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

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4071 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the placed-inservice date requirement for low-income housing credit buildings and 

bonus depreciation property and the period for rehabilitation expenditures 

in the Gulf Opportunity Zone. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 16, 2006 

Ms. LANDRIEU introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend 

the placed-in-service date requirement for low-income 

housing credit buildings and bonus depreciation property 

and the period for rehabilitation expenditures in the Gulf 

Opportunity Zone. 

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


ccoleman on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
2 

•S 4071 IS

1 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF PLACED-IN-SERVICE DATE RE2 QUIREMENT FOR LOW-INCOME HOUSING 

3 CREDIT BUILDINGS AND BONUS DEPRECIA4 TION PROPERTY AND PERIOD FOR REHABILI5 TATION EXPENDITURES IN GULF OPPOR6 TUNITY ZONE. 

7 (a) LOW-INCOME HOUSING CREDIT BUILDINGS.— 

8 Section 1400N(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 

9 is amended— 

10 (1) by striking ‘‘or 2008’’ in paragraph (3)(A) 

11 and inserting ‘‘2008, 2009, or 2010’’, 

12 (2) by striking ‘‘during such period’’ in para13 graph (3)(B)(ii) and inserting ‘‘during the period de14 scribed in subparagraph (A)’’, and 

15 (3) by striking ‘‘or 2008’’ in paragraph (4)(A) 

16 and inserting ‘‘2008, 2009, or 2010’’. 

17 (b) BONUS DEPRECIATION PROPERTY.—Section 

18 1400N(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amend19 ed— 

20 (1) by striking ‘‘December 31, 2007 (December 

21 31, 2008, in the case of nonresidential real property 

22 and residential rental property)’’ in paragraph 

23 (2)(A)(v) and inserting ‘‘December 31, 2010’’, and 

24 (2) by striking ‘‘January 1, 2008’’ in paragraph 

25 (3)(B) and inserting ‘‘January 1, 2011’’. 


ccoleman on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
3 

•S 4071 IS

1 (c) INCREASE IN REHABILITATION CREDIT.—Section 

2 1400N(h) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amend3 ed by striking ‘‘2008’’ and inserting ‘‘2010’’. 

Æ 


ccoleman on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

 

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

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

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report ofBancTec, Inc, a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-Q for thequarter ending March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission (the “Report”), I, J. Coley Clark, President and Chief Executive Officer of theCompany, certify, pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18U.S.C. § 1350), that to my knowledge:

 

(1) The Report fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2) The information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/    J.  Coley Clark |   |
|--------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                       |
| J. Coley Clark                             |
| President and Chief Executive  Officer     |

 

May 24, 2006

 

A signed original of this written statementrequired by 18 USC Section 1350 has been provided to the Company and willbe retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

 

1

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S FORM 10-QSB FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1996 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-29-1996
<CASH>                                              34
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,072
<ALLOWANCES>                                        21
<INVENTORY>                                      1,605
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   193
<PP&E>                                           5,289
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,617
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   3,894
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,702
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,508
<OTHER-SE>                                     (3,087)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     3,894
<SALES>                                          8,727
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 8,727
<CGS>                                            6,275
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    8,459
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  (26)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  83
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    211
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                211
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       211
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .05
        

</TABLE>
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 400 

To prevent the illegal importation of controlled substances. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 16, 2005 

Mr. COLEMAN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL

To prevent the illegal importation of controlled substances.

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 ‘‘Prevention of Illegally 

5 Imported Controlled Substances Act of 2005’’ or ‘‘Todd 

6 Rode Act’’. 

7 SEC. 2. DESTRUCTION OF CERTAIN IMPORTED SHIPMENTS. 

8 Part D of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 

9 841 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the fol10 lowing: 
2

•S 400 IS

1 ‘‘DESTRUCTION OF CERTAIN IMPORTED SHIPMENTS

2 ‘‘SEC. 424. (a) IN GENERAL.—A shipment of con3 trolled substances that is imported or offered for import 

4 into the United States in violation of section 401 and 

5 whose value is less than $10,000 shall be seized and sum6 marily forfeited to the United States. 

7 ‘‘(b) DESTRUCTION.—Controlled substances seized 

8 under subsection (a) shall be destroyed, subject to sub9 section (d). Section 801(b) of the Federal Food, Drug, 

10 and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 381(b)) does not authorize 

11 the delivery of the substances pursuant to the execution 

12 of a bond, and the substances may not be exported. 

13 ‘‘(c) NOTICE.— 

14 ‘‘(1) PROCEDURES.—The seizure and destruc15 tion of controlled substances under subsections (a) 

16 and (b) may be carried out without notice to the im17 porter, owner, or consignee of the controlled sub18 stances involved. Appraisement of such substances is 

19 required only to the extent sufficient to document 

20 that the substances are subject to subsection (a). 

