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

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4957 

To ensure an appropriate balance between resources and accountability under 

the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 22, 2004 

Mr. JOHN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To ensure an appropriate balance between resources and 

accountability under the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. 

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 ‘‘Keeping Our Edu5 cation Promise to America’s Children Act of 2004’’. 

6 SEC. 2. DEFERRAL OF FEDERAL MANDATES IF FEDERAL 

7 GOVERNMENT FAILS TO MAKE MINIMUM AP8 PROPRIATIONS. 

9 (a) DEFERRAL OF CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS.—Sec10 tion 1116 of the Elementary and Secondary Education 
2 

•HR 4957 IH 

1 Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6316) is amended by adding at 

2 the end the following: 

3 ‘‘(i) DEFERRAL.—No school or local educational 

4 agency may be identified for or subject to the require5 ments of school improvement, corrective action, or restruc6 turing under this section for any school year for which 

7 the amounts appropriated for the corresponding fiscal 

8 year for the purpose of carrying out this part are less than 

9 97 percent of the following: 

10 ‘‘(1) $20,500,000,000 for fiscal year 2005. 

11 ‘‘(2) $22,750,000,000 for fiscal year 2006. 

12 ‘‘(3) $25,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2007.’’. 

13 (b) DEFERRAL OF REQUIREMENTS FOR TEACHERS

14 AND PARAPROFESSIONALS.—Section 1119 of the Elemen15 tary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 

16 6319) is amended by adding at the end the following: 

17 ‘‘(m) DEFERRAL.—A State educational agency may 

18 defer the commencement, suspend the implementation, or 

19 modify but not cease the development, of the requirements 

20 of this section (for the State educational agency and local 

21 educational agencies within the State) for 1 school year 

22 for each fiscal year for which the amounts appropriated 

23 to carry out subparts 1 through 4 of part A of title II 

24 are less than 97 percent of the following: 

25 ‘‘(1) $3,016,000,000 for fiscal year 2005. 
3 

•HR 4957 IH 

1 ‘‘(2) $3,076,000,000 for fiscal year 2006. 

2 ‘‘(3) $3,143,000,000 for fiscal year 2007.’’. 

Æ
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 125 (Wednesday, July 1, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 31471]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-15518]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration <greek-i>11791 and <greek-i>11792]


Kentucky Disaster <greek-i>KY-00025

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of an Administrative declaration of a 
disaster for the Commonwealth of Kentucky dated 06/24/2009.
    Incident: Severe Storms and Tornadoes.
    Incident Period: 05/08/2009.
    DATES: Effective Date: 06/24/2009.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 08/24/2009.
    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 03/24/2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing And Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., 
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of 
the Administrator's disaster declaration, applications for disaster 
loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally 
announced locations.
    The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected 
by the disaster:

Primary Counties: Madison.
Contiguous Counties:
    Kentucky: Clark, Estill, Fayette, Garrard, Jackson, Jessamine, 
Rockcastle.
    The Interest Rates are:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homeowners With Credit Available Elsewhere...................      4.875
Homeowners Without Credit Available Elsewhere................      2.437
Businesses With Credit Available Elsewhere...................      6.000
Businesses & Small Agricultural Cooperatives Without Credit        4.000
 Available Elsewhere.........................................
Other (Including Non-Profit Organizations) With Credit             4.500
 Available Elsewhere.........................................
Businesses and Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit             4.000
 Available Elsewhere.........................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 11791 B 
and for economic injury is 11792 0.
    The Commonwealth which received an EIDL Declaration <greek-i> is 
Kentucky.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008)

    June 24, 2009.
Karen G. Mills,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. E9-15518 Filed 6-30-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
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), each of the undersigned officers of National Datacomputer, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that:





The Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2009 (the “Form 10-K”) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








Dated: May 12, 2010




/s/  Bruna Bucacci


Bruna Bucacci


President and Chief Executive Officer and


Chief Accounting Officer





A signed original 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.
S05A0555.

#### WILSON v. WILSON.

(612 SE2d 797)

HUNSTEIN, Justice.

