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

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2437 

To revise the boundaries of a unit of the John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier 

Resources System in Topsail, North Carolina, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 30, 2023 

Mr. MURPHY (for himself and Mr. ROUZER) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To revise the boundaries of a unit of the John H. Chafee 

Coastal Barrier Resources System in Topsail, North 

Carolina, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CORRECTION TO MAP. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 30 days after the 

5 date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior 

6 shall make such corrections to the map described in sub7 section (b) as are necessary to exclude lots from unit L06 

8 of the John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources System 

9 in North Topsail Beach, North Carolina, that were serv10 iced by infrastructure, as described in subsection (c), inVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:55 Apr 12, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H2437.IH H2437

kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2437 IH

1 stalled along North Carolina Highway 210 and New River 

2 Inlet Road as of the date of enactment of the Coastal Bar3 rier Resources Act (16 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 

4 (b) MAPS DESCRIBED.—The map referred to in sub5 section (a) is a map that— 

6 (1) is included in a set of maps as part of the 

7 John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources System 

8 entitled ‘‘John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources 

9 System’’ and dated December 21, 2018; and 

10 (2) relates to unit L06 of the John H. Chafee 

11 Coastal Barrier Resources System. 

12 (c) INFRASTRUCTURE DESCRIBED.— 

13 (1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), 

14 the infrastructure referred to in subsection (a) is in15 frastructure that meets the criteria described in sec16 tion 4(g)(1)(B) of the Coastal Barrier Resources Act 

17 (16 U.S.C. 3503(g)(1)(B)). 

18 (2) INCLUSION.—For purposes of paragraph 

19 (1), North Carolina Highway 210 and New River 

20 Inlet Road shall be considered to meet the criteria 

21 described in section 4(g)(1)(B)(i) of the Coastal 

22 Barrier Resources Act (16 U.S.C. 3503(g)(1)(B)(i)). 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
#### BAKER v. IRVINE.

See *Baker*v. *Irvine, ante.*

Before Ardrich, J., Greenville, November, 1900.

Reversed.

Action for damages for conversion of personal property by J. A. Baker against W. H. Irvine. From order of Circuit Court reversing magistrate’s judgment, plaintiff appeals.

*Messrs. Blythe & Blythe,*for appellant,

*122*Messrs. Carey & McCullough*and *Shuman & Mooney,*contra.

July 13, 1901.

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Pope.

The action below was commenced before the magistrate appointed for Bates and Paris Mountain townships of Greenville County to- recover a certain sum of money. After one postponement of trial by the defendant, the cause was heard on December 6th, 1899. Judgment was rendered for the plaintiff. Thereupon an appeal was taken to the Circuit ’Court for Greenville. Upon due notice, the defendant at the trial before his Honor, Judge Aldrich, raised the question of jurisdiction in the magistrate who heard the cause, because such magistrate was appointed for Bates and Paris Mountain townships, while the defendant resided not in Bates or Paris Mountain townships, but resided in Greenville township. The -Circuit Ju-dge sustained' the question of jurisdiction and ordered the judgment of magistrate’s court reversed and annulled. Thereupon the plaintiff appealed to this -Court from such judgment. The proceedings and grounds of appeal were identical with those just disposed of in the action of J. A. Baker and- W. C. Baker, this day filed. Our judgment in the present action must be the same as it was in the case just cited.

It is the judgment of this Court, that the judgment of the Circuit Court be reversed, and that the cause be remanded to the Circuit Court to hear and determine the questions presented by the defendant’s appeal from the judgment of the magistrate’s court.
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1


CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350,

AS ENACTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
2002


In connection with the quarterly report on
Form 10-Q of Hub International Limited (the
Company) dated August 5, 2004 containing the
financial statements of the Company for the fiscal quarter ended
June 30, 2004 (the Report) filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I,
Martin P. Hughes, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as enacted,
certify pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that:



| |    |                                                                                                                                                             
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | 1. | the Report fully complies with the requirements
    of Section 13(a) 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.

