                        
                        By Basic Military Training
                        
                        
                        737th Training Group
                **JOINT BASE SAN ANTONIO-LACKLAND, Texas (AFNS) --**
                Basic Military Training will temporarily graduate new Airmen in training week seven.
To fully maximize training effectiveness and space utilization to mitigate COVID-19, the U.S. Air Force Basic Military Training will accelerate BMT from eight and a half weeks to seven weeks of training according to Col. Michael Newsom, BMT commander.
This will allow BMT to restructure and enhance social-distancing requirements across the training campus to ensure the safety and security not just for the trainees, but for the Military Training Instructors, other active-duty members, civilians and contractors that support the mission.
Also, there will be rescheduling of recruit accessions to maintain social distancing mitigation efforts as to how BMT is innovating how Airmen are trained in order to meet the national security needs of the nation.
Therefore, all trainees in the BMT pipeline will graduate one week earlier than scheduled and ship directly the next day to their technical-training assignment.
All graduations will continue to be livestreamed.
The upcoming graduation schedule is as follows:
**Editor’s Note: Graduation times for Facebook live will be published the week of graduation on the U.S.Air Force Basic Military Training Facebook page.
Graduating Flights: 09 April 2020: Flights 257 thru 286
Graduating Flights: 16 Apr 2020: From 320 TRS: Flights 287 through 302
Graduating Flights 23 Apr 2020: From 323 TRS: Flights 303 through 318
Graduating Flights:30 Apr 2020: From 331 TRS: Flights 333 through 348
Graduating Flights: 7 May 2020: From 324 TRS: Flights 349 through 362
Graduating Flights: 14 May 2020: From 737 TRSS: Flights 363 through 376AFWN 



USAF 



AF 



Air Force 



basic military training 



BMT 



COVID-19 



Air Education and Training Command 



AETC 



Joint Base San Antonio-Lackland 



JBSA
1

The Honorable John A. Jarvey, United States District Judge for the Southern

District of Iowa.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 08-1025

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

v. * Southern District of Iowa.

*

Gary Alan Lynch, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: May 7, 2008

Filed: May 9, 2008

___________

Before BYE, SMITH, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Gary Alan Lynch challenges the sentence the district court1

 imposed after

revoking his supervised release. On appeal, he argues that the district court imposed

an unreasonable sentence because it did not determine that prison was the most

effective means of treatment for his substance abuse problem, and because his 12-

month prison sentence is “greater than necessary” to meet the statutory goals of

sentencing under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). 
-2-

The district court is not required to explicitly state that prison was the most

effective means of treating Lynch’s medical needs. See United States v. White Face,

383 F.3d 733, 740 (8th Cir. 2004) (district court need not mechanically list every

§ 3553(a) consideration when sentencing defendant upon revocation of supervised

release; all that is required is evidence that court has considered relevant matters and

that some reason be stated for its decision; if sentencing judge refers to some

considerations contained in § 3553(a), appellate court is ordinarily satisfied that

district court was aware of entire contents of relevant statute).

We conclude that Lynch’s sentence is not unreasonable. See 18 U.S.C.

§ 3583(e), (h) (authorizing up to 2-year prison term upon revocation of supervised

release where original offense was Class C felony; court may also order subsequent

supervised release for term not to exceed term of supervised release authorized by

statute for original offense minus any term of imprisonment imposed upon

revocation); United States v. Tyson, 413 F.3d 824, 825-26 (8th Cir. 2005) (per curiam)

(court reviews revocation sentences under “unreasonableness” standard announced in

United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 258-63 (2005)).

Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm.

______________________________
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-2023

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

RICKEY G. YOUNG,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James P. Jones, District Judge.

(CA-00-907-7)

Submitted: March 14, 2002 Decided: April 1, 2002

Before WILKINS, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Rickey G. Young, Appellant Pro Se. Rick A. Mountcastle, OFFICE OF

THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Abingdon, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Rickey G. Young seeks to appeal the district court’s order

granting the Government’s motion for a protective order. We

dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Young’s notice

of appeal was not timely filed.

When the United States is a party to a civil action, the

parties are accorded sixty days after entry of the district court’s

final judgment or order to note an appeal, see Fed. R. App. P.

4(a)(1), unless the district court extends the appeal period under

Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R.

App. P. 4(a)(6). This appeal period is “mandatory and

jurisdictional.” Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corrections, 434

U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S.

220, 229 (1960)).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket on

November 20, 2000. Young’s notice of appeal was filed on August 2,

2001. Because Young failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to

obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss

the appeal. 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.

DISMISSED
#### NORMANDY BEACH IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION v. COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, STATE OF NEW JERSEY, AND OCEAN COUNTY SEWERAGE AUTHORITY.

Nov. 20, 1979.

