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

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2938 

To terminate authority under the Troubled Asset Relief Program, and for 

other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 20, 2010 

Mr. THUNE (for himself, Mr. VITTER, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. JOHANNS, Mrs. 

HUTCHISON, Mr. BROWNBACK, Mr. LEMIEUX, Mr. BURR, Mr. ENZI, Mr. 

COBURN, Mr. BARRASSO, Mr. BENNETT, Ms. SNOWE, Mr. GRASSLEY, 

Mr. ENSIGN, Mr. CRAPO, Mr. WICKER, Mr. BUNNING, Mr. GRAHAM, and 

Mr. CORNYN) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs 

A BILL 

To terminate authority under the Troubled Asset Relief 

Program, 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 ‘‘Erasing our National 

5 Debt Through Accountability and Responsibility Plan Act 

6 of 2010’’. 


dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2938 IS

1 SEC. 2. REPEAL OF THE TROUBLED ASSET RELIEF PRO2 GRAM. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provi4 sion of law, the authorities provided under section 101(a) 

5 of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (ex6 cluding section 101(a)(3)) and under section 102 of such 

7 Act shall terminate as of the date of enactment of this 

8 Act. 

9 (b) LOWERING OF NATIONAL DEBT LIMIT TO COR10 RESPOND TO TARP REPAYMENTS.—Section 3101 of title 

11 31, United States Code, is amended— 

12 (1) in subsection (b), by inserting after the dol13 lar limitation contained in such subsection the fol14 lowing: ‘‘, as such amount is reduced by the amount 

15 described under subsection (d)’’; and 

16 (2) by adding at the end the following new sub17 section: 

18 ‘‘(d) The amount described under this subsection is 

19 the amount that equals the amount of all assistance re20 ceived under title I of the Emergency Economic Stabiliza21 tion Act of 2008 that is repaid on or after the date of 

22 enactment of this subsection, along with any dividends, 

23 profits, or other funds paid to the Government based on 

24 such assistance on or after the date of enactment of this 

25 subsection.’’. 

Æ 


dcolon on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION

Certification 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)

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), each of the undersigned officers of Zoom Technologies, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the Company), does hereby certify that:

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2008 (the Form 10-Q) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all materials respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                         |                                                      
|------------------------ | -----------------------------------------------------
|Dated: November 13, 2008 |                                                      
|                         | /s/ Robert A. Crist                                  
|                         | Robert A. Crist                                      
|                         | Vice President of Finance and Chief Financial Officer
|                         |
Exhibit 10.11


 


July 27, 2022



Jinwoo Kim aka
Stephan Kim


 


20155 Pingree Way


Yorba Linda, CA 92887


 


Dear Stephan:


 


Reborn Coffee, Inc. (“RC”,
“us”, “our”, or “we”) is pleased to offer you a job as a Chief Finance Officer for the period from
July 27, 2022 to July 26, 2023. This offer will be auto-renewed annually with separate adjustment to compensation unless written notice
is provided sixty (60) days prior to the last day. We trust that your knowledge, skills and experience will be among our most valuable
assets. Should you accept this offer, per RC’s policy you'll be eligible to receive the following beginning on your start date.


 


		●	Monthly Payment: Monthly payment of $12,000 ($144,000
annually) to be paid on a bi-weekly basis by your choice of check or direct deposit. Please note that as a salaried, exempt employee
there is no overtime paid.



 


		●	Raise: We normally provide annual pay adjustment based
on your performance. Your next annual raise consideration will be in August of 2023.



 


		●	Non-Compete Agreement and Employee Handbook: Our standard
non-compete and confidentiality agreement and acknowledgement of our employee handbook must be signed prior to start.



 


		●	Restricted Stock Unit (RSU): The Company grants $56,000
worth of shares of RSU which will be vested in 3 months after employment and can be sold after one year. Detail terms and conditions
of the RSU will be provided in a separate RSU agreement as a part of this offer letter.



 


Your employment with RC is at-will and
either party can terminate the relationship at any time with or without cause and with or without notice. You acknowledge that this offer
letter, represents the entire agreement between you and RC and that no verbal or written agreements, promises or representations that
are not specifically stated in this offer, are or will be binding upon RC.


 


Should you have any questions regarding
this letter or need additional information, please do not hesitate to reach out to any one of us or me at (714) 784-6369 or my cellphone
at (909) 234-9949.


