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

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 535 

Recognizing August 6, National Night Out, the national coming together 

of Americans all over the Nation to unite and promote public safety. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 30, 2019 

Mrs. TORRES of California (for herself and Mr. RUTHERFORD) submitted the 

following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing August 6, National Night Out, the national coming together of Americans all over the Nation to unite 

and promote public safety. 

Whereas on the first Tuesday of August, our Nation will observe National Night Out, a day to cultivate a better relationship between residents of a community and their 

local law enforcement, and to promote public safety; 

Whereas the participation in National Night Out by over 

38,000,000 neighbors in over 16,000 communities across 

the United States for over 36 years is unparalleled; 

Whereas the relationship between local law enforcement and 

the residents which they are sworn to protect and serve 

has improved immensely; 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 535 IH 

Whereas general awareness of public safety has improved, because of the continued efforts of communities to meet 

their law enforcement officers and participate in National 

Night Out activities; 

Whereas prominent figures, such as former Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson and former Vice President Joe Biden, 

have recognized the impact that National Night Out has 

made across the Nation, bringing all Americans closer together to achieve a common goal of community cohesiveness and public safety; and 

Whereas National Night Out not only includes Americans on 

the mainland, but includes those in United States territories and military bases to ensure all are included in the 

effort of community building and public safety awareness: 

Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) encourages law enforcement departments to 

3 use National Night Out to improve relationships 

4 with the communities they serve; 

5 (2) encourages public safety departments to in6 form communities— 

7 (A) how to most effectively contact their 

8 911 responders and emergency service pro9 viders; and 

10 (B) how they carry out their duties; and 

11 (3) recognizes the impact that has been made 

12 for the past 36 years in communities all over the 

13 United States of America by National Night Out in 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
3 

•HRES 535 IH 

1 creating a more united country by fostering relation2 ships between residents, neighbors, and local law en3 forcement, and promoting public safety awareness. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
Order entered July 13, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-15-00380-CV

LUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF THE SOUTH, INC., Appellant

V.

WINNIE BLOUNT, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT FRIEND OF P.B., MINOR CHILD, 

AND JOHN BLOUNT, INDIVIDUALLY AND 

AS NEXT FRIEND OF P.B., MINOR CHILD, Appellees

On Appeal from the 192nd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-14-02429

ORDER

We GRANT appellees’ July 9, 2015 unopposed motion for an extension of time to file a 

brief. Appellees shall file a brief by AUGUST 14, 2015. We caution appellees that no further 

extension of time will be granted in this accelerated appeal absent extraordinary circumstances.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS 

JUSTICE
#### Jenny Delvalle-Stone, Appellant, v Ultimate Service, Inc., Respondent.

[822 NYS2d 315]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Kitzes, J.), dated October 14, 2004, which, inter alia, granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The defendant, a cleaning service retained to sweep and vacuum the floors of the retail store where the plaintiff fell, owed no duty to the plaintiff because it did not completely displace or assume the general duty of the store’s owner to keep the premises in a safe condition *(see Espinal v Melville Snow Contrs.,*98 NY2d 136, 141 [2002]; *Grau v Taxter Park Assoc.,*283 AD2d 551 [2001]).

Further, the defendant made a prima facie showing that it did not launch a force or instrument of harm and thus create or exacerbate any allegedly dangerous condition, and the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact in opposition to that showing *(see Espinal v Melville Snow Contrs., supra*at 139; *Gaitan v Regional Maintenance Corp.,*6 AD3d 495, 496 [2004]; *Clapp v City of New York,*302 AD2d 347 [2003]; *Moquin v Romeo,*301 AD2d 581 [2003]; *Carricato v Jefferson Val. Mall Ltd. Partnership,*299 AD2d 444, 445 [2002]; *Davis v City of New York,*255 AD2d 356, 357-358 [1998]; *DeCurtis v T.H. Assoc.,*241 AD2d 536, 537 [1997]; *cf. Baillet v Auerbach,*277 AD2d 335 [2000]; *Grizzaffi v Paparodero Holding Corp.,*261 AD2d 437, 438 [1999]; *Roca v Gerardi,*243 AD2d 616, 617 [1997]; *Caro v Skyline Terrace Coop.,*132 AD2d 512, 513 [1987]).