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.





| |     |                       
| | --- | ----------------------
| | By: | /s/   MARTIN P. HUGHES

| |                        
| | -----------------------
| |                        
| | Martin P. Hughes       
| | Chief Executive Officer

August 5, 2004
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Erlin Rolando LANZA-PAZ, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 05-21045

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Oct. 25, 2006.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, H. Michael Sokolow, Philip G. Gallagher, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before JOLLY, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Erlin Rolando Lanza-Paz (Lanza) appeals following his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry after deportation. Lan-za argues that the “felony” and “aggravated felony” provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1) and (2) are unconstitutional in light of *Apprendi v. New Jersey,*530 U.S. *624466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000).

Lanza’s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998). Although Lanza contends that *Almendarez-Torres*was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule *Almendarez-Torres*in light of *Apprendi,*we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that *Almendarez-Torres*remains binding. *See United States v. Garza-Lopez,*410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), *cert. denied,*- U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 298, 163 L.Ed.2d 260 (2005). Lanza properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of *Almendarez-Torres*and circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further review.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. 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 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

ALONSO ISRRAEL ROEL

,

Appellant

,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

,

State

. §

§

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 1 9

- 00 2 43

- C R

Appeal from the

Criminal District Court No. 1

of El Paso C ounty, Texas

(TC# 201 8 0D0 5402 )

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS Angie Morales ’ r equest for an extension of time within which to file

the Reporter ’ s Record until February 8 , 2020

. NO FURTHER REQUESTS FOR EXTENSION

OF TIME TO FILE THE REPORTER ’ S RECORD WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ORDERED that Angie Morales

, Official Court Reporter for Criminal District

Court No. 1 f

or El Paso County, Texas, prepare the Reporter ’ s Record and forward the same to

this Court on or before February 8 , 2020

.

I T IS SO ORDERED this 13 th d ay of January , 20 20

.

PER CURIAM

Before Alley , C.J., R odriguez and Palafox , JJ.
#### Orlando B. ROBERTS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Thomas VAUGHN, Warden; et al., Respondents-Appellees.

No. 04-56675.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Oct. 16, 2006.*

Filed Oct. 18, 2006.

Orlando B. Roberts, Blythe, CA, pro se.

J. Conrad Schroeder, Los Angeles, CA, for Respondents-Appellees.

Before: T.G. NELSON, W. FLETCHER and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Orlando B. Roberts appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as time-barred. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.

Roberts contends that the California Board of Parole violated his rights by failing to apply the procedures of the now-*131repealed indeterminate sentencing law to his parole proceedings. Roberts contends that the district court erred by dismissing his petition because he is challenging the 1998 and 2002 denials of parole, and was unaware that the parole board was not applying the indeterminate sentencing procedure until the time of those proceedings. We conclude that the district court correctly found that the factual predicate for the claims should have been known to Roberts at his first parole hearing in 1982. *See Redd v. McGrath,*343 F.3d 1077, 1082 (9th Cir.2003) (“limitations period begins to run when the new evidence should have been discovered through the exercise of due diligence”). Furthermore, we conclude that Roberts has not shown that he has been disadvantaged by the application of the determinate sentencing law. *See Connor v. Estelle,*981 F.2d 1032, 1033-34 (9th Cir.1992) (per curiam). Accordingly, we affirm.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**CERTIFICATION
                                                           Exhibit
      31.1**





I,
      Christopher Haigh, certify that:




1.
        I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of SVC Financial
      Services, 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 year 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 years 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 we
      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 year 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 year 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
      year 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 registrant's board of
      directors;





(a)
      All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
      of internal controls 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 controls over financial
      reporting.




Date:
       January 12, 2006




/s/
      Christopher Haigh


_________________


Christopher
      Haigh


Chief
      Executive Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 08-8498

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee, 

 v. 

SHONTAYNE DWAYNE PITTMAN, a/k/a Wayne, a/k/a Light, 

 Defendant - Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior 

District Judge. (4:97-cr-00005-F-9) 

Submitted: March 23, 2009 Decided: April 9, 2009 

Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. 

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Shontayne Dwayne Pittman, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. 

Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North 

Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2 

PER CURIAM: 

Shontayne Dwayne Pittman appeals the district court’s 

orders denying his motion for reduction of sentence, 18 U.S.C. 

