alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
S. 2896

One Hundred Eighth Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,

the twentieth day of January, two thousand and four

An Act

To modify and extend certain privatization requirements of the Communications

Satellite Act of 1962.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. PRIVATIZATION REQUIREMENTS MODIFIED AND

EXTENDED.

Section 621(5) of the Communications Satellite Act of 1962

(47 U.S.C. 763) is amended—

(1) in subparagraph (A)(ii), by striking ‘‘June 30, 2004’’

and inserting ‘‘June 30, 2005’’; and

(2) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:

‘‘(F) Notwithstanding subparagraphs (A) and (B), a

successor entity may be deemed a national corporation

and may forgo an initial public offering and public securities listing and still achieve the purposes of this section

if—

‘‘(i) the successor entity certifies to the Commission

that—

‘‘(I) the successor entity has achieved substantial dilution of the aggregate amount of signatory

or former signatory financial interest in such

entity;

‘‘(II) any signatories and former signatories

that retain a financial interest in such successor

entity do not possess, together or individually,

effective control of such successor entity; and

‘‘(III) no intergovernmental organization has

any ownership interest in a successor entity of

INTELSAT or more than a minimal ownership

interest in a successor entity of Inmarsat;

‘‘(ii) the successor entity provides such financial

and other information to the Commission as the

Commission may require to verify such certification;

and

‘‘(iii) the Commission determines, after notice and

comment, that the successor entity is in compliance

with such certification.

‘‘(G) For purposes of subparagraph (F), the term

‘substantial dilution’ means that a majority of the financial
S. 2896—2

interests in the successor entity is no longer held or controlled, directly or indirectly, by signatories or former signatories.’’.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Lillian Gipson","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/lillian-gipson-1nasa-gov\/","title":"Air Traffic Management – eXploration (ATM-X) Description","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"QOyCaqwaBW\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/directorates\/armd\/atm-x-description\/\">Air Traffic Management – eXploration (ATM-X) Description<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/directorates\/armd\/atm-x-description\/embed\/#?secret=QOyCaqwaBW\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Air Traffic Management – eXploration (ATM-X) Description” — NASA\" data-secret=\"QOyCaqwaBW\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/uam-v3_0.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":450}
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

TRINETTE G. KENT (State Bar No. 025180)

KENT LAW OFFICES

10645 North Tatum Blvd., Suite 200-192

Phoenix, AZ 85028 

Telephone: (480) 247-9644

Facsimile: (480) 717-4781

E-mail: tkent@kentlawpc.com

Of Counsel to:

Nitzkin & Associates

22142 West Nine Mile Road

Southfield, MI 48033

Telephone: (248) 353-2882

Facsimile: (248) 353-4840

Attorneys for Plaintiff,

Gary Quinones

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Gary Quinones,

Plaintiff,

vs.

Trans Union, LLC, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.: CV-15-01994-PHX-DJH

NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT AS TO 

DEFENDANTS DIAMOND 

RESORTS INTERNATIONAL, INC.,

ONLY

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Plaintiff and Defendant, Diamond Resort 

International, Inc., in the above-captioned case have reached a settlement. The parties 

Case 2:15-cv-01994-SMM Document 92 Filed 10/20/16 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

anticipate filing a Stipulation of Dismissal with Prejudice as to Diamond Resort 

International, Inc., only, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a) within 60 days.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 20th day of October, 2016.

 KENT LAW OFFICES

By: /s/ Trinette G. Kent 

Trinette G. Kent 

Attorney for Plaintiff,

Gary Quinones

Case 2:15-cv-01994-SMM Document 92 Filed 10/20/16 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2762 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2762

 To encourage the use of indigenous feedstock from the Caribbean Basin 
           region with respect to ethyl alcohol for fuel use.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July  22, 2004

  Mr. Grassley (for himself and Mr. Coleman) introduced the following 
  bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To encourage the use of indigenous feedstock from the Caribbean Basin 
           region with respect to ethyl alcohol for fuel use.

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

SECTION 1. ETHYL ALCOHOL FOR FUEL USE.