This marks the second appearance of this case in our Court. See *Wilson v. Wlson,*277 Ga. 801 (596 SE2d 392) (2004). While that appeal from a Spalding County order was pending, appellant Brenda Wilson filed an action to modify custody in Fulton County, which was appellee E.D. Wilson’s new county of residence, and appellee counterclaimed. Both parties discussed the effect of the pending appeal during their first appearance in Fulton Superior Court. The Fulton County trial court determined that the custody modification hearing could continue because appellant sought to reverse only financial elements of the initial judgment. Prior to any decision by the Fulton Superior Court on the motion to modify custody, however, we reversed the Spalding County judgment on the ground that the trial court committed reversible error in refusing to allow appellant’s counsel to make a closing argument. Id. After the filing of the remittitur, Spalding County reinstated the divorce case.

Post-reversal, appellant filed a motion to dismiss the Fulton County action claiming that total reversal in the first appeal returned *303jurisdiction to the Spalding Superior Court and left no final judgment for modification by the Fulton Superior Court. The Fulton Superior Court ruled that it retained jurisdiction to modify matters not specifically enumerated in the original appeal. Appellant thereafter filed an application for interlocutory appeal which we granted to determine whether the Fulton Superior Court erred in refusing to dismiss the modification petition after reversal of the final judgment of the Spalding Superior Court.

Decided May 9, 2005.

*Jan V. Hinson,*for appellant.

*J. Stephen Clifford, David A. Webster,*for appellee.

As a general rule, where there is a judgment of reversal but no express direction of this Court to the lower court, the case stands as reversed, and a new trial must be had on the issues therein raised. *Rawdin v. Conner,*211 Ga. 52 (84 SE2d 50) (1954); *American Associated Cos. v. Vaughan,*210 Ga. 141 (2) (78 SE2d 43) (1953); *Schley v. Schofield & Son,*61 Ga. 528, 530 (1878). See OCGA § 5-5-49. In the absence of more specific direction by this Court, our reversal of the Spalding County judgment was the grant of a de novo trial on all issues contained within the judgment. Because in this case the trial court’s refusal to allow closing argument denied appellant her rights as to all issues being tried before the Spalding Superior Court, the Spalding County judgment was vacated and it was error for the Fulton Superior Court to refuse to dismiss the modification action.

*Judgment reversed.*

*All the Justices concur, except Fletcher, C. J., who concurs in the judgment only.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS RESTATED SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS IN THE ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K OF DIGITAL MICROWAVE
CORPORATION FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED MARCH 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                          40,547
<SECURITIES>                                    17,947
<RECEIVABLES>                                   62,990
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,377
<INVENTORY>                                     54,003
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               177,776
<PP&E>                                          58,250
<DEPRECIATION>                                  36,403
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 200,504
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           72,544
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           513
<OTHER-SE>                                     126,747
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   200,504
<SALES>                                        213,441
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               213,441
<CGS>                                          141,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  141,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                62,289
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,400
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,582
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  9,096
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,635
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,461
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,461
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0.16
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.13


</TABLE>
Exhibit
32.01
  CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO
 18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350,
 AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  In
connection with the Quarterly Report of PlayBox (US) Inc. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-Q for the period ending December 31, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Gideon
Jung, Chief Executive Officer and 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, to the best of my knowledge and
belief:
  (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.
  Dated:
      February 14, 2009
                        
