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

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1026 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow workers an abovethe-line deduction for union dues and expenses and to allow a miscellaneous itemized deduction for workers for all unreimbursed expenses incurred in the trade or business of being an employee. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 4, 2019 

Mr. CASEY (for himself, Mr. WHITEHOUSE, Ms. SMITH, Ms. STABENOW, Mr. 

MENENDEZ, Ms. BALDWIN, Mr. BROWN, Ms. CORTEZ MASTO, Mrs. 

GILLIBRAND, Mrs. MURRAY, Mr. CARDIN, Ms. KLOBUCHAR, and Mr. 

MERKLEY) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow workers an above-the-line deduction for union dues and expenses and to allow a miscellaneous itemized deduction 

for workers for all unreimbursed expenses incurred in 

the trade or business of being an employee. 

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 ‘‘Tax Fairness for 

5 Workers Act’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1026 IS

1 SEC. 2. ALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION FOR CERTAIN EX2 PENSES OF THE TRADE OR BUSINESS OF 

3 BEING AN EMPLOYEE. 

4 (a) ABOVE-THE-LINE DEDUCTION FOR UNION DUES

5 AND EXPENSES.—Section 62(a)(1) of the Internal Rev6 enue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the 

7 following new sentence: ‘‘The limitation under the pre8 ceding sentence shall not apply to deductions which are 

9 attributable to a trade or business consisting of the per10 formance of services by the taxpayer as an employee if 

11 such deductions are for union dues and expenses.’’ 

12 (b) ALLOWANCE OF MISCELLANEOUS ITEMIZED DE13 DUCTION FOR OTHER EXPENSES OF THE TRADE OR

14 BUSINESS OF BEING AN EMPLOYEE.—Section 67(g) of 

15 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended— 

16 (1) by striking ‘‘2025.—Notwithstanding sub17 section (a),’’ and inserting ‘‘2025.— 

18 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding subsection 

19 (a), except as provided in paragraph (2),’’; and 

20 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

21 ‘‘(2) EXCEPTION FOR EXPENSES OF THE

22 TRADE OR BUSINESS OF BEING AN EMPLOYEE.— 

23 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (1) shall 

24 not apply to miscellaneous itemized deductions 

25 for any taxable year which are itemized deduc26 tions attributable to a trade or business carried 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 1026 IS

1 on by the taxpayer which consists of the per2 formance of services by the taxpayer as an em3 ployee. 

4 ‘‘(B) APPLICATION OF 2-PERCENT TEST.— 

5 In applying subsection (a) for any taxable year 

6 to which this paragraph applies, only the 

7 itemized deductions described in subparagraph 

8 (A) shall be taken into account as miscellaneous 

9 itemized deductions.’’. 

10 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

11 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

12 December 31, 2018. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
# table113_q13.3_state
**Exhibit32.2**

**CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF FINANCIALOFFICER**

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

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Qof Pinnacle Gas Resources, Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ending June 30,2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), I, Ronald T. Barnes, Senior Vice President, Chief FinancialOfficer and Secretary of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)           TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)           Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

Date:  August14, 2007
|        | /s/ Ronald  T. Barnes                  |   |
|--------|----------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Ronald T. Barnes                       |
|   | Senior Vice President, Chief Financial |
|   | Officer and Secretary                  |

 

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-1396

In re: SHAHEEN CABBAGESTALK,

 Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

(No. 5:14-cv-03771-RMG-KDW)

Submitted: July 23, 2015 Decided: July 27, 2015

Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Shaheen Cabbagestalk, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Shaheen Cabbagestalk petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking 

an order directing the Dillon County, South Carolina Clerk of Court 

and retired South Carolina state administrative Judge J. Michael 

Baxley to enter the ten-year plea agreement he alleges that he was 

offered on his 2007 armed robbery offense. We conclude that 

Cabbagestalk is not entitled to mandamus relief.

Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only 

in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Court, 426 

U.S. 394, 402 (1976); United States v. Moussaoui, 333 F.3d 509, 

516-17 (4th Cir. 2003). Further, mandamus relief is available 

only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. 

In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 

1988).

Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. In re 

Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007). Further, 

this court does not have jurisdiction to grant mandamus relief 

against state officials, Gurley v. Superior Court of Mecklenburg 

Cnty., 411 F.2d 586, 587 (4th Cir. 1969), and does not have 

jurisdiction to review final state court orders, Dist. of Columbia 

Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 482 (1983). 

The relief sought by Cabbagestalk is not available by way of 

mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma 

pauperis, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. We dispense 
3

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 19-0655

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

ROBERT GONZALEZ,

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 October 19, 2020, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

09/08/2020

Case Number: DA 19-0655

FILED

Bowen Greenwood

CLERK OF THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF MONTANA

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

September 8 2020

09/08/2020

Case Number: DA 19-0655
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      Exhibit 24


                      POWER OF ATTORNEY TO SIGN AMENDMENTS

    KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that each person whose signature appears
below does hereby constitute and appoint I. Craig Henderson and Sally A.
Davenport, and each of them, with full power of substitution and full power to
act without the other, his true and lawful attorney-in-fact and agent to act for
him in his name, place and stead, in any and all capacities, to sign any or all
amendments to this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A, and to file the same, with all
exhibits thereto, and other documents in connection therewith, with the
Securities and Exchange Commission, granting unto said attorneys-in-fact and
agents, and each of them, full power and authority to do and perform each and
every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in and about the premises
in order to effectuate the same as fully, to all intents and purposes, as they
or he might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that said
attorneys-in-fact and agents, or any of them, may lawfully do or cause do be
done by virtue hereof.

    Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this
report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the
Registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
             SIGNATURE                               TITLE                       DATE
             ---------                               -----                       ----

<S>                                  <C>                                     <C>
       /S/ I. CRAIG HENDERSON        Chairman of the Board, Chief            April 9, 1998
      -----------------------        Executive Officer (Principal
      I. Craig Henderson, M.D.       Executive and Financial Officer)


     /S/ ANTHONY T. HENDRICKSON      Corporate Controller (Principal         April 9, 1998
     --------------------------      Accounting Officer)
         Anthony T. Hendrickson


        /S/ ROBERT G. FARIS          Director                                April 9, 1998
        -------------------
           Robert G. Faris


      /S/ RICHARD C.E. MORGAN        Director                                April 9, 1998
      -----------------------
         Richard C.E. Morgan


       /S/ E. DONNALL THOMAS         Director                                April 9, 1998
       -----------------------
       E. Donnall Thomas, M.D.


       /S/ ROBIN D. CAMPBELL         Director                                April 9, 1998
      -----------------------
      Robin D. Campbell, Ph.D
</TABLE>





                                       60
**Exhibit 32**

**CertificationPursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United StatesCode)**

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, UnitedStates Code), each of the undersigned officers of Osiris Therapeutics, Inc.,(the “Company”), does hereby certify, to the best of each officer’s knowledgethat:

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter endedSeptember 30, 2006 (the “Form 10-Q”) of the Company fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,and the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| Date: November 13, 2006  |   | /s/ C. Randal Mills     |   |   |
|--------------------------|--------|-------------------------|--------|--------|
|                     |   | C. Randal Mills, Ph.D.  |   |   |
|                     |   | Chief Executive Officer |   |   |
|                     |   |                    |   |   |
| Date: November  13, 2006 |   | /s/ Cary J. Claiborne   |   |   |
|                     |   | Cary J. Claiborne       |   |   |
|                     |   | Chief Financial Officer |   |   |

 

A signed originalof this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to theCompany and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request.  This certification “accompanies”the Form 10-Q to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the SEC and is notto be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under theSecurities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, asamended (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-Q), irrespectiveof any general incorporation language contained in such filing.

 

----
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Mark Staropoli, Appellant.

[855 NYS2d 159]

The defendant’s contention that the expert’s testimony concerning child sexual abuse accommodation syndrome impermissibly bolstered the testimony of the complainant is unpreserved for appellate review *(see*CPL 470.05 [2]). In any event, there is no merit to the contention *(see People v Carroll,*95 NY2d 375, 387 [2000]; *People v Taylor,*75 NY2d 277, 288 [1990] ).

