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

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 184 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 184

    Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Natural 
            Resources in the One Hundred Sixteenth Congress.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 7, 2019

    Mr. Grijalva (for himself and Mr. Bishop of Utah) submitted the 
  following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on House 
                             Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
    Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Natural 
            Resources in the One Hundred Sixteenth Congress.

    Resolved,

SECTION 1. AMOUNTS FOR COMMITTEE EXPENSES.

    For the expenses of the Committee on Natural Resources (hereafter 
in this resolution referred to as the ``Committee''), including the 
expenses of all staff salaries, there shall be paid, out of the 
applicable accounts of the House of Representatives for committee 
salaries and expenses, not more than $14,446,262 for the One Hundred 
Sixteenth Congress.

SEC. 2. SESSION LIMITATIONS.

    Of the amount specified in section 1--
            (1) not more than $7,223,131 shall be available for 
        expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
        January 3, 2019, and ending immediately before noon on January 
        3, 2020; and
            (2) not more than $7,223,131 shall be available for 
        expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
        January 3, 2020, and ending immediately before noon on January 
        3, 2021.

SEC. 3. VOUCHERS.

    Payments under this resolution shall be made on vouchers authorized 
by the Committee, signed by the Chairman of the Committee, and approved 
in the manner directed by the Committee on House Administration.

SEC. 4. REGULATIONS.

    Amounts made available under this resolution shall be expended in 
accordance with regulations prescribed by the Committee on House 
Administration.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32.1





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


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF


THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2004








In connection with the Quarterly Report of Hybred International, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending June 30, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Gary Kouletas, President of the Company, respectfully certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2004, that:





The Report fully complies with the requirements of the section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.














/s/ Gary Kouletas


Gary Kouletas


President (Principal Executive Officer)








Date: October 5, 2011





This Certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and shall not be deemed “filed” by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, whether made before or after the date of this Report, irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Hybred International, Inc. and will be retained by Hybred International, Inc. and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
J-A21029-15

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

PENNSYLVANIA

Appellee

v.

RAUL COLON

Appellant No. 3613 EDA 2014

Appeal from the PCRA Order November 24, 2014

In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County

Criminal Division at No(s): CP-51-CR-0202931-2003

BEFORE: ALLEN, J., MUNDY, J., and FITZGERALD, J.*

JUDGMENT ORDER BY MUNDY, J.: FILED JULY 15, 2015

Appellant, Raul Colon, appeals pro se from the November 24, 2014 

order dismissing, as untimely, his third petition for relief filed pursuant to 

the Post Conviction Relief Act, 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 9541-9546. After careful 

review, we affirm.

On June 25, 2003, the trial court imposed an aggregate sentence of 20 

to 40 years’ imprisonment, after Appellant pled guilty to two counts of 

attempted murder, and one count of carrying a firearm without a license.1 

Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal, but later withdrew said appeal on 

September 12, 2003. As a result, Appellant’s judgment of sentence became 

____________________________________________

*

Former Justice specially assigned to the Superior Court.

1 18 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 901(a) and 6106(a)(1), respectively.
J-A21029-15

- 2 -

final on that same day. See generally 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9545(b)(3). 

Therefore, Appellant had until September 12, 2004 to timely file a PCRA 

petition.2 See generally id. § 9545(b)(1). Appellant filed the instant 

petition on June 29, 2012. Consequently, it was patently untimely.

Moreover, we have reviewed Appellant’s brief, and therein, Appellant 

does not explicitly argue that one of the three enumerated time-bar 

exceptions applies. To the extent Appellant’s brief could be construed as 

arguing that the United States Supreme Court’s decisions in Missouri v. 

Frye, 132 S. Ct. 1399 (2012), and Lafler v. Cooper, 132 S. Ct. 1376 

(2012), satisfy the new constitutional right exception to the PCRA time-bar, 

this Court has rejected those arguments. Commonwealth v. Feliciano, 69 

A.3d 1270, 1277 (Pa. Super. 2013). Therefore, the PCRA court was without 

jurisdiction to address the merits of Appellant’s petition.

Based on the foregoing, we conclude the PCRA court properly 

dismissed Appellant’s PCRA petition as untimely filed. Accordingly, the PCRA 

court’s November 24, 2014 order is affirmed.

Order affirmed.

____________________________________________

2 Appellant timely filed his first PCRA petition on February 19, 2004, which 

the PCRA court denied on April 12, 2005. This Court affirmed that order on 

February 1, 2007. Commonwealth v. Colon, 919 A.2d 969 (Pa. Super. 