                        
                        /s/
      Gideon
      JungBy:
      Gideon Jung
                          Chief
      Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
 1
Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 73 Filed 11/14/12 Page 1 of 28 PageID: 446
Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 73 Filed 11/14/12 Page 2 of 28 PageID: 447
Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 73 Filed 11/14/12 Page 3 of 28 PageID: 448
Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 73 Filed 11/14/12 Page 4 of 28 PageID: 449
Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 73 Filed 11/14/12 Page 5 of 28 PageID: 450
Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 73 Filed 11/14/12 Page 6 of 28 PageID: 451
Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 73 Filed 11/14/12 Page 7 of 28 PageID: 452
Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 73 Filed 11/14/12 Page 8 of 28 PageID: 453
Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 73 Filed 11/14/12 Page 9 of 28 PageID: 454
Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 73 Filed 11/14/12 Page 10 of 28 PageID: 455
Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 73 Filed 11/14/12 Page 11 of 28 PageID: 456
Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 73 Filed 11/14/12 Page 12 of 28 PageID: 457
Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 73 Filed 11/14/12 Page 13 of 28 PageID: 458
Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 73 Filed 11/14/12 Page 14 of 28 PageID: 459
Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 73 Filed 11/14/12 Page 15 of 28 PageID: 460
Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 73 Filed 11/14/12 Page 16 of 28 PageID: 461
Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 73 Filed 11/14/12 Page 17 of 28 PageID: 462
Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 73 Filed 11/14/12 Page 18 of 28 PageID: 463
Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 73 Filed 11/14/12 Page 19 of 28 PageID: 464
Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 73 Filed 11/14/12 Page 20 of 28 PageID: 465
Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 73 Filed 11/14/12 Page 21 of 28 PageID: 466
Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 73 Filed 11/14/12 Page 22 of 28 PageID: 467
Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 73 Filed 11/14/12 Page 23 of 28 PageID: 468
Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 73 Filed 11/14/12 Page 24 of 28 PageID: 469
Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 73 Filed 11/14/12 Page 25 of 28 PageID: 470
Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 73 Filed 11/14/12 Page 26 of 28 PageID: 471
Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 73 Filed 11/14/12 Page 27 of 28 PageID: 472
Case 2:11-cv-00427-JLL-MAH Document 73 Filed 11/14/12 Page 28 of 28 PageID: 473
905 A.2d 864

#### IN THE MATTER OF KEVIN J. CARLIN, AN ATTORNEY AT LAW (ATTORNEY NO. 004231985).

September 8, 2006.

ORDER

The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 06-096, concluding that KEVIN J. CARLIN of HAMILTON TOWNSHIP, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1985, should be censured for violating *RPC*1.3 (lack of diligence), *RPC*1.4(a) (failure to communicate with client), *RPC*1.15(b) (failure to promptly deliver funds to third party), *RPC*1.15(d) (recordkeeping violations), and *RPC*8.4(c) (misrepresentation);

And the Disciplinary Review Board having further concluded that respondent should be required to make certain refunds and reimbursements in connection with his role as trustee of the Miller education trust;

And good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that KEVIN J. CARLIN is hereby censured; and it is further

ORDERED that within ninety days of the date of this Order KEVIN J. CARLIN shall (1) reimburse the Miller education trust $4,000 for the accounting and attorney’s fees paid, which funds shall be paid equally to Jessica and Nicole Miller; (2) release $1,210 to Nicole Miller; and (3) provide the Office of Attorney Ethics with the requested three-way account reconciliations; and it is further

ORDERED that the entire record of this matter be made a permanent part of respondent’s file as an attorney at law of this State; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent reimburse the Disciplinary Oversight Committee for appropriate administrative costs and actual *251expenses incurred in the prosecution of this matter, as provided in *Rule*1:20-17.
Case 2:10-cv-03984-FSH -PS   Document 10    Filed 08/31/10   Page 1 of 1 PageID: 129
V 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5004

For the relief of Judith Atuh Tanjoh, Serge Mbah Tikum, Marie Noel Tikum, 

Emmanuel Ngwa Tikum, and Roger Fon Tikum. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 22, 2004

Mr. VAN HOLLEN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL

For the relief of Judith Atuh Tanjoh, Serge Mbah Tikum, 

Marie Noel Tikum, Emmanuel Ngwa Tikum, and Roger 

Fon Tikum.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR JUDITH 

4 ATUH TANJOH, SERGE MBAH TIKUM, MARIE 

5 NOEL TIKUM, EMMANUEL NGWA TIKUM, AND 

6 ROGER FON TIKUM. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding subsections (a) 

8 and (b) of section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality 

9 Act, Judith Atuh Tanjoh, Serge Mbah Tikum, Marie Noel 

10 Tikum, Emmanuel Ngwa Tikum, and Roger Fon Tikum 
2

•HR 5004 IH 

1 shall each be eligible for issuance of an immigrant visa 

2 or for adjustment of status to that of an alien lawfully 

3 admitted for permanent residence upon filing an applica4 tion for issuance of an immigrant visa under section 204 

5 of such Act or for adjustment of status to lawful perma6 nent resident. 