The defendant’s contentions regarding the disqualification of two prospective jurors are without merit. The determination that a prospective juror should be disqualified *before voir dire*is a matter for the court, and a defendant has no statutory or constitutional right to personally participate in discussions leading to the court’s ruling *(see People v Velasco,*77 NY2d 469, 473 [1991] ). Here, the County Court providently exercised its discretion when, before the voir dire of two prospective jurors and before their panel was sworn to answer questions truthfully, it directed those two prospective jurors to report back to the Commissioner of Jurors because they were inappropriately dressed *(see People v Wilson,*211 AD2d 136, 140 [1995], *affd*88 NY2d 363 [1996]; *cf. People v Thorpe,*223 AD2d 739, 740-741 [1996]).

The defendant’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, to the extent that it is premised on his attorney’s failure to retain and call an expert witness, involves matter dehors the record and, thus, is not properly before us on this direct appeal from *569the judgment *(see People v Farrier,*45 AD3d 603 [2007]; *People v Zimmerman,*309 AD2d 824 [2003]; *People v Carlisle,*272 AD2d 477 [2000]). The record otherwise fails to support the defendant’s claim since it demonstrates that trial counsel rendered meaningful representation to him *(see People v Benevento,*91 NY2d 708, 712-713 [1998]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive *(see People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80 [1982]).

The defendant’s remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, is without merit. Skelos, J.P., Lifson, Santucci and Garni, JJ., concur.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-6504

EARL CARTER CLARK, JR., a/k/a Butch,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

JAMES B. HUNT, JR.; R. MACK JARVIS; JUANITA H.

BAKER; ELBERT T. BUCK, JR.; WILLIAM A. LOWRY;

CHARLES L. MANN, SR.; PEGGY STAMEY; MARY

HARROP; MICHAEL S. HAMDEN; MICHAEL F. EASLEY;

ELIZABETH F. PARSONS; SUSAN H. POLLITT; JOHN

DOES,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, District Judge.

(CA-99-209-5-F(3))

Submitted: September 29, 2000 Decided: October 11, 2000

Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Earl Carter Clark, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth F. Parsons, OFFICE

OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North Carolina,

for Appellees.
2

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Earl Carter Clark appeals the district court’s order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000) complaint. We

have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting

the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See

Clark v. Hunt, No. CA-99-209-3-209-F3 (E.D.N.C. Mar. 7, 2000). 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.

AFFIRMED
S05Y1030.

#### IN THE MATTER OF JOE C. ASHWORTH.

(612 SE2d 305)

Decided April 26, 2005.

*William P. Smith III, General Counsel State Bar, Elizabeth M. Williamson, Assistant General Counsel State Bar,*for State Bar of Georgia.

*Leslie S. McAdoo-Brobson,*for Ashworth.

Per curiam.

This matter is before the Court on Respondent Joe C. Ashworth’s Petition for Voluntary Surrender of License. In his petition Ashworth admits that he was admitted to the State Bar of Maryland in 1978, and to the State Bar of Georgia in 1985. He admits that on January 5,2005 the Court of Appeals of Maryland ordered that he be disbarred from the practice of law in the State of Maryland for violation of numerous rules of the Maryland Rules of Professional Conduct. Under Rule 9.4 of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct of Bar Rule 4-102 (d), a final adjudication in another jurisdiction that a lawyer had been guilty of misconduct establishes conclusively the misconduct or removal from practice for purposes of a disciplinary proceeding in this State. Ashworth admits that his disbarment in Maryland violates Rule 9.4 and, along with the State Bar, asks this Court to accept the voluntary surrender of his license to practice law in Georgia, which is tantamount to disbarment, see Bar Rule 4-110 (f).

We accept Ashworth’s petition and hereby order that his name be removed from the rolls of attorneys licensed to practice law in the State of Georgia. He is reminded of his duties under Bar Rule 4-219 (c).

