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

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3012 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                       Calendar No. 382
111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3012

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 2-116th Street in North Troy, New York, as the Martin G. ``Marty'' 
                           Mahar Post Office.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 22, 2010

Mrs. Gillibrand (for herself and Mr. Schumer) introduced the following 
 bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland 
                   Security and Governmental Affairs

                              May 18, 2010

              Reported by Mr. Lieberman, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 2-116th Street in North Troy, New York, as the Martin G. ``Marty'' 
                           Mahar Post Office.

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

SECTION 1. MARTIN G. ``MARTY'' MAHAR POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 2-116th Street in North Troy, New York, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Martin G. `Marty' Mahar Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Martin G. 
`Marty' Mahar Post Office''.
                                                       Calendar No. 382

111th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                                S. 3012

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 2-116th Street in North Troy, New York, as the Martin G. ``Marty'' 
                           Mahar Post Office.

_______________________________________________________________________

                              May 18, 2010

                       Reported without amendment
```
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF

UNION SECURITY INSURANCE COMPANY

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

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

§ 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly report of Union Security Insurance Company (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended
September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, P. Bruce Camacho, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as
adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based on my 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 operations of the Company.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: November 20, 2006



/s/ P. Bruce CamachoP. Bruce Camacho President and Chief Executive
Officer
EXHIBIT 23


                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the  incorporation  by reference in this Annual Report (Form 10-K)
of Baldor Electric  Company and affiliates of our report dated February 3, 1999,
included in the 1998 Annual Report to Shareholders  of Baldor  Electric  Company
and affiliates.

Our audits also included the  financial  statement  schedule of Baldor  Electric
Company and affiliates listed in Item 14(a). This schedule is the responsibility
of the Company's  management.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion based
on our audits.  In our opinion,  the financial  statement  schedule  referred to
above, when considered in relation to the basic financial  statements taken as a
whole,  presents  fairly in all  material  respects  the  information  set forth
therein.

We also consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8, No. 2-77046) pertaining to the Baldor Electric Company 1982 Incentive
Stock Option Plan,  (Form S-8, No.  33-16766)  pertaining to the Baldor Electric
Company 1987 Incentive Stock Plan,  (Form S-8, No.  33-28239)  pertaining to the
Baldor  Electric  Company  Employee  Savings  Plan,  (Form  S-8,  No.  33-36421)
pertaining  to  the  Baldor   Electric   Company  1989  Stock  Option  Plan  for
Non-Employee  Directors,  (Forms S-8, No. 33-60731 and No. 333-62331) pertaining
to the Baldor  Electric  Company  1994  Incentive  Stock  Plan,  (Form S-8,  No.
333-33109)  pertaining to the Baldor Electric Company 1996 Stock Option Plan for
Non-Employee  Directors,  and (Form S-8, No. 333-33287) pertaining to the Baldor
Electric Company  Employees' Profit Sharing and Savings Plan of our report dated
February  3,  1999,  with  respect  to  the  consolidated  financial  statements
incorporated  herein by  reference,  and our report  included in the  proceeding
paragraph  with respect to the  financial  statement  schedule  included in this
Annual Report (Form 10-K) of Baldor Electric Company and affiliates.


/s/  Ernst & Young LLP
---------------------
Ernst & Young LLP
Little Rock, Arkansas
March 26, 1999



<PAGE>
#### Erick Eduardo DIAZ-CARDONA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 04-70201.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 4, 2006.*

Filed Dec. 8, 2006.

Erick Eduardo Diaz-Cardona, Biola, CA, pro se.

Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Joan Stentiford Ulmer, U.S. Department of Justice Tax Division, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: GOODWIN, LEAVY, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Erick Eduardo Diaz-Cardona, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence and reverse the agency’s determination only if the evidence compels such a result. *Sangha v. INS,*103 F.3d 1482, 1487 (9th Cir.1997). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s determination that Diaz-Cardona failed to *702present credible evidence. There were significant and material omissions and inconsistencies between his first and second asylum applications, and between the applications and his testimony. *See Mejia-Paiz v. INS,*111 F.3d 720, 724 (9th Cir. 1997). For example, in his first asylum application he stated that he left Guatemala because he feared forced recruitment or death at the hands of the guerrillas when he was in his village. In his second application he did not mention the guerrillas in his village and stated that he feared the government and army because of his activities as a student leader and because his father was a unionist. He subsequently testified that he feared the army because he was a leader of a church group that organized protests against human rights abuses by the government, and that the guerrillas, army and government were the same.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 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.