 






     


     


    

 


Thank you.


 


	/s/ Jay Kim	 
	Jay Kim	 
	President & CEO	 



 


By
signing and dating this letter I, Stephan Kim, accept this offer of employment by Reborn Coffee, Inc.


 


	Signature:	/s/ Stephan Kim	 	Date:	July 27, 2022



 

 


Page | 2
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 23
 
                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
 
The Plan Committee
FINA Capital Accumulation Plan:
 
     We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (No.
2-89230) on Form S-8 of FINA, Inc. of our report dated March 14, 1997, relating
to the statements of net assets available for plan benefits of the FINA Capital
Accumulation Plan as of December 31, 1996 and 1995, and the related statements
of changes in net assets available for plan benefits for the years then ended,
and the related supplemental schedules, which report appears in the December 31,
1996 annual report on Form 11-K of the FINA Capital Accumulation Plan.
 
                                            KPMG Peat Marwick LLP
 
Dallas, Texas
April 14, 1997
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 104 (Tuesday, June 2, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26483-26484]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-12683]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service


Open Meeting of the Area 2 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel (Including the 
States of Delaware, North Carolina, South Carolina, New Jersey, 
Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia and the District of 
Columbia)

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 26484]]

SUMMARY: An open meeting of the Area 2 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be 
conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, 
ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal 
Revenue Service.

DATES: The meeting will be held Wednesday, July 15, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marianne Ayala at 1-888-912-1227 or 
954-423-7978.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given pursuant to section 
10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) 
that an open meeting of the Area 2 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be held 
Wednesday, July 15, 2009, at 2:30 p.m. Eastern Time via telephone 
conference. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit 
written statements for consideration. Due to limited conference lines, 
notification of intent to participate must be made with Marianne Ayala. 
For more information please contact Mrs. Ayala at 1-888-912-1227 or 
954-423-7978, or write TAP Office, 1000 South Pine Island Road, Suite 
340, Plantation, FL 33324, or post comments to the Web site: http://www.improveirs.org.
    The agenda will include various IRS issues.

    Dated: May 27, 2009.
Shawn F. Collins,
Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.
[FR Doc. E9-12683 Filed 6-1-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
EXHIBIT 99.2



                         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 Quarterly Report of Yocream International, Inc.
(the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended January 31, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, W. Douglas Caudell Chief 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:

       (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/ W. Douglas Caudell
----------------------
W. Douglas Caudell
Chief Financial Officer
Yocream International, Inc.
March 17, 2003
**Radio Program Review – Dispatch Center**

**Checklist #6**

**For the National Radio Review, you will need to have the following items available for review:**

**DISPATCH CENTER MANAGERS, DISPATCHERS**

Objective: to identify shortfalls – requirements vs equipment/service/support provided.

**Key Code: 	Y= Yes		N=No		NR= Not Reviewed**

Local Dispatch Center	13	Revised February 2024

# image1.png
95-2596.

#### Cherry Lee Ltd., Realty Dev. Co. No. 3 v. Licking Cty. Bd. of Revision.

Board of Tax Appeals, Nos. 94-M-1325 and 94-M-1326. This cause is pending before the court as an appeal from the Board of Tax Appeals. Upon consideration of the *amicus curiae*motion to participate in oral argument scheduled for February 19,1997,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that counsel for Franklin County Auditor, the Ohio State Bar Association, and the Ohio County Auditor’s Association may present argument within the time allotted to appellees pursuant to S.Ct. Prac.R. IX(5).
Dismissed; Opinion Filed November 9, 2016.

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-15-01259-CV

ALLIANCE ROYALTIES, INC. AND ALLIANCE ROYALTIES, LLC, 

Appellants

V.

VENTOS ENTITIES AND DLNGR NR LLC, Appellees

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 5

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CC-14-02930-E

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Francis, Fillmore, and Stoddart

Opinion by Justice Stoddart

Before the Court is the joint motion to dismiss this appeal based on a settlement 

agreement between the parties. TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1. We GRANT the motion and DISMISS

the appeal. TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(f). 

/Craig Stoddart/

CRAIG STODDART

JUSTICE

151259F.P05
–2–

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

ALLIANCE ROYALTIES, INC. AND 

ALLIANCE ROYALTIES, LLC, Appellants

No. 05-15-01259-CV V.

VENTOS ENTITIES AND DLNGR NR 

LLC, Appellees

On Appeal from the County Court at Law 

No. 5, Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CC-14-02930-E.