*Voluntary surrender of license accepted.*

*All the Justices concur.*
@misc{1213256,
  author = {Vincent C. Hu},
  title = {Overview and Considerations of Access Control Based on Attribute Encryption},
  year = {2023},
  month = {2023-09-06 04:09:00},
  publisher = {NIST Interagency/Internal Report (NISTIR), National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD},
  url = {https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=956307},
  doi = {https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.8450},
  language = {en},
}
PAULA T. DOW

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NEW JERSEY

Richard J. Hughes Justice Complex

25 Market Street

PO Box 112

Trenton, NJ 08625-0112

Attorney for Defendants Paula T. Dow, Col. Rick Fuentes

By: Gregory Spellmeyer

Deputy Attorney General

(609) 984-9504

Gregory.Spellmeyer@dol.lps.state.nj.us

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

 NEWARK VICINAGE

______________________________

JEFFREY M. MULLER; DANIEL J. :

PISZCZATOSKI; JOHN M. DRAKE; :

GREGORY C. GALLAHER; LENNY :

S. SALERNO; FINLEY FENTON; : Civil Action No. 10-6110

SECOND AMENDMENT FOUNDATION, : (WHW)(CCC)

INC.; AND ASSOCIATION OF NEW :

JERSEY RIFLE & PISTOL CLUSBS, :

INC. :

:

Plaintiffs, :

v. : Notice of Appearance

:

THE HON. PHILIP J. MAENZA, in :

his Official Capacity as Judge:

of the Superior Court of :

Morris County; THE HON. :

RUDOLPH A. FILKO, in his :

Official Capacity as Judge of :

the Superior Court of Passaic :

County; THE HON. EDWARD A. :

JEREJIAN, in his Official :

Capacity as Judge of the :

Superior Court of Morris :

County; THE HON. THOMAS A. :

MANAHAN, in his Official :

Capacity as Judge of the :

Superior Court of Morris :

County; COL. RICK FUENTES, in :

his Official Capacity as :

Superintendent of the New :

Jersey State Police; CHIEF :

FRANK INGEMI, in his Official :

Capacity as Chief of the :

Case 2:10-cv-06110-WHW-MCA Document 8 Filed 12/06/10 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 28
Hammonton, New Jersey Police :

Department; CHIEF RICHARD :

COOK, in his Official :

Capacity as Chief of the :

Montville, New Jersey Police :

Department; and PAULA T. DOW, :

in her Official Capacity as :

Attorney General of New :

Jersey, :

:

Defendants. :

 :

TO: CLERK OF THE COURT

Please enter my appearance on behalf of defendants Paula T.

Dow, and Col. Rick Fuentes in the above-captioned matter.

PAULA T. DOW

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NEW JERSEY

By:/s Gregory A. Spellmeyer

Gregory A. Spellmeyer

Dated: December 6, 2010 Deputy Attorney General

c: All Counsel (via electronic filing system)

Case 2:10-cv-06110-WHW-MCA Document 8 Filed 12/06/10 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 29
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER  PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF  THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Larry L. Crawford certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the
report of WorldWater & Power Corp. on Form 10-KSB for the annual period ended December 31, 2006 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) and 15(d)
of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-KSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and
results of operation of WorldWater & Power Corp.

| |  | By:    | /s/LARRY L. CRAWFORD                                 
| |  | ------ | -----------------------------------------------------
| |  | Name:  | Larry L. Crawford                                    
| |  | Title: | Executive Vice President, Principal Financial Officer

Dated:
November 1, 2007

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed
form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will
be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

This
certification accompanies this Report on Form 10-KSB pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required
by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"). Such certification will not be deemed to be
incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.

End
of Filing

---



QuickLinks
EXHIBIT 23.2



                        INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT



The Board of Directors and Stockholders
WorldCorp, Inc.



We consent to the  incorporation  by  reference in the  Registration  Statements
(Nos. 33-44245,  33-46443,  33-62864, and 33-60247) on Form S-3 and Registration
Statements  (Nos.  33-33468 and 33-51944) on Form S-8 of WorldCorp,  Inc. of our
report dated  February 5, 1997,  relating to the  consolidated  balance sheet of
InteliData  Technologies  Corporation,  Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31,
1996,  and the related  consolidated  statements  of  operations,  stockholders'
equity,  and cash flows for the year then  ended,  which  report  appears in the
December 31, 1996 annual report on Form 10-K of WorldCorp, Inc.
DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Hartford, Connecticut
March 28, 1997