In light of the foregoing, it is unnecessary to reach the issue of notice.

The plaintiffs remaining contention is without merit *(see*22 NYCRR 202.21 [d]). Crane, J.E, Spolzino, Fisher and Dillon, JJ., concur.
#### 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 New York State Trial Lawyers Association for leave to appear amicus curiae on the motions for reargument herein *998granted and the affirmation is accepted as filed *[see*20 NY3d 1035 (2013)].

Judges Rivera and Abdus-Salaam taking no part.
#### Christine Adami, Appellant, v Warwick Valley Central School District et al., Respondents.

Submitted June 17, 2013;

decided September 10, 2013

Motion, insofar as it seeks leave to appeal from that portion of the Appellate Division order that affirmed the denial of appellant’s motion to renew, dismissed upon the ground that such portion of the order does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution; motion for leave to appeal otherwise denied.
IV 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 416 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives on support for Estonia, 

Latvia, and Lithuania. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 3, 2019 

Mr. CONAWAY submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Foreign Affairs 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives on 

support for Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. 

Whereas the Baltic countries of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania are highly valued allies of the United States, and 

they have repeatedly demonstrated their commitment to 

advancing our mutual interests as well as those of the 

NATO Alliance; 

Whereas Operation Atlantic Resolve is a series of exercises 

and coordinating efforts demonstrating the United States 

commitment to its European partners and allies, including the Baltic countries of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, with the shared goal of peace and stability in the 

region; 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 416 IH 

Whereas Operation Atlantic Resolve strengthens communication and understanding, and is an important effort to 

deter Russian aggression in the region; 

Whereas through Operation Atlantic Resolve, the European 

Deterrence Initiative undertakes exercises, training, and 

rotational presence necessary to reassure and integrate 

our allies, including the Baltic countries, into a common 

defense framework; 

Whereas all three Baltic countries contributed to the NATOled International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, sending troops and operating with few caveats; and 

Whereas the Baltic countries continue to commit resources 

and troops to the Resolute Support Mission in Afghanistan: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) reaffirms its support for the principle of col3 lective defense in Article 5 of the North Atlantic 

4 Treaty for our NATO allies, including Estonia, Lat5 via, and Lithuania; 

6 (2) supports the sovereignty, independence, ter7 ritorial integrity, and inviolability of Estonia, Latvia, 

8 and Lithuania as well as their internationally recog9 nized borders, and expresses concerns over increas10 ingly aggressive military maneuvering by the Rus11 sian Federation near their borders and airspace; 

12 (3) expresses concern over and condemns sub13 versive and destabilizing activities by the Russian 

14 Federation within the Baltic countries; and 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HRES 416 IH 

1 (4) encourages the Administration to further 

2 enhance defense cooperation efforts with Estonia, 

3 Latvia, and Lithuania and supports the efforts of 

4 their Governments to provide for the defense of their 

5 people and sovereign territory. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with BILLS
#### TAGUE v. DELAWARE, L. & W. R. CO.

Civ. A. No. 5757.

District Court, E. D. New York.

March 13, 1946.

See, also, 5 F.R.D. 323.

Blank & Convisser, of Brooklyn, N.Y., (William A. Blank, of Brooklyn, N. Y., of counsel), for plaintiff for motion.

John E. Morrissey, of New York City, for defendant, opposed.

INCPI, District Judge.

The motion is granted—such requests are largely in the discretion of the court exercised in accordance with the new Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following § 723c. I see nothing “privileged” as to these reports and written statements. I do not mean by this to decide where oral statements by a client to his attorney is concerned. Nothing of that nature is here presented. These reports and statements may be useful to plaintiff. Connecticut Imp. Co. v. Continental Distilling Corp., D.C., 1 F.R.D. 190.

Settle order.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 20
- 05 59 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. CAMERON J. EAGLEMAN,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including September 20, 2021 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 16 2021

08/16/2021

Case Number: DA 20-0559
EXHIBIT 32.02


    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  Annual  Report of  Krystal  Digital  Corporation  (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending September 30, 2003 as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Fred Anavim,  Chief Financial  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:

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.