2007) (unpublished memorandum). Appellant did not file a petition for 

allowance of appeal in our Supreme Court. Appellant filed his second PCRA 

petition on May 27, 2009, and the PCRA court dismissed the same, as 

untimely, on January 8, 2010. Appellant did not file a notice of appeal to 

this Court.
J-A21029-15

- 3 -

Judgment Entered.

Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.

Prothonotary

Date: 7/15/2015
# FY22 Total Extramural Research Expenditures

The donut graph below shows a breakdown of expenditures within the NINDSExtramural Research budget for FY22.  Hover over each donut wedge to see the actual expenditures for each category and the activity codes that comprise it.

### 

### Past Extramural Research Expenditures

FY21 Total Extramural Research Expenditure

FY20 Total Extramural Research Expenditure

FY19 Total Extramural Research Expenditure
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-20064 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JOSE AGUIRRE-GALLEGOS, also known as Celso Gallegos, also known as Jose Aguirre-Gallego, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-99-CR-477-1

-------------------- March 13, 2001 Before DAVIS, JONES and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Jose Aguirre-Gallegos (“Aguirre”) appeals his guilty-plea conviction of unlawful reentry into the United States following a prior deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b). For the first time on appeal, Aguirre contends that the district court failed to comply with F ED . R. C RIM . P. 11(c)(1) at his rearraignment when it failed to advise him about the Sentencing Guidelines’ impact on his sentence. Although it is true that the district court failed to comply with this aspect ofNo. 00-20064 -2- Rule 11(c)(1), any error was harmless because the court did inform Aguirre of the statutory maximum prison term, and there is no allegation by Aguirre or indication in the record that the court’s failure to mention the Guidelines affected Aguirre’s willingness of plead guilty. See Rule 11(h); United States v. Johnson , 1 F.3d 296, 298, 302 (5th Cir. 1993) (en banc). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL,

Petitioner

v.

THOMAS ALLEN CRAWFORD, JR.

Respondent :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 2138 Disciplinary Docket No. 3

No. 160 DB 2014

Attorney Registration No. 30215

(Allegheny County)

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 14 th day of November , 2017, upon consideration of the Report

and Recommendations of the Disciplinary Board, Thomas Allen Crawford, Jr. is

disbarre d from the B ar of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and he shall comply with

provisions of Pa.R.D.E. 217. Respondent shall pay costs to the Disciplinary Board

pursuant to Pa.R.D.E. 208(g).
#### In the Matter of Iris Weinshall, as Commissioner of the New York City Department of Transportation, et al., Appellants, v Marine Engineers’ Beneficial Association et al., Respondents.

[854 NYS2d 9]

*341“An arbitration award must be upheld when the arbitrator ' offer[s] even a barely colorable justification for the outcome reached’ ” *(Wien & Malkin LLP v Helmsley-Spear, Inc.,*6 NY3d 471, 479 [2006], *cert dismissed*— US —, 127 S Ct 34 [2006]). Clear evidence supports the arbitrator’s decision.

A public policy the violation of which warrants vacatur of an arbitration award must entail “strong and well-defined policy considerations embodied in constitutional, statutory or common law [that] prohibit a particular matter from being decided or certain relief from being granted by an arbitrator” *(Matter of New York State Correctional Officers & Police Benevolent Assn. v State of New York,*94 NY2d 321, 327 [1999]). Based on the practices in effect at the time, and the lack of clarity or training in connection with the directive in question, the IAS court properly confirmed the arbitrator’s award.

We have considered petitioners’ remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur—Lippman, P.J., Andrias, Williams and McGuire, JJ. *[See*13 Misc 3d 1216(A), 2006 NY Slip Op 51850(U).]
**Exhibit
        99.4**
 
 
 CERTIFICATE
        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 (the “Report”) on the Form 10-QSB of
        Mortlock Ventures Inc. (the “Company”) for the nine months ended March 31, 2007,
        as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof,
        I,
        William Timmins, Chief Accounting Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Director,
        certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
        906
        of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and
        belief:
 
 1.
        The
        Quarterly Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or
        15
        (d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
 
 2.
        The
        information contained in this Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material
        respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the
        Company.
 
 
 Date:
        May
        11, 2007
 
 WILLIAM
        TIMMINS
 William
        Timmins
 Chief
        Accounting Officer
 Chief
        Financial Officer and Director
   -1-
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 420 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
H. Res. 420

