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

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1966 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1966

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Department of 
 Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 
         Public Health Scientific Studies 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 Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Department of 
 Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 
         Public Health Scientific Studies 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 PUBLIC HEALTH SCIENTIFIC STUDIES 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 Public 
Health Scientific Studies for fiscal year 2024 may not exceed 
$496,397,000.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 31.1



CERTIFICATIONS



I, Hugh Panero, President and Chief Executive Officer, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of XM Satellite Radio Holdings 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: March 15, 2004



|    |  |                                                  
|--- |  | -------------------------------------------------
|    | 
|By: |  | /s/    Hugh Panero                               
|    |  |                                                  
|    |  | Hugh Panero President and Chief Executive
Officer
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED MARCH 31, 2020

NO. 03-18-00769-CR

Kimberly Roming, Appellant

v. 

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 403RD DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE, JUSTICES TRIANA AND SMITH

AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE TRIANA

This is an appeal from the judgment adjudicating guilt rendered by the trial court. Having 

reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible 

error in the trial court’s judgment adjudicating guilt. Therefore, the Court affirms the trial 

court’s judgment adjudicating guilt. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, 

no adjudication of costs is made.
| §   | The      terms and conditions of the sections in the Offer Letter with the      following headings:      International Rectifier’s Executive Relocation Package, Temporary Living      Assistance, Closing Assistance on the sale of your current residence, and      Closing Assistance on the purchase of a home in the Los Angeles/Southern      California area are hereby extended to apply so that benefits are      provided through October 6, 2011. |
|--------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| §   | Should      you voluntarily terminate your employment with the Company on or before      October 6, 2011 for reasons other than Good Reason (as defined in the      Offer Letter) or a Qualifying Termination (as defined in the Severance      Agreement), you will reimburse the Company within thirty (30) days      following the date of your employment termination (“Employment Termination      Date”) as follows: |
|--------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| o   | An      Employment Termination Date prior to October 6, 2010 will require you to      reimburse the Company for any relocation benefits expended by you and paid      by the Company between October 6, 2009 and the Employment Termination      Date. |
|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| o   | An      Employment Termination Date after October 5, 2010 and prior to October 6,      2011 will require you to reimburse the Company for any relocation benefits      expended by you and paid by the Company between October 6, 2010 and the      Employment Termination Date. |
|---------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----
##### 



Exhibit 23.1 (PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LETTERHEAD)  CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT
ACCOUNTANTS We hereby consent to the use
in this Registration Statement on Form S-8 of our report dated
February 11, 2004 to the shareholders of Barrick Gold
Corporation relating to the consolidated balance sheets as at
December 31, 2003 and December 31, 2002 and the
consolidated statements of income, cash flows and shareholders equity
and comprehensive income for each of the years in the three year
period ended December 31, 2003 of Barrick Gold Corporation,
which appear in such Registration Statement.  /s/   PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP
 
Toronto, Canada
December 21, 2004      (PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS FOOTER)
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2086 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2086

