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

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3939 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                       Calendar No. 567
108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                               H. R. 3939

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 12, 2004

  Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental 
                                Affairs

                              June 7, 2004

               Reported by Ms. Collins, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To redesignate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
   at 14-24 Abbott Road in Fair Lawn, New Jersey, as the ``Mary Ann 
                    Collura Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. REDESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 14-24 
Abbott Road in Fair Lawn, New Jersey, and known as the Fair Lawn Main 
Post Office, shall be known and designated as the ``Mary Ann Collura 
Post Office Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Mary Ann Collura Post Office 
Building''.

                                                       Calendar No. 567

108th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 3939

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

To redesignate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
   at 14-24 Abbott Road in Fair Lawn, New Jersey, as the ``Mary Ann 
                    Collura Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                              June 7, 2004

                       Reported without amendment
```
#### D. W. Sanders, etc., *v.*Nicholas B. Douglas.

Judicial Sale — Restriction of Power to Sell Under Will.

Appellant pm-chased the land at judicial sale, not for himself but as trustee for S., who was restrained from selling the land by the will of her mother.

Held, that the judgment and confirmation of the sale, nor the purchase by appellant, will operate to remove or affect said restriction on the power of sale.

APPEAL FROM LOUISVILLE CHANCERY COURT.

February 12, 1872.

*Barnett, Edwards & Harding, for appellant.*

*Kinkead, for appellee.*

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Hardin:

Whatever may have been'the object of Stewart and wife, in the personal action against .them, in aiding the petitioner by their answer in suggestion the liability of the land to the plaintiffs’ claim and in apparently co-operating in procuring the judgment of sale, which was rendered March 1, 1867, the right of- appeal from that judgment was barred by limitation, when this appeal was taken, and the plea to that effect is sustained; and as between the parties as they now stand before this court, we can perceive no cause for reversing the case. We deem it proper to say, however, that as it is suggested by the appellant in his response to the rule against him as purchaser, that he' made the purchase not for himself, but as trustee for Mrs. Addie B. Stewart, who was restrained from selling the land by the will of her mother, Mrs. T-, we do not understand .the judgment of confirmation as decided — nor do we now decide that this proceeding or the purchase of the appellant will operate to *remove or affect*said restriction on the power of sale and conveyance, either by Stuart and wife or the appellant as-trustee.

Wherefore, the judgment is *affirmed.*
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONOF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORT**

**PURSUANTTO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

The undersigned officer of WII Components, Inc.(the “Company”) hereby certifies that the Company’s annual report on Form 10-K for thefiscal year ended December 31, 2009 to which this certification is beingfurnished as an exhibit (the “Report”), as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof, fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934, as amended (the “ExchangeAct”), and that the informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

This certification is provided solely pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350 and Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K (“Item 601(b)(32) ”) promulgated under the SecuritiesAct of 1933, as amended (the “SecuritiesAct”), and the ExchangeAct.  In accordance with clause (ii) ofItem 601(b)(32), this certification (A) shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act, orotherwise subject to the liability of that section, and (B) shall not bedeemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Actor the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specificallyincorporates it by reference.

 
| Date: March 31, 2010 |                                                      |
|---------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------|
|                      | /s/ Dale B. Herbst                                        |
|                      | Name: Dale B. Herbst                                      |
|                      | Title: Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer, and  Secretary |

 

1

----
**Exhibit      32.2**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

**18      U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF      2002**

|   | 1. | The                Annual 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 Annual Report fairly represents, in                all                material respects, the financial condition and result of operations                of the                Registrant. |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |                                                                           |                                                                    |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                                           | /s/ Steven                      M.                      Hill  |
|   | Steven                      M. Hill                                            |
|   | Chief Financial Officer,MACRO Securities Depositor,                        LLC |

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-7403

DEAN BRINSON,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

MICHAEL F. EASLEY,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District

Judge. (CA-98-611-HC-H)

Submitted: January 19, 1999 Decided: February 10, 1999

Before MURNAGHAN, WILKINS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Dean Brinson, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying

relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 &

Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s

opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning

of the district court. See Brinson v. Easley, No. CA-98-611-HC-H

(E.D.N.C. Sept. 2, 1998). 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
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4018 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4018

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to assure that immigrants 
   do not have to wait longer for an immigrant visa as a result of a 
    reclassification from family second preference to family first 
    preference because of the naturalization of a parent or spouse.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 23, 2004

   Mr. Case introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to assure that immigrants 
   do not have to wait longer for an immigrant visa as a result of a 
    reclassification from family second preference to family first 
    preference because of the naturalization of a parent or spouse.

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

SECTION 1. PREVENTING IMMIGRANTS FROM WAITING LONGER FOR IMMIGRANT 
              VISAS AS A RESULT OF RECLASSIFICATION FROM FAMILY SECOND 
              PREFERENCE TO FAMILY FIRST PREFERENCE.

    (a) In General.--Section 203 of the Immigration and Nationality Act 
(8 U.S.C. 1153) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
subsection:
    ``(i) Assuring Immigrants Do not Have to Wait Longer for an 
Immigrant Visa as a Result of Reclassification From Family Second 
Preference to Family First Preference.--Notwithstanding any other 
provision of law, in the case of a petition that has been approved to 
accord preference status under subsection (a)(2)(A) may be deemed to 
provide continued entitlement to status under that subsection in the 
case of any alien petitioner who is subsequently naturalized as a 
United States citizen, if a visa is not immediately available to the 
beneficiary under subsection (a)(1).''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) takes 
effect on the date of the enactment of this Act and applies to 
petitions filed before, on, or after such date, without regard to when 
an alien petitioner was naturalized as a citizen of the United States.
                                 <all>
```
UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL

on

MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION

IN RE: TIKTOK, INC., CONSUMER PRIVACY

LITIGATION MDL No. 2948

(SEE ATTACHED SCHEDULE)

CONDITIONAL TRANSFER ORDER (CTO −1)

On August 4, 2020, the Panel transferred 6 civil action(s) to the United States District Court for the

Northern District of Illinois for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1407. See _F.Supp.3d_ (J.P.M.L. 2020). Since that time, no additional action(s) have been

transferred to the Northern District of Illinois. With the consent of that court, all such actions have

been assigned to the Honorable John Z. Lee.

It appears that the action(s) on this conditional transfer order involve questions of fact that are

common to the actions previously transferred to the Northern District of Illinois and assigned to

Judge Lee.

Pursuant to Rule 7.1 of the Rules of Procedure of the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict

Litigation, the action(s) on the attached schedule are transferred under 28 U.S.C. § 1407 to the

Northern District of Illinois for the reasons stated in the order of August 4, 2020, and, with the

consent of that court, assigned to the Honorable John Z. Lee.

This order does not become effective until it is filed in the Office of the Clerk of the United States

District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The transmittal of this order to said Clerk shall be

stayed 7 days from the entry thereof. If any party files a notice of opposition with the Clerk of the

Panel within this 7−day period, the stay will be continued until further order of the Panel.

FOR THE PANEL:

John W. Nichols

Clerk of the Panel

Case MDL No. 2948 Document 86 Filed 08/13/20 Page 1 of 2

FILED: 9/03/2020

Judge John Z. Lee

Magistrate Judge Sunil R. Harjani

Lead case Number: 1:20-cv-04699

bg

A TRUE COPY-ATTEST

THOMAS G. BRUTON, CLERK -

By: s/ BROOK GUDAUSKY

DEPUTY CLERK

U.S. DISTRICT COURT, NORTHERN

DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS -

September 3, 2020

Aug 13, 2020

Case: 1:20-cv-05215 Document #: 12 Filed: 09/03/20 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:43
IN RE: TIKTOK, INC., CONSUMER PRIVACY

LITIGATION MDL No. 2948

SCHEDULE CTO−1 − TAG−ALONG ACTIONS

DIST DIV. C.A.NO. CASE CAPTION

CALIFORNIA CENTRAL

CAC 2 20−04537 G. R. v. TikTok Inc et al

CAC 2 20−05036 C.H. v. TikTok, Inc. et al

CALIFORNIA NORTHERN

CAN 5 20−03390 A.J. v. Tiktok Inc. et al

CAN 5 20−03555 M.E. v. TikTok, Inc. et al

CAN 5 20−03795 Iyer et al v. Tiktok Inc. et al

ILLINOIS SOUTHERN

ILS 3 20−00498 S.M. v. TikTok Inc., et al

Case MDL No. 2948 Document 86 Filed 08/13/20 Page 2 of 2

1:20-cv-05212

 1:20-cv-05213

1:20-cv-05214

1:20-cv-05215

1:20-cv-05217

1:20-cv-05218

Case: 1:20-cv-05215 Document #: 12 Filed: 09/03/20 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:44
<PAGE>   1
EXHIBIT 21


