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

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 1 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.Con.Res.1
                                       Agreed to January 4, 2005        

                       One Hundred Ninth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
            the fourth day of January, two thousand and five

                          Concurrent Resolution

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That the two Houses of Congress shall meet in the Hall of the House of 
Representatives on Thursday, the sixth day of January 2005, at 1 
o'clock post meridian, pursuant to the requirements of the Constitution 
and laws relating to the election of President and Vice President of 
the United States, and the President of the Senate shall be their 
Presiding Officer; that two tellers shall be previously appointed by 
the President of the Senate on the part of the Senate and two by the 
Speaker on the part of the House of Representatives, to whom shall be 
handed, as they are opened by the President of the Senate, all the 
certificates and papers purporting to be certificates of the electoral 
votes, which certificates and papers shall be opened, presented, and 
acted upon in the alphabetical order of the States, beginning with the 
letter ``A''; and said tellers, having then read the same in the 
presence and hearing of the two Houses, shall make a list of the votes 
as they shall appear from the said certificates; and the votes having 
been ascertained and counted in the manner and according to the rules 
by law provided, the result of the same shall be delivered to the 
President of the Senate, who shall thereupon announce the state of the 
vote, which announcement shall be deemed a sufficient declaration of 
the persons, if any, elected President and Vice President of the United 
States, and, together with a list of the votes, be entered on the 
Journals of the two Houses.
  Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.

  Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.
```
Exhibit 31.1

Certification of Principal Executive
Officer

Pursuant to Section 302 of the

Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



I, Edward J. Quilty, certify that:



1.	I have reviewed this amendment
no. 1 to the annual report on Form 10-K of Derma Sciences, Inc. (the “Registrant”);



2.	Based on my knowledge, this annual 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
annual report;



|Dated:  April 2, 2012 | /s/ Edward J. Quilty                            | 
|--------------------- | ----------------------------------------------- | 
|                      | Edward J. Quilty                                | 
|                      | Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer | 
|                      | (Principal Executive Officer)                   |
#### Joel A. Cook, Appellant, v HMC Times Square Hotel, LLC, et al., Respondents.

[977 NYS2d 212]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard E Braun, J.), entered May 24, 2012, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied plaintiffs motion to compel defendants to provide five years of past repair and incident records and one year of subsequent remedial measure and incident records, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, to permit plaintiff discovery of repair and incident records for a three-year period preceding the accident, through and including records of the subsequent incident on November 15, 2005, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

“Supreme Court is vested with broad discretion to supervise disclosure and ... its orders in this regard should not be disturbed absent an abuse of that discretion” *(Daniels v City of New York,*291 AD2d 260, 260 [1st Dept 2002]). However, limiting disclosure of materials on the issue of prior notice to one year unduly restricts a plaintiffs right to discovery *(id.).*Generally, three years is an appropriate time frame concerning the exchange of past notice evidence *(see Freeman v Hertzoff,*179 AD2d 363 [1st Dept 1992]; *Matos v City of New York,*78 AD2d 834 [1st Dept 1980]).

The motion court here improvidently exercised its discretion in limiting plaintiffs discovery of defendants’ records for one year prior to the accident, and plaintiff is entitled to Engineer on Duty Reports, Manager on Duty Reports, and Incident Reports involving rooms 1002 or 1012 for a three-year period preceding the accident through and including records of the post-accident incident on November 15, 2005, to the extent those documents are still available. Defendants submitted sufficient evidence that the other documents sought were previously destroyed in the ordinary course of business.

However, the court correctly found that records of defendants’ alleged post-accident remedial measures do not fall within any of the recognized exceptions to the general rule that evidence of post-accident repairs is generally inadmissible and may never be admitted to prove an admission of negligence *(Stolowski v 234 E. 178th St. LLC,*89 AD3d 549 [1st Dept 2011]). Thus, they are not discoverable.

We have considered plaintiffs remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Friedman, J.E, Sweeny, Acosta and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.
#### ALSTON v. SECURITY SAVINGS & COMMERCIAL BANK et al.

Civ. A. No. 3583.

District Court of the United States for the District of Columbia.

Oct. 10, 1939.

*496Emory B. Smith, of Washington, D. C., for plaintiff.

Julius I. Peyser and Aaron W. Jacobson, both of Washington, D. C., for defendants.

PROCTOR, Associate Justice.

1. On Motions of Defendant to Deposit Funds with Court.

Although plaintiff opposes these motions, the fact that they are made is evidence that defendant objects to carrying the accounts any longer and wishes to be relieved of any further burdens concerning the same by depositing the funds in court as provided by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, rule 67, 28 U.S.C.A. Presumably, they would have had the right at any time during Bergens’ life to return the funds to him; hence, I see no reason to deny them • the right to take advantage of Rule 67 and deposit the funds in court. Therefore, the several motions of defendant will be granted.

2. On Motions of Plaintiff for Summary Judgment.

I do not think that summary judgment should be entered upon the present record. As a necessary precaution in protecting any possible claims of others, notice by publication should be given to all persons interested of the nature and objects of the present suit and warning them to appear and show cause on or before a definite date why the prayers of the complaint should not be granted. This notice should be published in a newspaper of general circulation three successive weeks. Actual notice should also be given to all persons who are known or suspected to be creditors of the decedent Bergens. When this is done and proper proof made through the publication and service of these notices, the court will take proof in support of the allegations of the complaint and then consider the entry of judgment.
<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>                                       1,381,221
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,381,221
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          684,783
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     696,438
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,381,221 
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               237,069
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  217,824
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           (5,004,952)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,254
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              5,015,943
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          5,015,943
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 5,015,943
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    19.18 
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    19.18
        

</TABLE>
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.                  

###### Commodity Futures Trading Commission

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sauntia S. Warfield, 202-418-5084.

Sauntia S. Warfield, 

Assistant Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. E9-12590 Filed 5-26-09; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2477 

To liquidate or reliquidate certain entries of truck tires entered on or after 

April 13, 2004, and on or before December 28, 2004. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 29, 2009 

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

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To liquidate or reliquidate certain entries of truck tires entered on or after April 13, 2004, and on or before 

December 28, 2004. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LIQUIDATION OR RELIQUIDATION OF CERTAIN 

4 ENTRIES OF TRUCK TIRES ENTERED ON OR 

5 AFTER APRIL 13, 2004, AND ON OR BEFORE 

6 DECEMBER 28, 2004. 

7 (a) LIQUIDATION OR RELIQUIDATION REQUIRED.— 

8 Notwithstanding sections 514 and 520 of the Tariff Act 

9 of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1514 and 1520), or any other provi10 sion of law, U.S. Customs and Border Protection shall, 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2477 IS

1 not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment 

2 of this Act— 

3 (1) liquidate or reliquidate as free of duty each 

4 entry described in subsection (b) containing any 

5 merchandise which, at the time of original liquida6 tion, was merchandise eligible for duty-free treat7 ment under title V of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 

8 U.S.C. 2461 et seq.); and 

9 (2) refund any duties and interest paid on such 

10 entries. 

11 (b) AFFECTED ENTRIES.—The entries referred to in 

12 subsection (a) are the following: 

Port Code Entry Number Date of Entry 

1603 669–1383779–6 04/13/2004 

1603 669–1384048–5 04/27/2004 

1603 669–1383823–2 04/21/2004 

1603 669–1384049–3 04/27/2004 

1603 669–1384232–5 05/05/2004 

1603 669–1384416–4 05/12/2004 

1603 669–1384634–2 05/19/2004 

1603 669–1384781–1 05/26/2004 

1603 669–1385000–5 06/02/2004 