21 ‘‘(2) GOALS.—Procedures promulgated under 

22 paragraph (1) shall be designed toward the goal of 

23 ensuring that, with respect to efficiently utilizing 

24 Federal resources available for carrying out this sub25 section, a substantial majority of shipments of con-
3

•S 400 IS

1 trolled substances subject to subsection (a) are iden2 tified and seized under such paragraph and de3 stroyed under subsection (b). 

4 ‘‘(d) PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE.—Controlled sub5 stances may not be destroyed under subsection (b) to the 

6 extent that the Attorney General of the United States de7 termines that the controlled substances should be pre8 served as evidence or potential evidence with respect to 

9 an offense against the United States.’’.

Æ
----

|   |                          |                                      |
|--------|-------------------------------|-------------------------------------------|
|   | LaSalle Bank      N.A.        |
|   | 135 South      LaSalle Street |
|   |                          | Suite      1625                           |
|   |                          | Chicago, IL      60603                    |
|   |                          |                                      |
|   |                          |                                      |
|   |                          | Global      Securities and Trust Services |

| Citigroup Commercial      Mortgage Securities Inc., 388 Greenwich      Street, 11th FloorNew York,      New York 10013  | Wells Fargo Bank,      National Association, 9062 Old      Annapolis RoadColumbia,      Maryland 21045  |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| PNC Capital Markets      LLCOne PNC      Plaza, 249 Fifth AvenuePittsburgh,      Pennsylvania 15222                     | Standard &      Poor's Ratings Services55 Water      StreetNew York,      New York 10041            |
| LaSalle Financial      Services, Inc.55 East      52nd StreetNew York,      New York 10055                              | Moody's Investors      Services, Inc.7 World      Trade CenterNew York,      New York 10007             |
| Royal Bank of      CanadaOne      Liberty PlazaNew York,      New York 10006-1404                                       | Fitch,      Inc.One State      Street Plaza, 31st FloorNew York,      New York 10004                    |

|  Re:  |  Citigroup      Commercial Mortgage Trust 2007-CD4                    |
|-----------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|            |  Commercial      Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series  2007-CD4 |

----

----

----
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Edward P. COLLICOTT, Sr., Defendant-Appellant.

No. 06-35238.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Oct. 16, 2006.*

Filed Oct. 18, 2006.

Edward P. Collicott, Sr., Sheridan, OR, pro se.

Joe Harrington, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Spokane, WA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

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 **

Federal prisoner Edward P. Collicott, Sr., appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment denying as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion challenging his jury-trial conviction for possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, heroin and cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253. We review de novo, *United States v. Chacon-Palomares,*208 F.3d 1157, 1158 (9th Cir.2000), *and*we affirm.

Citing *Crawford v. Washington,*541 U.S. 36, 124 S.Ct. 1354, 158 L.Ed.2d 177 (2004), Collicott contends that his confrontation rights were violated at his re-trial when the district court allowed into evidence sworn testimony of an unavailable witness from his initial trial.

Because Collicott did not file his section 2255 motion until almost two years after the Supreme Court’s decision in *Crawford,**162the district court correctly denied the motion as untimely. *See Dodd v. United States,*545 U.S. 353, 125 S.Ct. 2478, 2481-83, 162 L.Ed.2d 343 (2005) (stating that an applicant has one year from the date on which the right he asserts was initially recognized by the Supreme Court).

Collicott’s motion for release, filed on September 11, 2006, is denied.

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.
<PAGE>

                                 HOLLINGER INC.

                     COMMENCES ACTION AGAINST RAVELSTON AND
                   BLACK ENTITIES AND CERTAIN FORMER DIRECTORS


TORONTO, ONTARIO, CANADA, MARCH 29, 2005 - HOLLINGER INC. (TSX: HLG.C; HLG.PR.B)
announced today that it has issued a Statement of Claim in the Ontario Superior
Court of Justice to commence a legal action against The Ravelston Corporation
Limited, Ravelston Management Inc., Moffatt Management Inc. and Black-Amiel
Management Inc. as well as former directors and officers Conrad M. Black, F.
David Radler, Jack A. Boultbee and Peter Y. Atkinson.


The Claims:
Claims made are for monetary damages from all defendants jointly and severally
in the amount of $550 million as well as reimbursement of certain amounts owing
to Hollinger by the Ravelston defendants in the amount of approximately $86
million plus accrued interest and costs.

The monetary damages include management fees and non-competition payments
misappropriated to Ravelston and the individual defendants during a period since
1998, as well as reimbursement of fees and costs including those related to the
current inspection by Ernst & Young Inc. and the now withdrawn going private
transaction. Other bases of the claims include diversion of corporate
opportunities, breach of fiduciary duties and oppression.


Background:
Hollinger's principal asset is its interest in Hollinger International Inc.
which is a newspaper publisher, the assets of which include the Chicago
Sun-Times, a large number of community newspapers in the Chicago area and a
portfolio of news media investments. Hollinger also owns a portfolio of
revenue-producing and other commercial real estate in Canada, including its head
office building located at 10 Toronto Street, Toronto, Ontario.


