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

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3933 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3933

            To extend the generalized system of preferences.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 25, 2006

  Mr. Inhofe introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
            To extend the generalized system of preferences.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF GENERALIZED SYSTEM OF PREFERENCES.

    (a) In General.--Section 505 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S. C. 
2465) is amended by striking ``December 31, 2006'' and inserting 
``December 31, 2009''.
    (b) Factor Affecting Country Designation.--In addition to the 
factors affecting a country's designation as a beneficiary developing 
country listed under section 502(c) of the Trade Act of 1974 and the 
factors affecting the designation of a country as a beneficiary sub-
Saharan African country under section 506A of such Act, the President 
may take into account the country's position and level of cooperation 
with the United States in multilateral trade negotiations.
    (c) Effective Date.--The provisions of this section shall take 
effect on the date that is 15 days after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```
CMF

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 18-0178

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

JOHN WILSON CHAMBERS,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 30-day extension of time, 

and good cause appearing therefor,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellee is granted an extension of time 

to and including June 8, 2020, within which to prepare, serve, and file its response 

brief.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 8 2020

05/08/2020

Case Number: DA 18-0178
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-1997
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           64,521
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     2,160,129
<OTHER-SE>                                 (2,224,650)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     (57)
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (1,482)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,539)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                464,093
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   462,554
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .01
        

</TABLE>
FILED

June 26, 1998

Cecil Crowson, Jr.

Appellate C ourt Clerk

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE 

 MAY 1998 SESSION

RONALD L. JONES, )

)

Appellant, ) No. 03C01-9710-CR-00428

 )

) Hamilton County

v. ) 

) Honorable Rebecca J. Stern, Judge 

)

STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) (Post-Conviction)

) 

Appellee. )

For the Appellant: For the Appellee:

Alan R. Beard John Knox Walkup

601 Chattanooga Bank Building Attorney General of Tennessee

615 Lindsey Street and

Chattanooga, TN 37402 Clinton J. Morgan

Assistant Attorney General of Tennessee 

425 Fifth Avenue North

Nashville, TN 37243-0493

William H. Cox, III

District Attorney General

and

David Denny

Assistant District Attorney General

600 Market Street, Suite 310

Chattanooga, TN 37402

OPINION FILED:____________________

AFFIRMED

Joseph M. Tipton

Judge
1

The petition is titled a “MOTION TO CHALLENGE THE VALIDITY OF PRIOR STATE

CONV ICTIONS .” The trial court properly treated the petition as one for post-conviction relief.

2

O P I N I O N

The petitioner, Ronald L. Jones, appeals as of right from the Hamilton

County Criminal Court’s summary dismissal of his pro se petition for post-conviction

relief1 on the ground that it was barred by the statute of limitations. The petitioner

contends that the petition was timely filed under the 1995 Post-Conviction Procedure

Act. He argues that the application of the statute of limitations violates his due process

rights because he was unaware of developments in Tennessee law because he was

incarcerated in a federal prison in Kansas. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The petitioner collaterally challenges convictions he received in 1984,

1986, 1989 and 1990 as a result of guilty pleas. The convictions were used to enhance

the defendant’s sentence for a conviction of a federal offense. The petitioner filed his

petition on December 30, 1996. 

Under the post-conviction law applicable at the times of his convictions,

the petitioner had three years to file a post-conviction petition from the date of the final

action of the highest state appellate court to which an appeal was taken. T.C.A. § 40-

30-102 (1990). The petition was not filed within that period. Also, the 1995 PostConviction Act did not reinstate a filing period for which the former three-year postconviction statute of limitations had already run. Carter v. State, 952 S.W.2d 417, 420

(Tenn. 1997). The petitioner’s claim that he was ignorant of the law does not excuse

his late filing of the petition. See Brown v. State, 928 S.W.2d 453, 456 (Tenn. 1996)

(“Ignorance of statute of limitations is not an excuse for late filing, even when the

petitioner claims that he did not learn of the statute’s enactment because he was

incarcerated in another state.”).
3

In consideration of the foregoing and the record as a whole, we affirm the

judgment of the trial court.