                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT


TOPS Pharmacy Services, Inc.
PRN Research, Inc.
Innovative Medical Communications, Inc.
Hematology Oncology Associates, S.C.
Northwest Cancer Center, Inc.
IIB 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4037 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 21, 2004 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 475 Kell Farm Drive in Cape Girardeau, 

Missouri, as the ‘‘Richard G. Wilson Processing and 

Distribution Facility’’. 

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

HR 4037 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

2 The facility of the United States Postal Service lo3 cated at 475 Kell Farm Drive in Cape Girardeau, Mis4 souri, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Richard G. 

5 Wilson Processing and Distribution Facility’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

7 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

8 paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

9 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference 

10 to the ‘‘Richard G. Wilson Processing and Distribution 

11 Facility’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives April 20, 2004. 

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL, 

Clerk.
No. 16,322.

#### Lefforge *v.*The State.

Criminal *Law.*— Incest.—Evidence *of Acts Prior to Specific Act Charged.*— In a prosecution for incest, it is competent for the State to prove acts of sexual intercourse prior to the specific act' charged in the indictment.

*Same.*— Excessive *Sentence.*— A sentence to imprisonment for eight years of one convicted of the crime of incest, after the passage of the act of March 7th, 1891, limiting the maximum term of imprisonment to five years, is void.

From the Decatur Circuit Court.

*J. S. Scobey,*for appellant.

*A. G. Smith,*Attorney General, for the State.

*552Filed Nov. 19, 1891.

Elliott, J. —

The appellant was convicted of the crime of incest, and sentenced to imprisonment in the State prison for a term of eight years.

One of the grounds upon which appellant’s counsel asks a reversal is that the court erred in permitting the State to prove acts of sexual intercourse prior to the specific act charged in the indictment. There was no error in this ruling. The decisions establish the doctrine that it is competent to prove previous acts of familiarity between the parties, although they culminate in the act of carnal intercourse. *State*v. *Markins,*95 Ind. 464; *Ramey*v. *State, ex rel,*127 Ind. 243; *Thayer*v. *Thayer,*101 Mass. 111; *State*v. *Bridgman,*49 Vt. 202 (24 Am. Rep. 124) and cases cited; *State*v. *Pippin,*88 N. C. 646; *State*v. *Kemp,*87 N. C. 538; Bishop’s Statutory Crimes, section 680.

The appellant was tried and convicted on the 21st day of September, 1891, and on that day the act of March 7, 1891, was in force. (Acts of 1891, page 347.) That act amends the prior act, and limits the maximum punishment by imprisonment to a term of five years. There was, therefore, no law in force at the time of the trial authorizing the jury to sentence the accused to imprisonment for the period of eight years, and the sentence is wholly unauthorized.

Judgment reversed, with instructions to award a new trial.
AGENDA – 10/10/2019

Safeguarding Health Information: Building Assurance through HIPAA Security

Hosted by the HHS Office for Civil Rights(OCR) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)

Time Day 1 – October 16, 2019

9:00-9:10 Welcoming Remarks

9:10-10:00

Keynote

Roger Severino, Director

HHS Office for Civil Rights

10:00-10:15 Break

10:15-11:15

Key Findings from the 2019 Verizon Data Breach

Investigations Report

Suzanne Widup, Senior Analyst

Verizon Enterprise Solutions

11:15-12:15 Panel: Securing Picture Archiving and Communication Systems(PACS)