Opinion delivered by Justice Stoddart. 

Justices Francis and Fillmore participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED.

Subject to any agreement of the parties, it is ORDERED that appellees recover their 

costs of this appeal from appellants. 

Judgment entered this 9th day of November, 2016.
Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the 

Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the 

Court of any formal errors so that corrections may be made before the bound 

volumes go to press.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS

No. 18-BG-626

IN RE CLAUDE D. CONVISSER

2016 DDN 123

An Inactive Member of the Bar of the

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Bar Registration No. 439202

BEFORE: Glickman and McLeese, Associate Judges, and Nebeker, Senior Judge. 

O R D E R

(FILED – August 22, 2018)

On consideration of the certified order of the Supreme Court of New Mexico 

suspending respondent from the practice of law in that state for a period of oneyear, with the suspension fully stayed; the June 12, 2018, order of this court 

directing respondent to show cause why reciprocal discipline should not be 

imposed; respondent’s response; the statement of Disciplinary Counsel regarding 

reciprocal discipline; and the lodged reply by respondent, it is 

ORDERED, sua sponte, that respondent’s lodged reply to Disciplinary 

Counsel’s statement regarding reciprocal discipline is filed. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that Clause D. Convisser is hereby suspended from 

the practice of law in the District of Columbia for a period of one year, the 

imposition of which is stayed. To the extent respondent challenges the imposition 

of reciprocal discipline by asserting the exception that his actions would not 

constitute misconduct in this jurisdiction, this court holds that respondent has not 

established the exception. The findings by the State of New Mexico, based on 

documentation created by respondent, that respondent engaged in both 

unauthorized practice of law and misrepresentation would support a finding of both 

violations if they occurred in this jurisdiction. Further, the standard of proof by the 
State of New Mexico, by itself, does not bar this court from imposing reciprocal 

discipline. See, e.g., In re Changanti, 144 A.3d 20 (D.C. 2016) (reviewing the 

record in full the use of preponderance of evidence by the initiating jurisdiction 

does not mandate a finding of infirmity of proof). Lastly, to the extent that 

respondent seeks to re-argue the merits of his original discipline or argue 

additional facts, such an attempt is improper in reciprocal disciplinary matters. See 

In re Zdravkovich, 831 A.2d 964, 969 (D.C. 2003) (“Put simply, reciprocal 

discipline proceedings are not a forum to reargue the foreign discipline.”). 

Therefore, respondent has failed to rebut the presumption that reciprocal discipline 

will be imposed. See In re Sibley, 990 A.2d 483 (D.C. 2010), and In re Fuller, 930 

A.2d 194, 198 (D.C. 2007) (rebuttable presumption of identical reciprocal 

discipline applies unless one of the exceptions is established). 

PER CURIAM
Exhibit 21.1

                      Subsidiaries of COMFORCE Corporation

         The following is a complete list of all of the subsidiaries of COMFORCE
         Corporation with jurisdiction of incorporation indicated thereby.

         1.       COMFORCE Operating, Inc. (Delaware)
         2.       COMFORCE Technical Services, Inc. (Delaware)
         3.       COMFORCE Information Technologies, Inc. (Delaware)
         4.       COMFORCE Telecom, Inc. (Delaware)
         5.       Project Staffing Support Team, Inc. (Arizona)
         6.       RHO Acquisition Company (Delaware)
         7.       RHO Company Incorporated (Washington)
         8.       COMFORCE IT Acquisition Corp., Inc. (Delaware)
         9.       Force Five, Inc. (Texas)
         10.      SUMTEC Corporation (Delaware)
         11.      Uniforce Services, Inc. (New York)
         12.      PrO Unlimited, Inc. (New York)
         13.      E.O. Operations Corp. (New York)
         14.      E.O. Servicing Co., Inc. (New York)
         15.      Uniforce Staffing Services, Inc. (New York)
         16.      PrO N.E., Inc. (New York)
         17.      USSI-NE Corp. (New York)
         18.      Uniforce Information Services, Inc. (New York)
         19.      Uniforce Payrolling Services, Inc. (New York)
         20.      USI Inc. of California (California)
         21.      UTS Corp. of Minnesota (Minnesota)
         22.      UTS of Delaware, Inc. (Delaware)
         23.      LabForce of America, Inc. (New York)
         24.      Uniforce MIS Services of Georgia, Inc. (Georgia)
         25.      Uniforce Medical Office Support, Inc. (New York)
         26.      Uniforce Information Services of Texas, Inc. (New York)
         27.      Temporary Help Industry Servicing Co., Inc. (New York)
         28.      Montare International, Inc. (Texas)
         29.      Brannon & Tully, Inc. (Georgia)
         30.      Staffing Industry Funding & Support, Inc. (New York)
         31.      Professional Staffing Funding & Support, Inc. (New York)
         32.      Brentwood Service Group, Inc. (New York)
         33.      Tempfunds International, Inc. (New York)
         34.      Computer Consultants Funding & Support, Inc. (New York)
         35.      Thisco of Canada, Inc. (New York)
         36.      Camelot Consulting Group, Inc. (New Jersey)
         37.      Camelot Communications Group, Inc. (New Jersey)
         38.      Camelot Control Group, Inc. (New Jersey)
         39.      Camelot Group, Inc. (New Jersey)
         40.      RHO Services, Inc. (Washington)
         41.      PrO Services, Inc. (Delaware)
         42.      PrO Unlimited Services, Inc. (Delaware)
         43.      COMFORCE Technical Administrative Services, Inc. (New York)