1603 669–1385136–7 06/09/2004 

1603 669–1385346–2 06/15/2004 

1603 669–1385519–4 06/22/2004 

1603 669–1385732–3 06/30/2004 

1603 669–1385864–4 07/06/2004 

1603 669–1386051–7 07/13/2004 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 2477 IS

Port Code Entry Number Date of Entry 

1603 669–1386223–2 07/20/2004 

1603 669–1386393–3 07/28/2004 

1603 669–1386639–9 08/04/2004 

1603 669–1386775–1 08/11/2004 

1603 669–1387022–7 08/18/2004 

1603 669–1387151–4 08/25/2004 

1603 669–1387392–4 09/01/2004 

1603 669–1387554–9 09/08/2004 

1603 669–1387722–2 09/14/2004 

1603 669–1387912–9 09/22/2004 

1603 669–1388090–3 09/29/2004 

1603 669–1388287–5 10/06/2004 

1603 669–1388471–5 10/13/2004 

1603 669–1388709–8 10/20/2004 

1603 669–1388912–8 10/27/2004 

1603 669–1389054–8 11/02/2004 

1603 669–1389270–0 11/10/2004 

1603 669–1389428–4 11/17/2004 

1603 669–1389571–1 11/24/2004 

1603 669–1389715–4 11/30/2004 

1603 669–1389863–2 12/07/2004 

1603 669–1390055–2 12/15/2004 

1603 669–1390207–9 12/21/2004 

1603 669–1390316–8 12/28/2004. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 13.1

Section 906 Certification

The certification set forth below is being submitted in connection with the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31,
2014 (the Report) for the purpose of complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code.

José Antonio Álvarez, the Chief Executive Officer, José G. Cantera, the Chief Financial Officer and José Doncel,
the Chief Accounting Officer of Banco Santander, S.A., each certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:



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



| | 2. | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Banco Santander, S.A.
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: April 29, 2015



/s/ José Antonio ÁlvarezName:

José Antonio ÁlvarezTitle:

Chief Executive Officer/s/ José G. CanteraName:

José G. CanteraTitle:

Chief Financial Officer/s/ José DoncelName:

José DoncelTitle:

Chief Accounting Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET AT MARCH 31, 2000 (UNAUDITED) AND THE STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE
QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 2000 (UNAUDITED) AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED AS PART OF ITS
QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE PERIOD MARCH 31, 2000
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                         470,342
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  166,309
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               636,651
<PP&E>                                       7,523,387
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,667,895
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,492,143
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,492,143
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,492,143
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               143,621
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  108,224
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    84,915
<EPS-BASIC>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
No. 829.

#### Brady et al. *v.*Beams et al.; Tiger et al. *v.*Beams et al.; Barnett et al. *v.*Connor et al.; Scott *v.*Beams et al.; and Allen et al. *v.*Beams et al.

No. 846.

No. 847.

No. 850.

No. 906.

March 2, 1942.

*Mr. Chas. E. McPherren*for petitioners in No. 829. *Messrs. Norman L. Meyers, James D. Simms,*and *Paul Pinson*for petitioners in No. 846. *Mr. Eck E. Brook*entered an appearance for petitioners in No. 847. *Miss Norma L. Comstock*entered an appearance for petitioner in No. 850. *Messrs. J. A. Fowler*and *Wm. C. Wilson*for petitioners in No. 906. *Messrs. W. T. Anglin, Leon C. Phillips, Charles A. Moon, Francis Stewart, Joseph C. Stone, D. A. Richardson, L. O. Lytle, Harry B. Parris,*and *810
      *Wilbur J. Holleman*for respondents in Nos. 829, 846, and 906. *Mr. Joseph C. Stone*entered an appearance for respondents in Nos. 847 and 850. *Solicitor General Fahy*filed a memorandum on behalf of the United States.

*809On petitions for writs of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. In No. 846 the motion to consider the petition for certiorari on a typewritten record is granted. The petitions for writs of certiorari are denied. The motions in Nos. 829, 847, 850, and 906, for leave to proceed further *in forma pauperis,*are also denied.
EX-4.10



 





Exhibit 4.10




CERTIFICATE OF TRUST



OF


CITIGROUP CAPITAL XXVIII



     This Certificate of Trust is being executed as of November 15, 2007 for the purposes of
organizing a statutory trust pursuant to the Delaware Statutory Trust Act, 12 Del. C. §3801 et seq.
(the “Act”).



     The undersigned, the trustees of Citigroup Capital XXVIII, hereby certify as follows:



     1. Name. The name of the statutory trust being formed hereby is “Citigroup Capital XXVIII”
(the “Trust”).



     2. Delaware Trustee. The name and business address of the trustee of the Trust which has its
principal place of business in the State of Delaware are as follows:


The Bank of New York (Delaware)

100 White Clay Center

Route 273

P. O. Box 6995

Newark, DE 19711




     3. Effective. This Certificate of Trust shall be effective immediately upon filing in the
Office of the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware.



1









 





Dated: November 15, 2007




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	By:
	 	/s/ John Gerspach
	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	John Gerspach, as Regular Trustee
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	By:
	 	/s/ Eric L. Wentzel	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	Eric L. Wentzel, as Regular Trustee
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	By:
	 	/s/ Saul Rosen	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	Saul Rosen, as Regular Trustee
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	THE BANK OF NEW YORK (DELAWARE),
	 	 	as Delaware Trustee
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	By:
	 	/s/ Kristine K. Gullo	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	Name: Kristine K. Gullo
	 	 	Title: Vice President
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	CITIGROUP INC.,
	 	 	as Sponsor
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	By:
	 	/s/ Charles E. Wainhouse	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	Name: Charles E. Wainhouse
	 	 	Title: Vice President






2
#### Mathunni Varghese, Appellant, v Suresh Ramcharitar et al., Respondents.

[975 NYS2d 169]

*820In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rosengarten, J.), dated March 12, 2012, which granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject accident.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied.

The plaintiff allegedly sustained injury to, inter alia, the cervical region of his spine as a result of a motor vehicle collision on July 4, 2007, between his vehicle and a vehicle operated by the defendant Suresh Ramcharitar and owned by the defendant DiFeo Tenafly Partnership. In this action, which the plaintiff commenced to recover damages for his alleged injuries, the defendants moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not, as a result of the collision, sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d). The Supreme Court granted the motion, and the plaintiff appeals.

The defendants failed to meet their prima facie burden of demonstrating that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject accident *(see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys.,*98 NY2d 345, 350 [2002]; *Gaddy v Eyler,*79 NY2d 955, 956-957 [1992]). The defendants’ examining orthopedic surgeon, Dr. William A. Healy, III, found that the plaintiff had significant limitations in the range of motion of the cervical region of his spine, and Dr. Healy’s affirmed reports failed to establish, prima facie, that those limitations were not caused by the subject accident *(see Smith v Rodriguez,*69 AD3d 605, 605-606 [2010]). Accordingly, the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint should have been denied without regard to the sufficiency of the plaintiffs opposing papers *(see Smith v Rodriguez,*69 AD3d at 606). Rivera, J.P, Balkin, Chambers and Sgroi, JJ., concur.