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION
OF
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
AND
CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Jack E. Davis, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report on
Form 10-K of Arizona Public Service Company for the fiscal year ended December
31, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Annual
Report on Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of Arizona Public Service Company. Date: March 15, 2004. /s/ Jack E. DavisJack E. Davis
President and Chief Executive Officer
 I, Donald E. Brandt, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual
Report on Form 10-K of Arizona Public Service Company for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in
such Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of Arizona Public Service
Company. Date: March 15, 2004. /s/ Donald E. BrandtDonald E. Brandt
Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer
### IN THE UNI TED STAT ES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIF TH CIRCU IT

N o

. 0 8

- 6 0 1 1 2 S u m m a r y C a l e n d a r

A D O L F O H E R E D I A

- A R R O Y O
,

P e t i t i o n e r

v

.

E R I C H

. H O L D E R , J R

. , U

. S

. A T T O R N E Y G E N E R A L ,

R e s p o n d e n t

P e t i t i o n f

o r R e v i e w o f a n O r d e r o f t h e B o a r d o f I m m i g r a t i o n A p p e a l s B I A N o

. A 1 9 0 2 2 4 6 0

B e f o r e K I N G
, B E N A V I D E S
, a n d E L R O D , C i r c u i t J u d g e s

. P E R C U R I A M : *

A d o l f o H e r e d i a

- A r r o y o ( H e r e d i a )
, a n a t i v e a n d c i t i z e n o f M e x i c o , p e t i t i o n s
f o r r e v i e w o f a n o r d e r o f t h e B o a r d o f I m m i g r a t i o n A p p e a l s ( B I A )

. T h e B I A
f o u n d H e r e d i a i n e l i g i b l e f o r c a n c e l l a t i o n o f r e m o v a l b e c a u s e h i s 1 9 9 7 T e x a s

c o n v i c t i o n o f p o s s e s s i o n o f m a r i j u a n a c o n s t i t u t e d a n a g g r a v a t e d f e l o n y f o r

p u r p o s e s o f i m m i g r a t i o n l a w

. B e c a u s e n o n e o f H e r e d i a ’ s T e x a s d r u g c o n v i c t i o n s w e r e b a s e d u p o n t h e f a c t

o f a p r i o r c o n v i c t i o n , t h e B I A e r r e d b y d e t e r m i n i n g t h a t h e h a d c o m m i t t e d a n U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s

F i ft h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D Decem ber 2 , 20 10
Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Purs uant to 5 T H C I R

. R. 47.5 , the cour t has d ete rm ined t hat this op inion sho uld not * be publ ish ed and is not pr ece dent excep t unde r the lim ite d cir cum st ance s se t for th in 5 T H C I R

. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 08-60112 Document: 00511309648 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/02/2010N o

. 0 8

- 6 0 1 1 2

a g g r a v a t e d f e l o n y a n d t h a t , a s a r e s u l t , h e w a s i n e l i g i b l e f o r c a n c e l l a t i o n o f

r e m o v a l

. S e e C a r a c h u r i

- R o s e n d o v

. H o l d e r , 1 3 0 S

. C t

. 2 5 7 7 , 2 5 8 0 ( 2 0 1 0 )

. H e r e d i a ’ s p e t i t i o n f

o r r e v i e w i s G R A N T E D

. T h e o r d e r o f t h e B I A i s V A C A T E D ,

a n d t h e c a s e i s R E M A N D E D t o a l l o w h i m t o p u r s u e c a n c e l l a t i o n o f r e m o v a l i n
l i g h t o f t h e S u p r e m e C o u r t ’ s r u l i n g i n C a r a c h u r i

- R o s e n d o

.

2 Case: 08-60112 Document: 00511309648 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/02/2010
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2906 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2906

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To amend the Act of August 9, 1955, to modify a provision relating to 
                leases involving certain Indian tribes.

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

SECTION 1. LEASES INVOLVING CERTAIN INDIAN TRIBES.

    The first section of the Act of August 9, 1955 (25 U.S.C. 415), is 
amended--
            (1) in subsection (a), in the second sentence, by inserting 
        ``and land held in trust for the Kalispel Tribe of Indians, the 
        Puyallup Tribe of Indians,'' after ``the Kalispel Indian 
        Reservation''; and
            (2) in subsection (b), by inserting ``, the Puyallup Tribe 
        of Indians, the Swinomish Indian Tribal Community, or the 
        Kalispel Tribe of Indians'' after ``Tulalip Tribes''.

            Passed the Senate September 22, 2010.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
111th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                                S. 2906

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To amend the Act of August 9, 1955, to modify a provision relating to 
                leases involving certain Indian tribes.
```
#### Dolores Stewart, Respondent, v Sandy Marte et al., Appellants.

Submitted September 17, 2012;

decided November 27, 2012

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM THE
UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS,  INC. FOR THE NINE
MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                                       0000823560                       
<NAME>                 Medical Technology Systems, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                      1000
<CURRENCY>                                          US
       
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          Mar-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                              Apr-1-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               Dec-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                   1.00
<CASH>                                             540
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   12,552
<ALLOWANCES>                                    (6,389)
<INVENTORY>                                      2,625
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 9,652
<PP&E>                                           9,923
<DEPRECIATION>                                  (6,242)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  18,637
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,956
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          1
<COMMON>                                            62
<OTHER-SE>                                       8,588
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    18,637
<SALES>                                         25,467
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                25,467
<CGS>                                           13,828
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   27,089
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 951
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (1,622)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (1,622)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    662
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (960)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.27)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.17)
        

</TABLE>
#### Claudia Jenkins, Respondent, v Trustees of the Masonic Hall and Asylum Fund et al., Appellants.

[975 NYS2d 883]

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Laura G. Douglas, J.), entered May 24, 2013, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, in this action for personal injuries, denied defendants’ motion to compel plaintiff to provide additional post-note of issue discovery, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendants’ motion to compel plaintiff to provide additional post-note of issue discovery and to appear for an additional deposition *(see generally 148 Magnolia, LLC v Merrimack Mut. Fire Ins. Co.,*62 AD3d 486 [1st Dept 2009]). There is no basis for disturbing the court’s determination that plaintiff had fully complied with its prior discovery order and defendants’ subsequent discovery demands, and defendants fail to identify any specific information that had not yet been made available. Furthermore, the court did not abuse its discretion in determining that a third deposition of plaintiff was not warranted, since defendants had a sufficient opportunity to inquire into the relevant matters during plaintiffs prior depositions.

We have considered defendants’ remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Tom, J.P., Friedman, Acosta, Moskowitz and Gische, JJ.
#### Johnnie K. REGISTER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Jonathan E. OZMINT; Henry McMaster, South Carolina Attorney General, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 05-7958.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Oct. 20, 2006.

Decided: Nov. 6, 2006.

Johnnie K. Register, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Derrick K. McFarland, Office of the Attorney General of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Johnnie K. Register seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. *Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Register has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.

*DISMISSED.*
#### ANDERSEN CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. PELLA CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee, and W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc., Defendant-Appellee, v. Christopher Langdon, Movant-Appellant.

No. 2006-1413.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

June 29, 2006.

Christopher Langdon, pro se.

ORDER

The appellant having failed to pay the docketing fee required by Federal Circuit Rule 52(a)(1) within the time permitted by the rules, it is

ORDERED that the notice of appeal be, and the same hereby is, DISMISSED, for failure to prosecute in accordance with the rules.
EXHIBIT 32.1

                                  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),  the
undersigned  officer  of ASI  Technology  Corporation  (the  "Company"),  in his
capacity and as of the date set forth below, does hereby certify with respect to
the  Annual  Report of the  Company on Form  10-KSB  for the  fiscal  year ended
December  31, 2002 as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  (the
"10-KSB Report") that to his knowledge:

         (1) the 10-KSB 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 10-KSB Report fairly presents, in
all material respects,  the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

Dated:  March 24, 2004

                                                 /s/ JERRY E. POLIS
                                                 -------------------------------
                                                 Jerry E. Polis, President and
                                                 Principal Executive Officer of
                                                 ASI Technology Corporation