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                         July 25, 2019.
    Resolved, That on such date as the Speaker of the House of Representatives 
may designate, official photographs of the House may be taken while the House is 
in actual session. Payment for the costs associated with taking, preparing, and 
distributing such photographs may be made from the applicable accounts of the 
House of Representatives.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk May 18, 2011

y0511 

# Order

May 18, 2011

142895 & (13)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 142895 COA: 302630 Muskegon CC: 07-055693-FH ANTHONY PIERRE OLIVER, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the motion for immediate consideration is GRANTED. The application for leave to ap peal the March 24, 2011 order of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1 ), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REMAND this case to the Muskegon Circuit Court to enter an amended judgment of sentence granting the defendant sentencing credit of eleven months for the period of time that he was incarcerated in jail as a cond ition of probation. Hi s incarceration was imposed as part of the sentence in this ca se, and sentence credit is required in that

circumstance. People v Sturdivant , 412 Mich 92 (1981), modified in People v Whiteside

, 437 Mich 188 (1991). In all other respects, leave to appeal is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the remaini ng questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
EXHIBIT 32.2





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18 U.S.C SECTION 1350)





In connection with the Quarterly Report of China Tel Group, Inc. and its Subsidiaries (“Company”), on Form 10-Q/A for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2009, as filed with the Untied States Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Carlos A. Trujillo, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), 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 results of operations of the Company.





Dated: April 15, 2010
By:
/s/ Carlos A. TrujilloCarlos A. TrujilloChief Financial Officer





[A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to China Tel Group, Inc. and will be retained by China Tel Group, Inc. and furnished to the United States Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
* The Honorable Jerome Farris, United States Circuit Judge for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, sitting by designation. NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 05a0040n.06 Filed: January 13, 2005 No. 03-2406 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

ROBERT J. BOWMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v. KNAPE & VOGT MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

Before: DAUGHTREY, COOK, and FARRIS, * Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM. Robert Bowman a ppeals the district court’s orde r granting summary judgment for Knape & Vogt Manufacturing Company. After heari ng oral argument and reviewing the record, the parties’ briefs, and the applicable law, this court determines that no jurisprudential purpose would be served by a panel opinion and affirms the district court’s decision for the reasons stated in that court’s opinion.
#### Maria Auqui, as Guardian of the Property of Jose Verdugo, et al., Respondents, v Seven Thirty One Limited Partnership et al., Appellants.

Submitted April 1, 2013;

decided June 27, 2013

Motion by The Black Institute for leave to appear amicus curiae on the motions for reargument herein granted and the affirmation and brief are accepted as filed *[see*20 NY3d 1035 (2013)].

Judges Rivera and Abdus-Salaam taking no part.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                             138
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      327
<ALLOWANCES>                                        20
<INVENTORY>                                       1041
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     9
<PP&E>                                            6775
<DEPRECIATION>                                    4119
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    5622
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              985
<BONDS>                                            628
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                         14
<COMMON>                                           132
<OTHER-SE>                                        1343
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      5622
<SALES>                                           4478
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  4478
<CGS>                                             3883
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     4288
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  55
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    144
<INCOME-TAX>                                        24
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                120
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        78
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.64
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.64
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 23.1
 


                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS



We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Annual Report (Form 10-K)
of St. Paul Bancorp, Inc. of our report dated January 28, 1999, included in the
1998 Annual Report to Stockholders of St. Paul Bancorp, Inc.

We also consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(Form S-8 No. 33-11890) pertaining to the St. Paul Federal Bank For Savings
Profit Sharing and Savings Plan, the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No.
33-60609) pertaining to the St. Paul Bancorp, Inc. 1995 Incentive Plan, the
Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-31195) pertaining to the St. Paul
Bancorp, Inc. Employee Incentive Plan, the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No.
33-55773) pertaining to the St. Paul Bancorp, Inc. Stock Option Plan, the
Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-53227) pertaining to the St. Paul
Bancorp, Inc. 1995 Incentive Plan, As Amended and the Registration Statement
(Form S-8 No. 333-50133) pertaining to the Beverly Bancorporation 1994 Incentive
Stock Option Plan and the Beverly Bancorporation 1997 Incentive Stock Option
Plan of our report dated January 28, 1999, with respect to the consolidated
financial statements of St. Paul Bancorp, Inc. incorporated by reference in the
Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1998.



                                                   /s/ Ernst & Young LLP



Chicago, Illinois
March 26, 1999




                                       1
Exhibit 31(j)

CERTIFICATIONS

 
I, Jay A. Lewis, certify that:  
1.
I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Entergy Mississippi, Inc.;  
2.
Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;  
3.
Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrants as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  
4.
The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:   
a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including their consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;   
b)  Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;   
c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and   
d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and  
5.
The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):   
a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and   
b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

			/s/ Jay A. Lewis
#### In the Matter of Norse Energy Corp. USA, Appellant, v Town of Dryden et al., Respondents. Dryden Resources Awareness Coalition, Proposed Intervenor.

Submitted June 24, 2013;

decided August 29, 2013

*1038Motion by New York Farm Bureau for leave to file a brief amicus curiae on the motion for leave to appeal herein granted and the brief is accepted as filed.