    (a) In General.--Subparagraph (B) of section 423(c)(3) of the Tax 
Reform Act of 1986 (19 U.S.C. 2703 note) is amended to read as follows:
                    ``(B) The local feedstock requirement with respect 
                to any calendar year is--
                            ``(i) 0 percent with respect to the base 
                        quantity that is entered;
                            ``(ii) 30 percent with respect to the 
                        35,000,000 gallons of dehydrated alcohol and 
                        mixtures entered in excess of the base 
                        quantity; and
                          ``(iii) 50 percent with respect to all 
                        dehydrated alcohol and mixtures entered after 
                        the amount specified in clause (ii) is 
                        entered.''.
    (b) Base Quantity.--Clause (i) of section 423(c)(3)(C) of the Tax 
Reform Act of 1986 (19 U.S.C. 2703 note) is amended to read as follows:
                            ``(i) The term `base quantity' means, with 
                        respect to dehydrated alcohol and mixtures 
                        entered during any calendar year--
                                    ``(I) 90,000,000 gallons in the 
                                case of dehydrated alcohol and mixtures 
                                produced in a distillation facility 
                                located in a beneficiary country that 
                                was established before, and in 
                                operation on July 1, 2004; and
                                    ``(II) 0 gallons in the case of 
                                dehydrated alcohol and mixtures 
                                produced in any other distillation 
                                facility located in a beneficiary 
                                country.''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to calendar years beginning after 2004.
                                 <all>
```
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-6032
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JOHN THOMAS, JR., Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Chief District Judge. (CR-93-171, CA-95-377-R) Submitted: April 15, 1996 Decided: May 2, 1996 Before ERVIN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John Thomas, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Joseph William Hooge Mott, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1988) motion. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Thomas , Nos. CR-93-171; CA-95-377-R (W.D. Va. Jan. 2, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
I

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4797

To amend the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 to require that a

State having an approved coastal zone management program must be

provided a copy of an environmental impact statement to enable its

review under that Act of any plan for exploration or development of,

or production from, any area in the coastal zone of the State.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 10, 1998

Mr. GOSS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Resources

A BILL

To amend the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 to

require that a State having an approved coastal zone

management program must be provided a copy of an

environmental impact statement to enable its review

under that Act of any plan for exploration or development of, or production from, any area in the coastal

zone of the State.

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 ‘‘OCS Environmental

5 Consistency Act of 1998’’.
2

•HR 4797 IH

1 SEC. 2. REQUIREMENT THAT STATE HAVE ENVIRON2 MENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT TO REVIEW

3 PLAN FOR EXPLORATION, DEVELOPMENT, OR

4 PRODUCTION IN THE COASTAL ZONE OF THE

5 STATE.

6 Section 307(c)(3) of the Coastal Zone Management

7 Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1456(c)(3)(B)) is amended by

8 adding at the end the following:

9 ‘‘(C) For purposes of subparagraph (B), a State shall

10 not be considered to have received all necessary data and

11 information with respect to a plan for exploration, develop12 ment, or production, before the date the State has received

13 a copy of an environmental impact statement under sec14 tion 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act

15 of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)) that applies to that explo16 ration, development, or production.’’.

Æ
Exhibit 31.1




                                  CERTIFICATION

     I, Charles  Dawson,  Chief Executive  Officer of Five Star Products,  Inc.,
certify that:

     1. I have reviewed  this annual report on Form 10-K of Five Star  Products,
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;


Date: April 29, 2004




                                                              Charles Dawson
#### Shirley WIGGINS; Ronnie Howell, Plaintiffs—Appellants, v. MARTIN COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION; Karen Dameron; Reatha Garner, deceased; Angela Matthews; Willie C. Peele; Lisa Gauls; Janet Kallen; Tom Daily; Bonita Andrews; Brenda White; Perry James; Angela Freeman, Defendants—Appellees.

No. 04-2118.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 28, 2005.

Decided March 18, 2005.

Before WILLIAMS and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM.

Appellants appeal the district court’s order dismissing this action filed under the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *See Wiggins v. Martin County Bd. of Ed.,*No. CA-04-17-4-FL(4) (E.D.N.C. filed Aug. 18, 2004 & entered Aug. 19, 2004). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED*
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

November 23, 2009 

p1116 

Order 

 

November 23, 2009 

139635 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 139635 

 COA: 285481 

Wayne CC: 08-000658-FH 

GRADY JEROME ELERSON, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 11, 2009 

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.
