alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"NASA","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nasamigrate\/","title":"Soyuz Heads to Space Station with New Crew, Return Transportation for One-Year Mission Team","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"kZV9NYJ7g5\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/news-release\/soyuz-heads-to-space-station-with-new-crew-return-transportation-for-one-year-mission-team\/\">Soyuz Heads to Space Station with New Crew, Return Transportation for One-Year Mission Team<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/news-release\/soyuz-heads-to-space-station-with-new-crew-return-transportation-for-one-year-mission-team\/embed\/#?secret=kZV9NYJ7g5\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Soyuz Heads to Space Station with New Crew, Return Transportation for One-Year Mission Team” — NASA\" data-secret=\"kZV9NYJ7g5\" 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\/2015\/09\/15-181master.png?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":161}
#### ROWE v. PESCOR.

No. 4735.

District Court, W. D. Missouri, W. D.

May 26, 1947.

*812Petitioner per se.

Emmet J. Seawell, Asst. U. S. Atty., of Sacramento, Cal.-, and Frank J. Hennessy, U. S. Atty., of San Francisco, Cal, for respondent.

REEVES, District Judge.

The petitioner has two grounds for his complaint: First, he says he “was made to plead guilty by the F. B. I. Agents and his Lawyer;” second, he asserts that the sentences were illegal for the reason that both were imposed for the same alleged offense. The petitioner has submitted a copy of the indictment as well as a copy of the judgment and commitment. These have been examined and disclose the following:

The petitioner was represented by counsel at the time he entered his plea of guilty on February 1, 1945, in the Northern District of California. The first count charged that, on December 13, 1944- at Sacramento, California, the petitioner sold a quantity of marihuana, and that, in doing so, he was unregistered and with taxes unpaid. The second count charges on the same date he “did unlawfully, acquire and obtain said lot of marihuana without having first paid a transfer tax required by law * *.”

An examination of the statute, 26 U.S.C. A.Int.Rev.Code, § 2590 et seq., shows that any person unregistered and without having paid the tax is forbidden to sell or dispense marihuana. Another statute forbids that any one should so acquire such drug except that he had first paid a transfer tax as required by law.

These are separate and distinct offenses and section 2596, Title 26 U.S.C.A. Int.Rev.Code, provides a penalty for each offense of not more than 5 years in prison or a fine of not more than $2000. The court, therefore, had jurisdiction to impose two sentences and to make one run consecutively to the other for the reason that two separate and distinct offenses were being considered and the petitioner entered pleas of guilty to both of them.

By Section 454, 28 U.S.C.A., it is required that a complaint for a writ of habeas corpus shall set out in detail the facts of his wrongful detention. The averment that the petitioner “was made to plead by the F. B. I. Agent and his Lawyer” would be wholly insufficient. It is presumed that the attorney for the petitioner in the cases mentioned faithfully represented his best interests. Moreover there is no detail as required by statute as to the acts of the F. B. I. agents in compelling pleas of guilty.

In view of the above the complaint dpes not state a cause of action and should be dismissed. It will be so ordered.
In the Senate of the United States,

September 1 (legislative day, August 31), 1998.

Resolved, That the bill from the House of Representatives (H.R. 930) entitled ‘‘An Act to require Federal employees to use Federal travel charge cards for all payments of expenses of official Government travel, to amend title 31,

United States Code, to establish requirements for prepayment

audits of Federal agency transportation expenses, to authorize reimbursement of Federal agency employees for taxes incurred on travel or transportation reimbursements, and to

authorize test programs for the payment of Federal employee

travel expenses and relocation expenses.’’, do pass with the

following

AMENDMENTS:

1 Ω1æPage 2, line 5, strike out ø1997¿ and insert: 1998

2 Ω2æPage 3, after line 4 insert:

3 (b) AGENCY EXEMPTION.—The head of a Federal agen4 cy or the designee of such head may exempt any payment,

5 person, type or class of payments, or type or class of agency

6 personnel from subsection (a) if the agency head or the des-
2

HR 930 EAS

1 ignee determines the exemption to be necessary in the inter2 est of the agency. Not later than 30 days after granting

3 such an exemption, the head of such agency or the designee

4 shall notify the Administrator of General Services in writ5 ing of such exemption stating the reasons for the exemption.

6 Ω3æPage 3, line 5, strike out ø(b)¿ and insert: (c)

7 Ω4æPage 3, line 22, strike out ø(c)¿ and insert: (d)

8 Ω5æPage 5, line 9, strike out ø(d)¿ and insert: (e)

9 Ω6æPage 5, line 20, strike out ø(c)¿ and insert: (d)

10 Ω7æPage 6, line 2, strike out ø(c)¿ and insert: (d)

11 Ω8æPage 6, line 11, strike out ø(e)¿ and insert: (f)

12 Ω9æPage 7, after line 5 insert:

13 (g) REIMBURSEMENT OF TRAVEL EXPENSES.—In ac14 cordance with regulations prescribed by the Administrator

15 of General Services, the head of an agency shall ensure that

16 the agency reimburses an employee who submits a proper

17 voucher for allowable travel expenses in accordance with ap18 plicable travel regulations within 30 days after submission

19 of the voucher. If an agency fails to reimburse an employee

20 who has submitted a proper voucher within 30 days after

21 submission of the voucher, the agency shall pay the em-
3

HR 930 EAS

1 ployee a late payment fee as prescribed by the Adminis2 trator.