Jennifer Cawthra, NIST National Cybersecurity Center of Excellence Sue

Wang, MITRE

Kevin Dietz, Hyland

Michael Holt, Virta Labs

Jim Wachhaus, Tripwire

David Alfonso, Phillips

12:15-1:30 Lunch on Your Own

1:30-2:30

Panel: Best Practices from the HHS HICP CSA 405(d) Task Group

Julia Chua, HHS OCIO

Erik Decker, CISO, University of Chicago Medicine

Nick Heesters, HHS OCR

2:30-2:45 Break

2:45–3:45 NIST Privacy Framework: A Tool for Improving Privacy Through

Enterprise Risk Management

Naomi Lefkovitz

Senior Privacy Policy Advisor, NIST

3:45-4:45 Data Governance and Artificial Intelligence in the Health Care Space

Alaap Shah 

Attorney at Epstein Becker Green

End Conference Day 1
AGENDA – 10/10/2019

Safeguarding Health Information: Building Assurance through HIPAA Security

Hosted by the HHS Office for Civil Rights(OCR) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)

Time Day 2 - October 17, 2019

9:00-10:00

Keynote Address

An Organizational Risk Approach to Current and Emerging

Health Care Threats and Opportunities

Elizabeth Callahan-Morris

VP & Deputy General Counsel, Hospital Operations

Henry Ford Health System

and

Christy Wheaton

VP & Chief Information Privacy and Security Officer

Henry Ford Health System

10:00-10:15 Break

10:15 – 11:15 HHS Security Risk Assessment Tool: New Functionalities and Uses

Lisa Steffey, Project Manager, Altarum

Ryan Callahan, IT Business Analyst, Altarum

11:15 – 12:15

Key Security Considerations for Healthcare Application Programming Interfaces (APIs)

Steve Posnack, Executive Director, Office of Technology at Office of the National

Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC)

Linda Sanches, Senior Advisor, Health Information Privacy, HHS Office for Civil Rights

12:15 – 1:30 Lunch on Your Own

1:30 – 2:30

Health Information Privacy Beyond HIPAA:

A Framework for Use and Protection 

Linda L. Kloss, Kloss Strategic Advisors

Former Chair, National Committee on Vital and Health Statistics,

Subcommittee on Privacy, Confidentiality, and Security

and

William W. Stead, MD

Chief Strategy Officer

McKesson Foundation Professor of Biomedical Informatics

Professor of Medicine

Vanderbilt University Medical Center

Chair, National Committee on Vital and Health Statistics

2:30 – 3:30

Update on OCR’s HIPAA Compliance and 

Enforcement Activities

Serena Mosley-Day, Senior Advisor

Compliance and Enforcement 

HHS Office for Civil Rights

End Conference
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 5.01
 
               [LETTERHEAD OF SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE]
 
   
                                 June 17, 1998
    
 
Crescent Real Estate Equities Company
777 Main Street, Suite 2100
Fort Worth, Texas 76102
 
     RE: CRESCENT REAL ESTATE EQUITIES COMPANY
 
Ladies and Gentleman:
 
   
     We have acted as counsel to Crescent Real Estate Equities Company, a Texas
real estate investment trust (the "Company"), in connection with the
Registration Statement on Form S-3 (File No. 333-47563) filed by the Company on
March 9, 1998 with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Securities
Act of 1933, as amended to date (the "Registration Statement"), and any
subsequent amendments thereto, relating to the offering by certain Selling
Shareholders (as defined in the Registration Statement) from time to time of up
to 250,310 common shares of beneficial interest of the Company, par value $.01
per share (the "Common Shares"), which are represented by 125,155 units (the
"Units") of ownership interest in Crescent Real Estate Equities Limited
Partnership, a Delaware limited partnership (the "Operating Partnership"). 
    
 
     Based upon our examination of originals and copies of such documents,
corporate records, certificates of officers of the Company and other instruments
as we have deemed necessary and upon the laws as presently in effect, we are of
the opinion that upon exchange of the 125,155 Units for Common Shares on a
one-for-two basis in accordance with the terms of the Operating Partnership's
limited partnership agreement, such 250,310 Common Shares will be validly
issued by the Company, fully paid and nonassessable.

     We hereby consent to your filing of this opinion as an exhibit to the
Registration Statement and to the reference to our firm under the caption "Legal
Matters" in the Prospectus included therein.
 
                                            Very truly yours,
 
                                            Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge