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

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 184 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 184

 To promote accountability and transparency in future executive orders.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 9, 2023

   Mr. Mann introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To promote accountability and transparency in future executive orders.

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

SECTION 1. NOTIFICATION RESPECTING CERTAIN EXECUTIVE ORDERS.

    (a) In General.--Not later than 30 days before issuing a qualifying 
executive order, the President shall transmit to the Congress, and make 
publicly available, a notification with respect to such executive 
order. Such notification shall contain--
            (1) the text of the executive order;
            (2) the Federal law or laws affected by the executive order 
        that is the subject of the notification;
            (3) how the President is working within the parameters 
        specified in Federal law and the Constitution;
            (4) the means by which the executive order will be 
        accomplished, including through any related Federal agencies or 
        departments; and
            (5) a comprehensive list of organizations, businesses, and 
        other parties or entities the President, or the President's 
        designee, engaged with prior to the issuance of such executive 
        order.
    (b) Reports.--Not later than 6 months after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, and every 12 months thereafter, the President 
shall submit to the Congress a report on the outcome of each qualifying 
executive order issued during the period covered by the report.
    (c) Qualifying Executive Order.--The term ``qualifying executive 
order'' means any executive order (including an executive order that 
revokes or nullifies a previous executive order) issued on or after the 
date of the enactment of this Act, relating to the natural resources of 
the United States and the environment.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

ALVIN JOHNSON, :

: 

Plaintiff, :

 :

vs. : CIVIL ACTION 14-0526-WS-M 

: 

STATE OF ALABAMA, et al., :

:

 Defendants. : 

ORDER

After due and proper consideration of the issues raised, 

and there having been no objections filed, the Recommendation of 

the Magistrate Judge made under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) is 

ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court.

It is ORDERED that this action be and is hereby DISMISSED

without prejudice for failure to prosecute and to obey the 

Court's Order.

DONE this 18th day of February, 2015.

 s/WILLIAM H. STEELE

 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00526-WS-M Document 5 Filed 02/18/15 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 32.1


  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE AND FINANCIAL OFFICER Pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 USC 1350)

I, Ralph Eisenschmid, the Chief Executive Officer, President and Chief Financial
Officer of InteliSys Aviation Services of America Inc.,do hereby certify that
the Annual Report of InteliSys Aviation Services of America Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-KSB for the 12 months ended December 31, 2006 (the "Report") fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.


Date: April 17, 2007            /s/_Ralph Eisenschmid
                                ----------------------------------
                                Ralph Eisenschmid
                                Chief Executive Officer, President and
                                Chief Financial Officer
                                (Principal Executive and Financial Officer)
**Exhibit10(f)(9)**

 

**AMENDMENT**

**TO**

# **ALLTEL CORPORATIONDEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN FOR DIRECTORS**

**(October 1, 1993 Restatement)**

 

 

Effective April 25, 2002, Article V of the ALLTELCorporation Deferred Compensation Plan for Directors under an October 1, 1993Restatement, as amended, is further amended by adding at the end thereof a newsection which reads as follows:

 

7.               Amendment of Election Agreement. Notwithstanding any prior Plan Provisions or any other provision hereinto the contrary, a Participant may amend his previously executed ElectionAgreement so as to defer the payment of his Deferred Compensation Accountsand/or change the manner of payment of his Deferred Compensation Accounts,subject to the following conditions:

 

(a)      such amendment is made not less thantwelve (12) full calendar months prior to the date the lump sum payment or thefirst annual installment, as the case may be, would otherwise have been madepursuant to the previously executed Election Agreement;

 

(b) paymentunder the amended Election Agreement is deferred to a date which is at leasttwelve (12) full calendar months later than the date the lump sum payment orthe first annual installment, as the case may be, would otherwise have beenmade pursuant to the previously executed Election Agreement;  and

 

(c) theamended Election Agreement applies with respect to all Deferred CompensationAccounts for all Deferral Years of the Participant under the Plan.

 

Any amendment of anElection Agreement which does not satisfy the conditions set forth above shallbe of no force or effect.

 

----
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

KYLE ROGERS,

Petitioner

v.

UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION 

BOARD OF REVIEW,

Respondent

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 811 MAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Commonwealth Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 2nd day of May, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2061 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Department of 

Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Operations Support for fiscal year 2024. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 29, 2023 

Mr. BIGGS (for himself, Mr. ROSENDALE, Mr. GAETZ, Mr. GOOD of Virginia, 

Mr. ROY, and Mr. CRANE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Department of Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Operations Support for fiscal year 2024. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 

4 DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY, INTERNAL REV5 ENUE SERVICE, OPERATIONS SUPPORT FOR 

6 FISCAL YEAR 2024. 

7 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

8 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise avail9 able for Department of Treasury, Internal Revenue ServVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:48 Apr 18, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H2061.IH H2061

rfrederick on DSKB3L4F33PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2061 IH

1 ice, Operations Support for fiscal year 2024 may not ex2 ceed $3,724,000,000. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSKB3L4F33PROD with BILLS
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1927 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Department of Labor, 

Job Corps for fiscal year 2024. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 29, 2023 

Mr. BIGGS (for himself, Mr. ROSENDALE, Mr. GAETZ, Mr. GOOD of Virginia, 

Mr. ROY, and Mr. CRANE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for 

Department of Labor, Job Corps for fiscal year 2024. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 

4 DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, JOB CORPS FOR 

5 FISCAL YEAR 2024. 

6 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

7 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise avail8 able for Department of Labor, Job Corps for fiscal year 

9 2024 may not exceed $0. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15**  **- 7069** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. ROGER WAYNE JONES, III , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina , at Greensboro
. James A. Beaty, Jr., Senior District Judge. ( 1:14

- cr - 00037

- JAB

- 1 )

Submitted : November 25, 2015 Decided: January 8, 2016

Before NIEMEYER , AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Roger Wayne Jones, III , Appellant Pro Se. Kelley Patricia Kenned Gates, Special Assistant U nited States Attorney , Timothy Nicholas Matkins, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY , Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Roger Wayne Jones, III, appeal s the district court’s order denying his motion for a new trial under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33 and his motion for correction of the
pr esentence report. Finding no error, we affirm. A jury convicted Jones of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, and the district court sentenced him to 204 months’ imprisonment. Jones appealed. While that appeal was pending, Jones filed a motion for a new trial based on an affidavit from a prosecution witness, Bryan Sabot. He also filed a motion to correct a perceived error in the presentence report. After we affirmed Jones’ conviction and sentence, United States v. Jones , 611 F. App’x 116 (4th Cir. 2015), the district court denied both motions. The present appeal followed. We have reviewed the record and conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Jones a new trial.
See United States v. Moore , 709 F.3d 287, 292 (4t h Cir. 2013) (stating standard of review). Sabot’s testimony at trial was inconclusive on the critical issue of whether Jones possessed a firearm, and the affidavit does not contain sufficient new evidence to suggest that a new trial would probably result in Jones’ acquittal. See id. Similarly, to th e extent Jones claims that the G overnment’s suppression of such evidence3 constituted a violation of Brady v. Maryland , 373 U.S. 83 (1963), he is not entitled to a new trial because the evidence is not material. See United States v. Horton , 693 F.3d 463, 470

- 71 (4th Cir. 2012). Finally, because Jones did not file his motion to correct the presentence report before he wa s sentenced, the district court properly denied that motion as untimely. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(f)(1), (i)(1)(D). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

DENNIS BROWN, III, AIS #108821, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 14-0568-CG-N

)

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

ORDER

After due and proper consideration of this file deemed relevant to the issue 

raised, and a de novo determination of those portions of the recommendation to 

which objection is made, the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge made under 

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court, with the 

following changes: the Court corrects the misidentification of defendant Micheal

Wheeler as Micheal “Williams.” on Page 8 of the Report and Recommendation.

It is ORDERED that this action be and is hereby DISMISSED with

prejudice as frivolous, prior to service, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). 

DONE and ORDERED this 17th day of June, 2015.

/s/ Callie V. S. Granade

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00568-CG-N Document 17 Filed 06/17/15 Page 1 of 1
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4833 

To direct the Secretary of Education to extend the same level of increased 

flexibility to all rural local educational agencies under part A of title 

I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 14, 2004 

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

on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of Education to extend the same 

level of increased flexibility to all rural local educational 

agencies under part A of title I of the Elementary and 

Secondary Education Act of 1965. 