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for The Judiciary, 
  Court of Appeals, District Courts, and other Judiciary Activities, 
                  Court Security 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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for The Judiciary, 
  Court of Appeals, District Courts, and other Judiciary Activities, 
                  Court Security 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 THE JUDICIARY, COURT 
              OF APPEALS, DISTRICT COURTS, AND OTHER JUDICIARY 
              ACTIVITIES, COURT SECURITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, amounts authorized 
to be appropriated or otherwise available for The Judiciary, Court of 
Appeals, District Courts, and other Judiciary Activities, Court 
Security for fiscal year 2024 may not exceed $607,110,000.
                                 <all>
```
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 98-3426

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Western District of Missouri.

Ellen Leger, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

 Submitted: May 3, 1999

 Filed: May 21, 1999

___________

Before FAGG, HANSEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Ellen Leger appeals her conviction and sentence for knowingly using

intimidation with intent to prevent the testimony of a witness, in violation of 18

U.S.C. § 1512(b). We affirm.

For reversal, Leger argues that an 8-level enhancement assessed against her

under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2J1.2(b)(1) (1998) ("causing or

threatening to cause physical injury to a person, or property damage, in order to

obstruct the administration of justice") amounts to double counting. “Double

counting occurs when one part of the Guidelines is applied to increase a defendant’s
-2-

punishment on account of a kind of harm that has already been fully accounted for by

application of another part of the Guidelines.” United States v. Hipenbecker, 115

F.3d 581, 583 (8th Cir. 1997) (citation and internal quotations omitted). We review

de novo the question of double counting under the Guidelines. See id. The

background commentary to section 2J1.2 indicates that the Guidelines provision

addresses a number of offenses of "varying seriousness" that involve the obstruction

of justice. The specific offense characteristics, which include the 8-level increase

here, are intended to “reflect the more serious forms of obstruction.” USSG § 2J1.2,

comment. (backg’d.). Thus we cannot say that Leger’s act of threatening physical

injury in order to obstruct justice was taken into consideration in calculating the base

offense level. Therefore, no impermissible double counting occurred.

Leger also argues that she was entitled to a downward departure under USSG

§ 5K2.0 because her case falls outside the “heartland” of cases. The district court

applied the language of section 5K2.0, and simply chose not to depart under the facts

of this case. We lack jurisdiction to review such a discretionary decision. See United

States v. Correa, 167 F.3d 414, 417 (8th Cir. 1999).

Finally, Leger raises ineffective-assistance claims, but we decline to address

them because such claims would be better addressed in a 28 U.S.C. § 2255

proceeding. See United States v. Santana, 150 F.3d 860, 863 (8th Cir. 1998).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
EXHIBIT 32.1CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

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 Annual Report of Sycamore
Networks, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ending July 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Daniel E. Smith, Chief Executive 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 to the best of my knowledge:

(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, as of, and for the periods presented in the Report.



|                                                        
|--------------------------------------------------------
|                                                        
|/S/    DANIEL E. SMITH                                  
|Daniel E. Smith                                         
|President and Chief Executive Officer September 26, 2007
. 

5 - 

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

May 10, 1939 

Honorable Henry Hull 

Ohairman, Suboommittee, Approprlationm 

House of Repreaentatlvse 

Austin, Texae 

Dear Sir: OQfnion Ho. o-736’ 

Be I Conlltltution 

House Bill l8 

This im% reply to 

OOMtitutioMlity ~oi a 

veadr as rollowot i 

OAR ACT making appro 

on armories irom Mar 

past due rsi*t 

Au@at Sl,~lWZ, 

the State of Texas, 

on taking erreot 

ng leare aontraote 

tant~Osner&il of the 

r*aay.m 

e .namaacand amountm to 

h 1, 193R, tb Awat S, 

or the ~Stat* or Taxas. 

to the fmte subjrot, 

t bet-en tha’~Adjutant l?eneral 

the ,property leased or rented 

Guard of Texas; ,.It would be 

8 faota and olrbtistanoee o? eaoh 

lght Of the prohibitlon oontalned in 

statutes to determine whether or not 

ing one, oreating a legal obligation 

the State. 

It so happene that one of them olaims, that Is the 

Port Worth Cavalry Club, for $l,VlO.OO hae already been passed 

on by the Supreme Court of thie State. Judge Orltz, who rendered 

the opinion, held~that auoh olaia wae void. If the other claim 

are ldentiaal to ,thie ‘one they are all void and, in that event, 

the bill would be ufloonet~tutional. 83 S.W. {S) 660. 
, 

Honorable Henry Hull, Nay 19, 1939, page I: 

Tour8 very truly 

AlTORNEYGENEFUL OF TEXAS 

APFROVRD 

Chalrmn.
Fifth Amendment to the Second Restatement






Exhibit  4.13


 FIFTH AMENDMENT 
TO THE SECOND RESTATEMENT OF THE 
MERIT MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC. 401(k) PROFIT SHARING PLAN




This Fifth Amendment to the Second Restatement of the Merit Medical Systems, Inc. 401(k) Profit Sharing Plan (the “Plan”) is adopted by Merit Medical Systems, Inc. (the “Employer”) as principal sponsor of the Plan.


WHEREAS, the Employer maintains the Plan for the benefit of its employees and the employees of its participating subsidiaries; and


WHEREAS, on December 19, 2012, the Employer acquired all of the issued and outstanding stock of Thomas Medical Products, Inc. (“Thomas Medical”); and


WHEREAS, the Employer wishes to amend the Plan to address the participation of former Thomas Medical employees in the Plan and to grant prior service credit to Thomas Medical employees for purposes of vesting under the Plan; and