Media contact:
Larry Parnell
Hill & Knowlton
416-413-4623
larry.parnell@hillandknowlton.ca



                              www.hollingerinc.com
EXHIBIT
32.02



CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO

18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



WRITTEN
STATEMENT OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER



Solely
for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I,
David Baum, the undersigned Chief Financial Officer of Uplift Nutrition, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certify, based
on my knowledge, that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2015 (the “Report”)
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof:



|1. | Fully
    complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | That
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
    operations of the Company.
|-- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|/s/
    David Baum                                                | 
|----------------------------------------------------------------- | 
|David
    Baum                                                    | 
|Chief
                                         Financial Officer  | 
|(principal
    financial officer andprincipal accounting officer) | 



Dated:
January 19, 2017
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.33

                         IASIS CORPORATE INCENTIVE PLAN

                                 2004 PLAN YEAR

PURPOSE

The IASIS Corporate Incentive Plan is designed to provide a financial incentive
and reward to each participating employee for exceptional performance.

ELIGIBILITY

Corporate executives at the manager level and above are eligible to participate
in the plan. Participation will begin the beginning of the fiscal year.
Individuals employed or promoted to an eligible position will begin
participation the first of the month following the effective date of their
employment or promotion. Individuals hired or promoted to an eligible position
after June 30, will not be eligible for plan participation until the following
fiscal year.

INCENTIVE

The incentive plan is based on the attainment of the established EBITDA target
for the company for the fiscal year.

EBITDA target for the plan includes the budgeted EBITDA plus the potential bonus
payout.

The company must achieve the EBITDA target for any bonus to be paid.

Plan participants will receive a payment based on the following guidelines
unless other was noted.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                   LEVEL                                   PERCENTAGE OF SALARY
                   -----                                   --------------------
<S>                                                        <C>
               Vice President                                      35%
          Assistant Vice President                                 30%
                  Director                                         25%
                  Manager                                          15%
</TABLE>


SPECIAL NOTES

         1.       Employees may not participate in another incentive program
                  while participating in the Corporate Incentive Plan.

         2.       Plan participants must be employed at the time of the bonus
                  payout in order to receive payment from the plan.

         3.       Executive management reserves the right to change, modify or
                  terminate the incentive plan, or any part of the plan, at any
                  time without prior notice to the plan participants.


<PAGE>

         4.       Internal and/or external events may impact the EBITDA target
                  and therefore require an adjustment to the target established
                  at the beginning of the year.

         5.       Payments will be made as soon as administratively possible
                  following the end of the fiscal year and completion of the
                  corporate financial audit.

         6.       Individuals hired or employees promoted after the beginning of
                  the fiscal year will receive a prorated payment based on the
                  time assigned to the position.

EFFECTIVE DATE

This plan is for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2003.
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 18

- 0036 8

- CR

T ERVON L EE B ASPED

, Appellant

V

.

T HE S TATE OF T EXAS §

§

§

§ On Appeal from Criminal District

Court No. 1

of Tarrant County (154 3547R )

October 25 , 2018

Per Curiam

(nfp)

JU DGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that the

appeal should be dismissed. It is ordered that the appeal is dismissed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

PER CURIAM
[915 NE2d 1140, 886 NYS2d 845]

#### Joseph I. Rosenzweig, Appellant, v Radiah K. Givens, Respondent.

Decided September 17, 2009

*775APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Marc E. Elliott, EC.,*New York City *(Marc E. Elliott*of counsel), for appellant.

*Law Offices of Barbara H. Katsos, EC.,*New York City *(Barbara H. Katsos*of counsel), for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, and the certified question answered in the affirmative.

 In connection with the mortgage foreclosure action, defendant has alleged sufficient facts to warrant denial of plaintiffs prediscovery motion for summary judgment, having asserted that plaintiff, an attorney who was then her paramour, secured the mortgage through fraud and overreaching and by exploiting a fiduciary relationship with her *(see generally Matter of Greiff,*92 NY2d 341, 345 [1998]). She contends that, under the guise of buying her a condominium, he induced her to enter into a mortgage arrangement whereby he was the lender and she the borrower. Furthermore, *776plaintiff hired a friend to represent them both at the closing. Defendant claims that plaintiff paid all expenses related to the condominium and did not seek mortgage payments or any other contribution from defendant until three years later— after their marriage and defendant’s subsequent discovery that plaintiff already had a wife and two children, rendering their marriage bigamous. Plaintiff then demanded payment, accelerated the loan and pursued foreclosure against defendant. We also conclude that defendant has stated a prima facie case of fraudulent inducement to marriage (see *Blossom v Barrett,*37 NY 434 [1868]; *see also Tuck v Tuck,*14 NY2d 341, 344 [1964]).

Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Grapfeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones concur in memorandum.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, etc.