3 Ω10æPage 14, line 11, strike out ø1997¿ and insert: 1998

4 Ω11æPage 15, line 23, strike out ø1997¿ and insert: 1998

Attest:

Secretary.
105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 930

AMENDMENTS
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED November 7, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-50830 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus MICHAEL LAWRENCE PETISCA, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 1:04-CR-146-ALL

-------------------- Before Jolly, Dennis, and Clement, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Michael Lawrence Petisca pleaded guilty to two counts of bank robbery. See 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a). He was sentenced prior to the Supreme Court’s issuance of United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220 (2005). His case was remanded for resentencing after Booker . He now appeals, arguing that the district court erred in denying his request for a non-guideline sentence below the applicable guideline range. The district court adequately addressed the factors in 18 U.S.C. §3553(a). Petisca has failed to rebut the presumption ofNo. 05-50830 -2- reasonableness attached to his guideline sentence. See United States v. Alonzo , 435 F.3d 551, 554 (5th Cir. 2006).
AFFIRMED.
In the Senate of the United States,

April 16, 1997.

Resolved, That the bill from the House of Representatives (H.R. 914) entitled ‘‘An Act to make certain technical

corrections in the Higher Education Act of 1965 relating to

graduation data disclosures.’’, do pass with the following

AMENDMENT:

Page 2, after line 16 insert:

1 SEC. 2. DATE EXTENSION.

2 Section 1501(a)(4) of the Elementary and Secondary

3 Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6491(a)(4)) is amended

4 by striking ‘‘January 1, 1998’’ and inserting ‘‘January 1,

5 1999’’.

6 SEC. 3. TIMELY FILING OF NOTICE.

7 Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Sec8 retary of Education shall deem Kansas and New Mexico

9 to have timely submitted under section 8009(c)(1) of the

10 Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20

11 U.S.C. 7709(c)(1)) the States’ written notices of intent to
2

HR 914 EAS

1 consider payments described in section 8009(b)(1) of the Act

2 (20 U.S.C. 7709(b)(1)) in providing State aid to local edu3 cational agencies for school year 1997-1998, except that the

4 Secretary may require the States to submit such additional

5 information as the Secretary may require, which informa6 tion shall be considered part of the notices.

7 SEC. 4. HOLD HARMLESS PAYMENTS.

8 Section 8002(h)(1) of the Elementary and Secondary

9 Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7702(h)(1)) is amend10 ed—

11 (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ‘‘or’’ after

12 the semicolon;

13 (2) in subparagraph (B), by striking the period

14 and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and

15 (3) by adding at the end the following:

16 ‘‘(C) for fiscal year 1997 and each succeed17 ing fiscal year through fiscal year 2000 shall not

18 be less than 85 percent of the amount such agen19 cy received for fiscal year 1996 under subsection

20 (b).’’.

21 SEC. 5. DATA.

22 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 8003(f)(4) of the Elemen23 tary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.

24 7703(f)(4)) is amended—

25 (1) in subparagraph (A)—
3

HR 914 EAS

1 (A) by inserting ‘‘expenditure,’’ after ‘‘reve2 nue,’’; and

3 (B) by striking the semicolon and inserting

4 a period;

5 (2) by striking ‘‘the Secretary’’ and all that fol6 lows through ‘‘shall use’’ and inserting ‘‘the Secretary

7 shall use’’; and

8 (3) by striking subparagraph (B).

9 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by sub10 section (a) shall apply with respect to fiscal years after fis11 cal year 1997.

Attest:

Secretary.
105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 914

AMENDMENT
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"NASA","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nasamigrate\/","title":"Steve Stich","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"GKuiKLLdmL\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/people\/steve-stich\/\">Steve Stich<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/people\/steve-stich\/embed\/#?secret=GKuiKLLdmL\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Steve Stich” — NASA\" data-secret=\"GKuiKLLdmL\" 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\/2016\/02\/stichportrait.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":800}
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

)

Jacob Rudolph ) Case No: 20 C 2142

)

v. )

) Judge: Thomas M. Durkin

)

United Airlines Holdings, )

Inc., et al )

ORDER

Telephone motion hearing held on 7/15/2020. Defendants’ unopposed motion to consolidate

cases [32] is granted. The Rosenberger, Rudolph, and Compo cases are hereby consolidated. All

further filings are to be made in this action. Plaintiffs’ unopposed motion for an extension of

time to file a consolidated class action complaint is granted. [35] Plaintiffs’ consolidated

amended complaint it to be filed by 7/29/2020. Defendants have to 9/14/2020 to answer or

otherwise plead. If a motion to dismiss is filed, plaintiffs’ response is due by 10/29/2020. 