January 29, 2004                              By: /s/ FRED ANAVIM
                                                  ----------------------------
                                              Name: Fred Anavim
                                              Title: Chief Financial Officer
---



UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

---



FORM 10-QSB/A



xQUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)

OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934



For the Quarterly Period Ended November 30, 2006



 ̈TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)

OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934



For the Transition Period From  to



---



Commission File Number



SUMMIT EXPLORATION INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)



|Nevada                                                           |  | 20-4475552                          
|---------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ------------------------------------
|(State or other jurisdiction of
		incorporation or organization) |  | (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)



Suite 700, One Executive Place 1816 Crowchild Trail N.W. Calgary, AB       T2M 3Y7

(Address of principal executive offices)                                     (Zip Code)



Registrants telephone number, including area code:    (403) 313 8995



Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

Yes x     No ̈





Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).

Yes x     No ̈



APPLICABLE ONLY TO ISSUERS INVOLVED IN BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS DURING THE PRECEDING FIVE YEARS

Check whether the registrant filed all documents and reports required to be filed by Section 12, 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act after the distribution of securities under a plan confirmed by court.

Yes  ̈     No ̈



APPLICABLE ONLY TO CORPORATE ISSUERS



State the number of shares outstanding of each of the Issuer's classes of common equity, as of the latest practicable date: Common, $0.0001 par value per share: 8,162,800 outstanding as of February 20, 2007.

Transitional Small Business Disclosure Format (check one):

Yes  ̈     Nox



---





In accordance with the requirements of the Exchange Act, the registrant caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

|                         | SUMMIT EXPLORATION INC.(Registrant)
|------------------------ | -----------------------------------
|                         |                                    
|Dated: February 20, 2007 | BY:                                
|                         |                                    

---
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 243 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 243

Of inquiry requesting the President and directing the Attorney General 
     to transmit, respectively, certain documents to the House of 
  Representatives relating to the actions of former Federal Bureau of 
              Investigation Acting Director Andrew McCabe.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 18, 2019

 Mr. Collins of Georgia submitted the following resolution; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Of inquiry requesting the President and directing the Attorney General 
     to transmit, respectively, certain documents to the House of 
  Representatives relating to the actions of former Federal Bureau of 
              Investigation Acting Director Andrew McCabe.