 

Joseph M. Tipton, Judge 

CONCUR:

 

Joe G. Riley, Judge 

 

Curwood Witt, Judge
[PWC Logo]******PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP**2001 Ross Avenue, Suite 1800  Dallas TX 75201-2997  Telephone (214) 999 1400  Facsimile (214) 754 7991******Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**To the Board of Directors of The First American Corporation: We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying Report on Assessment of Compliance, that First American Real Estate Solutions of Texas, LP. (the "Company" and an indirect subsidiary of The First American Corporation) complied with  the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB for all loans for residential and commercial mortgage loan outsourcing customers for which the Company served as the residential and commercial tax service provider (the "Platform"), as of December 31, 2007 and for the year then ended, excluding criteria 1122(d)(1)(i) -(iii), 1122(d)(2)(i)-(iv), 1122(d)(3)(i)-(iv), 1122(d)(4)(i) -(x) and 1122(d)(4)(xiv)-(xv), which the Company has determined are not applicable to the servicing activities performed by it with respect to the Platform. Management's assertion identifies the individual securities defined by management as constituting the Platform. Management is responsible for the Company's compliance with th e servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertion based on our examination. Our examination was conducted in accordance with standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the applicable servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances . Our examination included testing of selected securities that comprise the Platform, testing of selected servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether the Company processed those selected transactions and performed those selected activities in compliance with the applicable servicing criteria. Our procedures were limited to the selected transactions and the servicing activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report. Our procedures were not designed to detect noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report . We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company's compliance with the servicing criteria. In our opinion, management's assertion that the Company complied with the aforementioned  applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2007 for all loans for residential and commercial mortgage loan outsourcing customers for which the Company served as the residential and commercial tax service provider is fairly stated, in all material respects. /s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP February 12, 2008
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D18-279

_____________________________

TREVIS PRINCE,

Appellant,

v.

WELLS FARGO BANK N.A. as 

trustee on behalf of The Holders 

of the Harborview Mortgage 

Loan Trust Mortgage Loan 

Pass-through Certificates Series 

2007-1,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Alachua County.

Donna M. Keim, Judge.

March 1, 2019

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROWE, BILBREY, and WINSOR, JJ., concur.
2

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________

James H. Cerveny, Gainesville; and Niles B. Whitten, Gainesville,

for Appellant.

Allison Morat of Bitman O’Brien & Morat, PLLC, Maitland, for 

Appellee.
EXHIBIT 13.2



Certification of Chief Financial Officer

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 International Barrier Technology Inc., a company organized under the British Columbia Company Act (the Company) on Form 20-F as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, David Corcoran, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. (S) 1350, as adopted pursuant to (S) 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 result of operations

of the Company.



/s/ David Corcoran

David Corcoran, Chief Financial Officer





Date: March 17, 2005
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

Certification Pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United StatesCode)

 

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsections(a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), I,William D. Hibbetts, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer ofPioneer Drilling Company, a Texas corporation (the “Company”), hereby certify,to my knowledge, that:

 

(1)           the Company’s Quarterly Report onForm 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004 (the “Report”) fullycomplies with the requirements 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.

 

 
| Dated: | November  5, 2004 |                                               |  /s/  William D. Hibbetts |   |
|--------|-------------------|----------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------|
|   |              | William  D. Hibbetts                               |
|   |              | Senior  Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

# ACTION:

Announcement of grant award.

*Recipient:*                     American Hospital Association.                

*Purpose of Award:*                     ONC announces the award of a grant to the American Hospital Association to fund a supplement to the Association's national survey of hospitals that will measure the adoption and use of electronic health records by these providers.                

*Amount of Award:*                     $101,973.                

*Project Period:*                     12 months with option for four additional years of funding at the same level.                

*Justification for Exception to Competition:*                     The American Hospital Association, has many years of experience conducting surveys with a high response rate across all United States hospitals.                