Defendants’ reply is due by 11/12/2020. A telephone status hearing is set for 12/8/2020 at 9:00

a.m. The parties are to call 877-402-9757, access code 4410831. 

Date: 7/15/2020 /s/ Thomas M. Durkin

Case: 1:20-cv-02142 Document #: 40 Filed: 07/15/20 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:401
**Exhibit
      32.2**





**YUHE
      INTERNATIONAL, INC.**




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 of YUHE INTERNATIONAL, INC. (the “Company”)
      on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2008, as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Hu
      Gang, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, 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 results of operations of the
      Company.




Date:
      14th day of November, 2008.





/s/
                Hu GangHu
                GangChief
                Financial Officer
I

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 701

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow the deduction for

personal exemptions in determining alternative minimum taxable income.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 12, 1997

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

on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow the

deduction for personal exemptions in determining alternative minimum taxable income.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 701 IH

1 SECTION 1. DEDUCTION FOR PERSONAL EXEMPTIONS AL2 LOWED IN DETERMINING ALTERNATIVE MIN3 IMUM TAXABLE INCOME.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (1) of section 56(b) of

5 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to adjust6 ments applicable to individuals) is amended by redesignat7 ing subparagraph (F) as subparagraph (H) and by strik8 ing subparagraph (E) and inserting the following new sub9 paragraphs:

10 ‘‘(E) STANDARD DEDUCTION NOT AL11 LOWED.—The standard deduction under section

12 63(c) shall not be allowed.

13 ‘‘(F) PERSONAL EXEMPTIONS FOR INDI14 VIDUALS ALLOWED.—

15 ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—Except as pro16 vided in clause (ii), the deduction under

17 section 151 shall be allowed.

18 ‘‘(ii) PHASEOUT.—In applying section

19 151 for purposes of determining alter20 native minimum taxable income, the

21 threshold amounts in clause (iii) shall be

22 substituted for the amounts applicable

23 under section 151(d)(3).

24 ‘‘(iii) THRESHOLD AMOUNT.—For

25 purposes of clause (ii), the term ‘threshold

26 amount’ means—
3

•HR 701 IH

1 ‘‘(I) $100,000 in the case of a

2 joint return or a surviving spouse (as

3 defined in section 2(a)),

4 ‘‘(II) $83,300 in the case of a

5 head of a household (as defined in

6 section 2(b)),

7 ‘‘(III) $66,700 in the case of an

8 individual who is not married and who

9 is not a surviving spouse or head of a

10 household, and

11 ‘‘(IV) $50,000 in the case of a

12 married individual filing a separate

13 return.

14 For purposes of this clause, marital status

15 shall be determined under section 7703.

16 ‘‘(iv) INFLATION ADJUSTMENT OF

17 THRESHOLD AMOUNTS.—The threshold

18 amounts in clause (iii) shall be adjusted at

19 the same time and in the same manner as

20 under section 151(d)(4)(B); except that

21 the base for the adjustment of such

22 amounts shall be the CPI for calendar year

23 1996 (within the meaning of section

24 1(f)(4)).
4

•HR 701 IH

1 ‘‘(G) PERSONAL EXEMPTION FOR TRUSTS

2 NOT ALLOWED.—The deduction under section

3 642(b) shall not be allowed.’’

4 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

5 subsection (a) shall apply to taxable years beginning after

6 December 31, 1996.

Æ
```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 211 (Friday, October 31, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64766-64767]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-25871]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Update to Notice of Financial Institutions for Which the Federal 
Deposit Insurance Corporation has Been Appointed Either Receiver, 
Liquidator, or Manager

AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

ACTION: Update listing of Financial Institutions in liquidation.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the Federal Deposit Insurance 
Corporation (Corporation) has been appointed the sole receiver for the 
following financial institutions effective as of the Date Closed as 
indicated in the listing. This list (as updated from time to time in 
the Federal Register) may be relied upon as ``of record'' notice that 
the Corporation has been appointed receiver for purposes of the 
statement of policy published in the July 2, 1992 issue of the Federal 
Register (57 FR 29491). For further information concerning the 
identification of any institutions which have been placed in 
liquidation, please visit the Corporation Web site at www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/banklist.html or contact the Manager of 
Receivership Oversight in the appropriate service center.

    Dated: October 27, 2014.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Pamela Johnson,
Regulatory Editing Specialist.

                                           Institutions In Liquidation
                                             [In alphabetical order]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                         Date
      FDIC Ref. No.                  Bank name                      City                 State          closed
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10507....................  The National Republic Bank of  Chicago................  IL                 10/24/2014
                            Chicago.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 64767]]

[FR Doc. 2014-25871 Filed 10-30-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
```
**Exhibit 31.1** **CERTIFICATION**I, William T. Bromage, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Webster Preferred CapitalCorporation;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded 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 periodspresented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining 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 suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensurethat material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recentfiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annualreport) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likelyto adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.Date:August 8, 2005/s/ William T. Bromage