file:///K|/1%20KK%20Clients/Martinez/Pleadings/Corrected%20Civil%20Cover%20Sheet.html[9/3/2015 2:12:54 PM]

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Civil Cover Sheet

This automated JS-44 conforms generally to the manual JS-44 approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974. The

data is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. The information contained herein neither

replaces nor supplements the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law. This form is authorized for use only in the District

of Arizona.

The completed cover sheet must be printed directly to PDF and filed as an attachment to the

Complaint or Notice of Removal.

Plaintiff(s): Cleopatria Martinez Defendant(s): Maricopa County Community College

District ; Rufus and Debra Glasper

County of Residence: Maricopa County of Residence: Maricopa

County Where Claim For Relief Arose: Maricopa

Plaintiff's Atty(s): Defendant's Atty(s):

Kevin Koelbel 

7303 W. Boston Street

Chandler, Arizona 85226

4807057550

II. Basis of Jurisdiction: 1. U.S. Government Plaintiff

III. Citizenship of Principal Parties

(Diversity Cases Only)

Plaintiff:- 1 Citizen of This State

Defendant:- 1 Citizen of This State

IV. Origin : 1. Original Proceeding

V. Nature of Suit: 440 Other Civil Rights

VI.Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. section 1983; Denial of due process and liberty interest

VII. Requested in Complaint

Class Action:No

Dollar Demand:

Jury Demand: Yes

VIII. This case IS RELATED to Case Number 2:15-cv-01759 assigned to Judge Neil V. Wake.

Signature: Kevin Koelbel

Case 2:15-cv-01759-NVW Document 6 Filed 09/03/15 Page 1 of 2
file:///K|/1%20KK%20Clients/Martinez/Pleadings/Corrected%20Civil%20Cover%20Sheet.html[9/3/2015 2:12:54 PM]

 Date: 09/03/2015

If any of this information is incorrect, please go back to the Civil Cover Sheet Input form using the Back button in your browser and

change it. Once correct, save this form as a PDF and include it as an attachment to your case opening documents.

Revised: 01/2014

Case 2:15-cv-01759-NVW Document 6 Filed 09/03/15 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 473 Introduced in House (IH)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 473

To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to prohibit nonparty 
   multicandidate political committee contributions in elections for 
                Federal office, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 21, 1997

Mr. Gilchrest introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on House Oversight

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to prohibit nonparty 
   multicandidate political committee contributions in elections for 
                Federal office, 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. PROHIBITION OF CONTRIBUTIONS BY NONPARTY MULTICANDIDATE 
              POLITICAL COMMITTEES IN ELECTIONS FOR FEDERAL OFFICE.

    Section 315 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 
441a) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
    ``(i)(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, no 
nonparty multicandidate political committee may make any contribution 
to a candidate for Federal office.
    ``(2) As used in this subsection, the term `multicandidate 
political committee' has the meaning given that term in subsection 
(a)(4).''.

SEC. 2. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ELECTION PROHIBITION OF CONTRIBUTIONS 
              FROM INDIVIDUAL NONRESIDENTS OF THE CONGRESSIONAL 
              DISTRICT.

    Section 315 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 
441a), as amended by section 1, is further amended by adding at the end 
the following new subsection:
    ``(j) A candidate for the office of Representative in, or Delegate 
or Resident Commissioner to, the Congress may not accept contributions 
from an individual who is not a resident of the congressional district 
involved.''.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 31a


CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT UNDER SECTION 302 OF


THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, John H. Weber, certify that:


1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Remy International, 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 registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;


4. The registrant’s other certifying officer 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 registrant 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 registrant, 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 registrant’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 registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and


5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’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 registrant’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 registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.





Date: November 2, 2012/s/ JOHN H. WEBERJohn H. WeberPresident and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)
`Exhibit 32

                                    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 amended Annual Report of Frontier  Airlines,  Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-K/A for the period ending March  31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned as the Company's  principal  executive officer
and principal financial officer certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 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.

Date:   June 21, 2004

By:/s/ Jeff  S. Potter
   Jeff S. Potter
   President and Chief Executive Officer


By:/s/ Paul H. Tate
   Paul H. Tate
   Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer`
##### 



Exhibit 32.2
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
AS ADDED BY
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 2002
  1
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Royal as of the dates
and for the periods expressed in the Report.
 /s/ Jeffrey T. HanuscinJeffrey T. HanuscinChief Financial OfficerJanuary 23, 2007.  57