WHEREAS, the Employer has reserved the right to amend the Plan.


NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as follows effective December 19, 2012: 


1.    Section 64(b) of Article I of the Plan document, the definition of “Years of Service,” is amended to add the following sentence at the end thereof:


“In the case of any person who becomes an Employee as a result of directly transferring his or her employment from Thomas Medical Properties, Inc. to Merit Medical Systems, Inc. between December 19, 2012 and March 31, 2013 (including a transfer of employment resulting from a merger of Thomas Medical Properties, Inc. with and into Merit Medical Systems, Inc.), such Employee’s Hours of Service and periods of continuous prior service with Thomas Medical Properties, Inc. immediately prior to such transfer of employment shall be considered Hours of Service and periods of service with Merit Medical Systems, Inc. in computing Years of Service.” 


2.    Article II B of the Plan document, relating to eligibility, is amended to add new subsection 3 to read as follows:


“3.    Any provision herein to the contrary notwithstanding, any person who becomes an Employee as a result of directly transferring his or her employment from Thomas Medical Properties, Inc. to Merit Medical Systems, Inc. between December 19, 2012 and March 31, 2013 (including a transfer of employment resulting from a merger of Thomas Medical Properties, Inc. with and into Merit Medical Systems, Inc.) shall be eligible to participate in the Plan commencing on the later of January 1, 2013 or the date he or she becomes an Employee of Merit Medical Systems, Inc. and shall not be required to satisfy the otherwise applicable 90-days of service requirement for Plan participation.”   


3.    Except as provided above, the Plan is hereby ratified and confirmed in all respects.







1






IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Employer has caused this Fifth Amendment to the Second Restatement of the Plan to be executed this 28th day of December, 2012.




MERIT MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC.




By: /s/ Rashelle Perry                 
Name: Rashelle Perry
Its: Chief Legal Officer 



2
1 The Honorable Warren K. Urbom, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 05-1032

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Nebraska. Victor M. Alvaro-Reyes, also known * as Cruz De Luna, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: January 20, 2006 Filed: February 2, 2006

___________ Before MELLOY, FAGG, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Victor Alvaro-Reyes appeals the 87- month sentence the district court 1 imposed after he pleaded guilty to a drug conspiracy, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. In a brief filed under Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), counsel argues that AlvaroReyes’s sentence is excessive and unreasonable.-2- To the extent counsel is raising an Eighth Amendment challenge to AlvaroReyes’s sentence, we concludethat the argument fails. See United States v. Collins , 340 F.3d 672, 679 (8th Cir. 2003) (Eighth Amendment forbids only extreme sentences that are grossly disproportionate to crime); cf. id. at 676, 679-80 (imposition of mandatory life sentence for conspiring to distribute more than 500 grams of methamphetamine was not cruel and unus ual punishment under Eighth Amendment); United States v. Jones , 2 F.3d 827, 828-29 (8th Cir. 1993) (finding 151-month sentence for conspiring to distribute phencyclidine not “excessive”). We further find that Alvaro-Reyes’s sentence--which was imposed at the bottom of the Guidelines range, and well be low the mandatory statutory minimum--is not unreasonable. See United States v. Booker , 125 S. Ct. 738, 765-67 (2005) (appellate courts should review post- Booker sentences for unreasonableness); United States v. Lincoln , 413 F.3d 716, 717-18 (8th Cir.) (sen tence within Guidelines range is presumptively reasonable, and defendant must rebut presumption of reasonableness), cert. denied , 126 S. Ct. 840 (2005). Having reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm.

______________________________
Exhibit 32(f)

CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  FOR PPL ELECTRIC UTILITIES CORPORATION'S 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30,
  2003

In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of PPL Electric Utilities
  Corporation (the "Company") for the quarter ended June 30, 2003, as filed with
  the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Covered Report"),
  I, the principal financial officer of the Company, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
  1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
  hereby certify that:

| | · | The Covered Report fully complies with the
        requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
        of 1934, as amended; and                   
| | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |   |                                                                                                                                                                             
| | · | The information contained in the Covered
        Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
        and results of operations of the Company.





|Date: August 12, 2003 | /s/ James E. AbelJames E. AbelTreasurerPPL Electric Utilities Corporation
|--------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
  provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to
  the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN NO. 03-05-00420- CR Ro dne y J e r r y V ie r a, App e lla nt

v. The State of Texas, App ellee

F ROM THE DISTRICT CO URT OF TRAVIS COUNTY , 390TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. D-1- DC-05 -30 0546 , HO NORAB LE JULIE H. K OCUREK , JUDGE PRESIDI NG

M E M O R

A N D UM O P I N I O N Rodney J err y Viera seeks to appe al from a

judgme nt of conviction for ag g ravated ro bb e ry . T he tr ia l court ha s ce rt if ie d that this is a ple a

ba rg a in c a se and

Vi e ra ha s n o r ight o f a

pp e a l. SeeTex. R. App. P . 25.2(a) (2). The appea l is dism issed. Se eid . rule 25.2(d) .

__________________________________________ J an P. Patterson, J ustice Be fore Chief J ustice L aw, Justi ces Patter son and Puryear Dismissed for Want of J urisdiction Filed: August 5, 2005 Do No t Pu

bli sh