§ 3582(c) (2006), in which he sought the benefit of Amendments 

505 and 706 of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, and denying his 

motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and 

find no reversible error.* Accordingly, we affirm for the 

reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Pittman, 

No. 4:97-cr-00005-F-9 (E.D.N.C. Oct. 2, 2008 & Nov. 18, 2008). 

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the 

court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

AFFIRMED

 *

 We note that Amendment 505 became effective prior to 

Pittman’s initial sentencing in 1997. That Amendment therefore 

factored into Pittman’s original guideline calculation, and his 

claim that he is entitled to the benefit of that Amendment is 

moot.
EXHIBIT 32

<PAGE>




                                  CERTIFICATION

     In connection  with the Annual Report of Biocurex,  Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-K/A for the year ending  December 31, 2011 as filed with the  Securities
and  Exchange  Commission  (the  "Report"),  Dr.  Ricardo  Moro,  the  Principal
Executive  Officer  and Gladys  Chan,  the  Principal  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 to the  best  of  their
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 the Company.



Date:  August 28, 2012               By:/s/ Ricardo Moro
                                        -------------------------------------
                                        Dr. Ricardo Moro - Principal Executive
                                        Officer



Date:  August 28, 2012               By:/s/ Gladys Chan
                                        -------------------------------------
                                        Gladys  Chan  -  Principal   Financial
                                        Officer
<PAGE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                       2,730,009
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   38,836
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                      51,409,373
<DEPRECIATION>                            (30,448,759)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              32,493,649
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                     36,326,333
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                32,493,649
<SALES>                                     11,329,456
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            11,589,933
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             7,485,521
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,838,576
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,265,836
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,265,836
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM COMPANY'S
SEPTEMBER 30, 1996 10-Q/A FILED JUNE 6, 1997 WITH SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                      13,028,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               48,896,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                13,319,000
<INVENTORY>                                    362,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            49,148,000
<PP&E>                                       2,685,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,422,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              58,368,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       24,052,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        2,078,000
<PREFERRED>                                    199,000
<COMMON>                                       306,000
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                58,368,000
<SALES>                                      3,898,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,898,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                           (3,438,000)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             338,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,991,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,991,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,991,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.07)
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 23.2



CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (File No. 333-150333, effective April 18, 2008) of Bioheart, Inc. and subsidiaries of our report dated March  31, 2010 except for Note 2 as of May 10, 2011 relating to the consolidated financial statements which appear in this Form 10-K. Our report contains an explanatory paragraph regarding the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern.





/s/ Jewett, Schwartz, Wolfe & Associates





Hollywood, Florida

May 10, 2011



---
EXHIBIT 32.1

Certification of CEO and CFO Pursuant to

18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

as Adopted Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

The undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial
Officer of The TriZetto Group, Inc. (the Company), each hereby certifies that to his knowledge on the date hereof:

(a) The
Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2007, filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and

(b) Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.



|                        |  |  |  |                        
|----------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|                        |  | 
|Date: February 15, 2008 |  |  |  | /s/ Jeffrey H. Margolis
|                        |  |  |  | Jeffrey H. Margolis    
|                        |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer
|                        |  | 
|Date: February 15, 2008 |  |  |  | /s/ Robert G. Barbieri 
|                        |  |  |  | Robert G. Barbieri     
|                        |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer
**EXHIBIT 99.7**
**Attention Business/Financial Editors:**
**Call-Net Enterprises Inc. — Q3 2004 results — October 27, 2004**
     TORONTO, Oct. 25 /CNW/ — Notification of Q3 2004 results:
     CALL-NET ENTERPRISES INC. (TSX: FON.) (TSX: FON.B.) (OTCBB: CNEZF)
     October 27, 2004, 1:00 PM ET
     To listen to this event, please enterhttp://www.newswire.ca/en/webcast/viewEvent.cgi?eventID=935880 inyour web browser.
     For a complete listing of upcoming and archived webcasts available throughCanada NewsWire, please visit our events calendar athttp://www.newswire.ca/en/webcast/index.cgi. CNW’s webcast of earnings calls isconsistent with Market Regulation Services Inc. (RS) initiatives to broadeninvestor access through the use of new technology.
 
For further information: Karen O’Leary, (416) 718-6445,