Petition for certification denied.
**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

        I, Steven P. Wyandt, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of Nitches, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the nine months ended May 31, 2006, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Nitches, Inc.

| By:    | /s/ Steven P. Wyandt                                  |   |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |                                                       |   |
| Name:  | Steven P. Wyandt                                      |   |
| Title: | Chief Executive Officer   and Chief Financial Officer |   |
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 08-6844

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee, 

 v. 

BENJAMIN COLWIN LEAVENS, 

 Defendant - Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, 

Chief District Judge. (7:07-cv-00158-FL; 7:05-cr-00082-FL-l) 

Submitted: February 5, 2009 Decided: February 17, 2009 

Before MICHAEL, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. 

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Benjamin Colwin Leavens, Appellant Pro Se. Steve R. Matheny, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2 

PER CURIAM: 

Benjamin Colwin Leavens seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 

Supp. 2008) motion. The order is not appealable unless a 

circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (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). A 

prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that 

reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the 

constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or 

wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district 

court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 

322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); 

Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have 

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Leavens 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 legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the 

court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
Exhibit 31.1

Certification of Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to

Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a)

I, Christopher J. Reinhard,
Chief Executive Officer of Cardium Therapeutics, Inc., certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Cardium Therapeutics, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does 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, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and
for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The small business issuers other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuers disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as
of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) disclosed in this report any change in the small business
issuers internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuers most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuers fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The small
business issuers other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuers auditors and the audit committee of the small business
issuers board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses
in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuers ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuers
internal control over financial reporting.

Date: May 15, 2006

/s/ Christopher J. ReinhardChristopher J. Reinhard, Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE> 1

                                                                     EXHIBIT 11

<TABLE>
                            ENGINEERED SUPPORT SYSTEMS, INC.
                    STATEMENT RE: COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE
<CAPTION>
                                           Three Months Ended          Nine Months Ended
                                                July 31                     July 31
                                        ------------------------    ------------------------
                                           1997          1996          1997          1996
                                        ----------    ----------    ----------    ----------
<S>                                     <C>           <C>           <C>           <C>
NET INCOME                              $1,297,657    $  916,394    $3,198,793    $2,119,430
                                        ==========    ==========    ==========    ==========
NET INCOME PER SHARE

  Average shares outstanding             3,150,989     3,098,075     3,170,092     3,035,894
                                        ==========    ==========    ==========    ==========
  Net income                                 $ .41         $ .30         $1.01         $ .70
                                        ==========    ==========    ==========    ==========

PRIMARY EARNINGS PER SHARE

  Average shares outstanding             3,150,989     3,098,075     3,170,092     3,035,894
  Net effect of dilutive
    stock options<F1>                      135,583       171,881       126,619       204,992
                                        ----------    ----------    ----------    ----------
                                         3,286,572     3,269,956     3,296,711     3,240,886
                                        ==========    ==========    ==========    ==========
  Net income                                 $ .39         $ .28         $ .97         $ .65
                                        ==========    ==========    ==========    ==========

FULLY DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE

  Average shares outstanding             3,150,989     3,098,075     3,170,092     3,035,894

  Net effect of dilutive stock
    options<F1>                            151,348       171,706       160,338       214,328
                                        ----------    ----------    ----------    ----------
                                         3,302,337     3,269,781     3,330,430     3,250,222
                                        ==========    ==========    ==========    ==========
  Net income                                 $ .39         $ .28         $ .96         $ .65
                                        ==========    ==========    ==========    ==========
<FN>
<F1> Based on the treasury stock method.
</TABLE>

                                    10
Exhibit 31.1




Certification of Principal Executive and Financial Officer


Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as Adopted Pursuant to


Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





In connection with the Annual Report of Polar Petroleum Corp., a Nevada corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending March 31, 2013, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Daniel Walker, Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certifies to the best of his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





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





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





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Polar Petroleum Corp., and will be retained by Polar Petroleum Corp., and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.








/s/Daniel Walker


Daniel Walker


Principal Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer


July 16, 2013
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of EDAC
Technologies Corporation (the "Company") for the period ended June28, 2003, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), the undersigned, Dominick A. Pagano, Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

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

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

Dated: August 5, 2003                     /s/ Dominick A. Pagano
                                          -------------------------
                                          Dominick A. Pagano
                                          Chief Executive Officer

         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to EDAC Technologies Corporation and will be retained by EDAC
Technologies Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                            JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                              MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                      3,748,400
<SECURITIES>                                  985,400         
<RECEIVABLES>                                 395,300
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            5,129,100 
<PP&E>                                     48,838,600
<DEPRECIATION>                             17,545,300
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             36,620,100
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       1,589,300
<BONDS>                                    33,314,200
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                            0
<OTHER-SE>                                  (505,300)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               36,620,100
<SALES>                                             0 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            2,520,600
<CGS>                                               0         
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               1,211,400 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               39,600
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            631,900
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               269,900
<INCOME-TAX>                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           269,900
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0 
<NET-INCOME>                                  269,900
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       0
        

</TABLE>