*Name and Address of Awarding Office Official:*                     Marc Weisman, Executive Director, Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, Department of Health and Human Services, 200 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington DC 20201.                

Dated: May 13, 2009.

Marc Weisman,

Executive Director, Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology. 

[FR Doc. E9-11672 Filed 5-18-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4150-45-P
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Darrell Byrd, Appellant.

Submitted February 9, 2009;

decided April 2, 2009

Motion, insofar as it seeks leave to appeal from that part of the Appellate Division order that affirmed Supreme Court’s order denying appellant’s motion to vacate, dismissed upon the ground that such portion of the order does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution; motion for leave to appeal otherwise denied. Motion for poor person relief dismissed as academic.
```

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 95 (Tuesday, May 19, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 23464]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-11641]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 6620]

Waiver of Restriction on Assistance to the Central Government of 
Lebanon

    Pursuant to section 7088(c)(2) of the Department of State, Foreign 
Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2009 (Division H, 
Pub. L. 111-8) (``the Act''), and Department of State Delegation of 
Authority Number 245-1, I hereby determine that it is important to the 
national interest of the United States to waive the requirements of 
section 7088(c)(1) of the Act with respect to the Government of 
Lebanon, and I hereby waive such restriction.
    This determination shall be reported to the Congress, and published 
in the Federal Register.

    Dated: May 7, 2009.
Jacob L. Lew,
Deputy Secretary of State, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E9-11641 Filed 5-18-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-31-P
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                         502,314
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 517,337
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          110,559
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     406,778
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   517,337
<SALES>                                        265,290
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               329,036
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  174,764
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                64,207
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              61,890
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             12,303,016
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              (129,068)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                12,173,948
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   151.29
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   151.29
        

</TABLE>
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 435 

To amend the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to designate a segment of the 

Farmington River and Salmon Brook in the State of Connecticut for 

study for potential addition to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers 

System, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 17, 2005 

Mr. DODD (for himself and Mr. LIEBERMAN) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To amend the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to designate 

a segment of the Farmington River and Salmon Brook 

in the State of Connecticut for study for potential addition to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, 

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. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Lower Farmington 

5 River and Salmon Brook Wild and Scenic River Study Act 

6 of 2005’’. 
2 

•S 435 IS

1 SEC. 2. DESIGNATION OF ADDITIONAL SEGMENT OF FARM2 INGTON RIVER AND SALMON BROOK IN CON3 NECTICUT FOR STUDY FOR POTENTIAL ADDI4 TION TO NATIONAL WILD AND SCENIC RIV5 ERS SYSTEM. 

6 (a) DESIGNATION.—Section 5(a) of the Wild and 

7 Scenic Rivers Act (16 U.S.C. 1276(a)) is amended by add8 ing at the end the following: 

9 ‘‘(139) LOWER FARMINGTON RIVER AND SALMON

10 BROOK, CONNECTICUT.—The segment of the Farmington 

11 River downstream from the segment designated as a rec12 reational river by section 3(a)(156) to its confluence with 

13 the Connecticut River, and the segment of the Salmon 

14 Brook including its mainstream and east and west 

15 branches.’’. 

16 (b) TIME FOR SUBMISSION.—Not later than 3 years 

17 after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of 

18 the Interior shall submit to Congress a report containing 

19 the results of the study required by the amendment made 

20 by subsection (a). 

21 (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There 

22 are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are nec23 essary to carry out this Act. 

Æ
#### State v. Bullock

Case below: 171 N.C. App. 763

No. 445P02-3

1. AG’s Motion for Temporary Stay (COA04-665)

2. AG’s Petition for Writ of Supersedeas

3. AG’s PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31

4. Def’s NOA Based Upon a Constitutional Question

5. AG’s Motion to Dismiss Appeal

6. Def’s PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31

1. Allowed 359 N.C. 854

Stay dissolved 12/19/06

2. Denied 12/19/06

3. See Special Order Page 150

4. _

5. Allowed 12/19/06

6. Denied 12/19/06