                                      E-21
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Nadirah Brown, Appellant.

Submitted September 27, 2010;

decided October 14, 2010

Motion for assignment of counsel granted and David C. Schopp, Esq., the Legal Aid Bureau of Buffalo, Inc., 237 Main Street, Suite 1602, Buffalo, New York 14203 assigned as counsel to the appellant on the appeal herein.
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

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel; Member Conflicts.                    

*Date:*                         October 26, 2009.                    

*Time:*                         3 p.m. to 4 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Ryan G. Morris, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4205, MSC 7814, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1501,                         *morrisr@csr.nih.gov.*

This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: October 16, 2009.

Jennifer Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. E9-25508 Filed 10-23-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
NATIONAL INDIAN GAMING COMMISSION

CHAIR’S NOTICE – Chairman E. Sequoyah Simermeyer

Visit www.NIGC.gov to learn more about the NIGC 3 For 35 Project— a 

year-long project emphasizing the importance of conversations among 

the tribal gaming regulatory community about workforce preparedness.

Date: 7 December, 2022

RE: Remarks to the NIGC Banking Secrecy Act/Anti-Money 

Laundering (Title 31) Symposium

Today I had the opportunity to open the inaugural two-day NIGC 

Symposium focused on the Bank Secrecy Act and Anti Money 

Laundering provisions applicable to Indian gaming. The virtual 

event featured federal experts from the Financial Crimes 

Enforcement Network (FinCEN), the Internal Revenue Service 

(IRS), and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

The NIGC has never hosted a symposium on this topic. However, 

registration for the six individual sessions taking place today 

and tomorrow averaged 500 attendees—underscoring the demand from 

this often-requested training topic. I am grateful to the 

federal participants because the topic is relevant to Indian 

gaming regulators and operators for at least three reasons:

• The IGRA framework regulates gaming operation, but other 

federal laws apply to the Indian gaming community. Those 

laws and regulations that serve to protect our national 

currency system can provide valuable insights for gaming 

regulators into emerging industry areas such as new 

technology and currency tools.

• Money laundering provisions rely on the risk assessment 

tools Indian gaming regulators have honed and developed for 

over three decades - like game play integrity and revenue 

audits.

• Indian gaming’s regulators do not operate in a vacuum. We 

share our goals for institutions’ integrity and the 

public’s confidence. Other regulatory and law enforcement 

bodies such as FinCEN, FBI, and IRS are partners in our 

shared objectives.

I am grateful to the NIGC Chief of Staff Office and Training 

team, as well as subject matter experts and leaders from FinCEN, 

FBI, and IRS who presented. I look forward to a robust two days 

of dialogue and information sharing.

###
Exhibit 23
                      CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS



We hereby  consent  to the  incorporation  by  reference  in the  Registration
Statement  on Form S-8  (33-317553)  of Watson  Wyatt & Company  of our report
dated July 23, 1998  appearing on page F-1 of this Form 10-K.  We also consent
to the  incorporation  by reference of our report on the  Financial  Statement
Schedule, which appears on page F-26 of this Form 10-K.


/S/ PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP
------------------------------
PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP
Washington, D.C.
September 24, 1998