    Resolved, That the Attorney General of the United States is 
directed to transmit, to the House of Representatives, not later than 
14 days after the date of the adoption of this resolution, copies of 
any document, record, audio recording, memorandum, correspondence, or 
other communication in his possession, or any portion thereof, that 
refers or relates to the following:
            (1) Any meetings or discussions between or among Deputy 
        Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and former Federal Bureau of 
        Investigation (FBI) Acting Director Andrew McCabe, regarding 
        conversations with the President, including but not limited 
        to--
                    (A) any reference concerning wearing a recording 
                device or preparing in any way to record the President; 
                and
                    (B) any reference concerning the invocation of the 
                25th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution to remove the 
                President from office.
            (2) Any meetings or discussions between or among FBI Acting 
        Director Andrew McCabe and others at the FBI referring or 
        relating to commencing or continuing an obstruction of justice 
        or counterintelligence investigation of the President.
                                 <all>
```
# Rigor and Transparency Resources

NINDS has been gathering a list of currently available public resources that are, or can be made, freely accessible to the scientific community and beyond. These are in addition to the NINDS-funded comprehensive educational resource to improve training in the principles of rigorous research and other NINDS-driven efforts.

Below you will find non-NINDS resources related to improving awareness and practice of scientific rigor and transparency. Contact us at RigorChampions@nih.gov to let us know about others that may potentially be included.

NINDS does not endorse any of these resources and leaves it to the scientific community to judge their quality.

## Resources Table

Categories of resources listed in the table include Books and Articles, Guidelines and Protocols, Media and Courses, Organizations and Training Programs, and Software and Other Digital Resources. Please use the drop-down menu under "Category" to filter results based on one of these categories or use the "Quick Search" bar on the right to enter a key word of your choice.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

VARDAN PETROSYAN; et al.,

 Petitioners,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 08-74335

Agency Nos. A076-357-482

 A076-357-483

 A076-357-484

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted December 14, 2010** 

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

Vardan Petrosyan and family, natives and citizens of Armenia, petition for

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion

to reopen based on ineffective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction

FILED

JAN 06 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 08-74335

pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Reviewing for abuse of discretion, Singh v. Gonzales,

491 F.3d 1090, 1095 (9th Cir. 2007), we deny in part and grant in part the petition

for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to

reopen as untimely because the motion was filed more than six years after the

BIA’s June 11, 2002, order dismissing the underlying appeal, see 8 C.F.R. 

§ 1003.2(c)(2) (motion to reopen must generally be filed within 90 days of the final

administrative order), and petitioners failed to establish grounds for equitable

tolling, see Singh, 491 F.3d at 1096-97. 

Because the BIA failed to address petitioners’ request that the BIA exercise

its sua sponte authority to reopen proceedings, we remand for the BIA to consider

petitioners’ request in the first instance. See Montes-Lopez v. Gonzales, 486 F.3d

1163, 1165 (9th Cir. 2007).

Each party shall bear its own costs for this petition for review.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; GRANTED in part;

REMANDED.
#### Fowler *et al. v.*The Bertram L. Townsend.1

*(District*Court, *E. D. New York.*

July 27, 1888.)

Shipping—Damage to Cargo—Perils of the Sea.

On the evidence, *held,*that the damage to a cargo of sugar on the schooner Bertram L. Townsend, to recover for which this suit was brought, was caused by a peril of the sea, and not by neglect on the part of the ship, and that the libel should accordingly be dismissed.

In Admiralty.

*J. Adriance Bush,*for libelant.

*Wing, Shoudy & Putnam,*for claimant.

1

Reported by Edward G. Benedict, Esq., of the New York bar.

Benedict, J.

This is an action to recover for damage to a cargo of sugar while being transported in the schooner Bertram L. Townsend. *798The schooner arrived in the port of New York in May, 1885, and delivered a cargo of sugar in hogsheads aud bags, part of which were damaged by sea-water. The libelant charges improper stowage of the cargo, unseaworthiness of the vessel because insufficiently calked, and that her limbers were permitted to be clogged with sand. The answer admits the shipment, the charter-party, bills of lading, and payment of the freight; and avers that the cargo was well stpwed, that the vessel was tight, staunch, and seaworthy. That during the voyage she encountered very heavy and severe weather, with high seas, in which she labored heavily, shipped much water, became strained and damaged, and that the damage to the cargo was caused bjr perils of the sea. On the trial the libel-ant abandoned all charges in regard to the stowage of the cargo, and expressly admitted good stowage. This left but two questions for dis*cussion—First,*whether the schooner was in good seaworthy condition as to repairs and calking when she undertook the voyage; and, *second,*whether damage to the sugar arose from her limbers being allowed to become clogged up by the negligence of the master of the schooner. Upon these two questions much evidence has been taken. An examination of it has satisfied me that the damage in question must be attributable to the peril of the sea, and not to neglect on the part of the ship. The libel is accordingly dismissed, with costs.
Order entered July 10, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-15-00199-CR

No. 05-15-00221-CR

ROBERT WORLEY KYRIAS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court At Law No. 1

Kaufman County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. 31131CC, 12CL-1053

ORDER

The Court ORDERS the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine why appellant’s 

brief has not been filed. In this regard, the trial court shall make appropriate findings and 

recommendations and determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeals, whether 

appellant is indigent, or if not indigent, whether retained counsel has abandoned the appeals. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(b). If the trial court cannot obtain appellant’s presence at the hearing, the 

trial court shall conduct the hearing in appellant’s absence. See Meza v. State, 742 S.W.2d 708 

(Tex. App.–Corpus Christi 1987, no pet.) (per curiam). If appellant is indigent, the trial court is 

ORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective representation, which 

may include appointment of new counsel.
We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record of the proceedings, which shall include 

written findings and recommendations, to this Court within THIRTY DAYS of the date of this 

order.

The appeals are ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with the above order. The 

appeals shall be reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the findings are 

received, whichever is earlier.

/s/ ADA BROWN 

JUSTICE
*Tuesday, May 13, 1997*

MOTION DOCKET

97-831.

#### Clagg v. Baycliffs Corp.

Ottawa App. No. OT-96-023. This cause is pending before the court as a discretionary appeal and claimed appeal of right. Upon consideration of appellant’s motion for injunction pending appeal,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion for injunction pending appeal be, and hereby is, denied.