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 ‘‘Rural Education Eq5 uity Act of 2004’’. 
2 

•HR 4833 IH 

1 SEC. 2. INCREASED FLEXIBILITY FOR RURAL LOCAL EDU2 CATIONAL AGENCIES. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—If the Secretary of Education 

4 takes any action (whether by regulation, guidance, or oth5 erwise) to authorize increased flexibility for any category 

6 of rural local educational agencies, the Secretary shall ex7 tend the same level of increased flexibility to all rural local 

8 educational agencies. 

9 (b) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

10 (1) INCREASED FLEXIBILITY.—The term ‘‘in11 creased flexibility’’ means increased flexibility under, 

12 or facilitated compliance with, part A of title I of the 

13 Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 

14 (20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.). 

15 (2) RURAL LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCY.— 

16 The term ‘‘rural local educational agency’’ includes 

17 any local educational agency described in section 

18 6211(b) or section 6221(b)(1) of the Elementary 

19 and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 

20 7345(b), 7351(b)(1)). 

21 (c) APPLICATION.—This section applies to any action 

22 described in subsection (a) that occurs on or after January 

23 8, 2002 (the date of the enactment of the No Child Left 

24 Behind Act of 2001 (Public Law 107–110)). 

Æ
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-6031 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

FREEMAN LEE ROGERS, JR.,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Richard L. Voorhees,

Chief District Judge. (CR-00-137; CA-05-106-3)

Submitted: March 30, 2006 Decided: April 10, 2006

Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Freeman Lee Rogers, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray,

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina,

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Freeman Lee Rogers, Jr., a federal prisoner, seeks to

appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his motion

filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). The order is not appealable

unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of

appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). 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) (2000).

A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable

jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of his

constitutional claims is debatable or wrong and that any

dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also

debatable or wrong. See 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 Rogers 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 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 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.
 /s/ John K. GrelleName:
    
    John K. GrelleTitle:
    
    Chief Financial OfficerDate:
    
    May 21, 2010
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1970 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1970

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Department of 
 Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 
 Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program for fiscal 
                               year 2024.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 29, 2023

Mr. Biggs (for himself, Mr. Rosendale, Mr. Gaetz, Mr. Good of Virginia, 
   Mr. Roy, and Mr. Crane) introduced the following bill; which was 
  referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the 
     Committee on Education and the Workforce, for a period to be 
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration 
  of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee 
                               concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Department of 
 Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 
 Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program for fiscal 
                               year 2024.

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

SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 
              AND HUMAN SERVICES, CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND 
              PREVENTION ENERGY EMPLOYEES OCCUPATIONAL ILLNESS 
              COMPENSATION PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, amounts authorized 
to be appropriated or otherwise available for Department of Health and 
Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Energy 
Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program for fiscal year 
2024 may not exceed $55,358,000.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

WILLIE ARTHUR SULLEN, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 14-0112-CG-M

)

CYNTHIA STEWARD, )

)

Respondent. )

JUDGMENT

In accordance with the Order entered this date, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and 

DECREED that JUDGMENT is entered in favor of Respondent Cynthia Steward and against 

Petitioner Willie Arthur Sullen.

DONE and ORDERED this 8th day of August, 2014.

/s/ Callie V. S. Granade 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00112-CG-M Document 17 Filed 08/08/14 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 10.24





[English Summary]





Lease Agreement





Lessor/Party A: Fujian Xin Hengji Advertisement Co., Ltd.


Lessee/Party B: Fuzhou Fuyu Advertisement Co., Ltd.





Rental Area:


28th Floor, Yifa Building, for an area of 500 square meters, as Party B’s corporate office





Term:


From October 10, 2010 to October 9, 2011





Rental Fees:


5000 RMB per month, payable annually





Dispute:


If there is any dispute between the parties, both parties shall resolve the dispute through compromise settlement.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

JOSE GOINES,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 501 MAL 2020

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

JOSE GOINES,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 502 MAL 2020

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

JOSE GOINES,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 503 MAL 2020

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 10th day of February, 2021, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.
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 Quarterly Report of Coca-Cola Bottling Co. Consolidated (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending October 2, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), we, J. Frank Harrison, III, Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Steven D. Westphal, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, 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 results of operations of the
Company.



|                                                              
|--------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                              
|/s/    J. FRANK HARRISON,
III                                 
|J. Frank Harrison, III                                        
|Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer
|                                                              
|November 10, 2005                                             
|                                                              
|/s/    STEVEN D. WESTPHAL                                     
|Steven D. Westphal                                            
|Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer             
|                                                              
|November 10, 2005