7 (b) ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS.—If Judith Atuh 

8 Tanjoh, Serge Mbah Tikum, Marie Noel Tikum, Emman9 uel Ngwa Tikum, or Roger Fon Tikum enters the United 

10 States before the filing deadline specified in subsection (c), 

11 he or she shall be considered to have entered and remained 

12 lawfully and shall, if otherwise eligible, be eligible for ad13 justment of status under section 245 of the Immigration 

14 and Nationality Act as of the date of the enactment of 

15 this Act. 

16 (c) DEADLINE FOR APPLICATION AND PAYMENT OF

17 FEES.—Subsections (a) and (b) shall apply only if the ap18 plication for issuance of an immigrant visa or the applica19 tion for adjustment of status is filed with appropriate fees 

20 within 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

21 (d) REDUCTION OF IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBER.—

22 Upon the granting of an immigrant visa or permanent res23 idence to Judith Atuh Tanjoh, Serge Mbah Tikum, Marie 

24 Noel Tikum, Emmanuel Ngwa Tikum, and Roger Fon 

25 Tikum, the Secretary of State shall instruct the proper 
3

•HR 5004 IH 

1 officer to reduce by 5, during the current or next following 

2 fiscal year, the total number of immigrant visas that are 

3 made available to natives of the country of the aliens’ birth 

4 under section 203(a) of the Immigration and Nationality 

5 Act or, if applicable, the total number of immigrant visas 

6 that are made available to natives of the country of the 

7 aliens’ birth under section 202(e) of such Act. 

8 (e) DENIAL OF PREFERENTIAL IMMIGRATION

9 TREATMENT FOR CERTAIN RELATIVES.—The natural 

10 parents, brothers, and sisters of Judith Atuh Tanjoh, 

11 Serge Mbah Tikum, Marie Noel Tikum, Emmanuel Ngwa 

12 Tikum, and Roger Fon Tikum shall not, by virtue of such 

13 relationship, be accorded any right, privilege, or status 

14 under the Immigration and Nationality Act.

Æ
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan



### April 28, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice


### 129932 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan 

### PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices



### v SC: 129932 COA: 255239 Oakland CC: 2003-192708-FH MARK THOMAS HENTSCHEL, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to a ppeal the October 20, 2005 judgment of the Court of Appeals is cons idered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

p0424 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.

April 28, 2006

Clerk
S06Y1057.

#### IN THE MATTER OF SCOTT M. SCHWARTZ.

(629 SE2d 819)

Decided May 8, 2006.

*William P. Smith III, General Counsel State Bar, Gene Chapman, Assistant General Counsel State Bar,*for State Bar of Georgia.

Per curiam.

This disciplinary matter is before the Court pursuant to the Report and Recommendation of the Review Panel of the State Disciplinary Board, which recommends that Respondent Scott M. Schwartz receive a six-month suspension with conditions on reinstatement, pursuant to Rule 9.4 (b) (1) of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct, see Bar Rule 4-102 (d). This suspension arises out of Schwartz’s having received the same sanction in Connecticut for his violations of that state’s Rules of Professional Conduct.

Because Schwartz acknowledged the Notice of Reciprocal Discipline but did not object in any way, this Court hereby accepts the recommendation of the Review Panel and orders that Schwartz be suspended for a period of six months beginning from the date of this opinion. This Court further orders that any application by Schwartz for readmission to the Bar of the State of Georgia must contain a satisfactory showing that he has passed the “Multi-State Professional Responsibility Examination”; that he has complied fully with Dr. Goldstein’s treatment plan; and that Dr. Goldstein considers him capable of practicing law in a professional and ethical manner. Even after Schwartz has satisfactorily made the above showings, Schwartz’s readmission remains subject to the discretion of the State Bar of Georgia (or their designated representative) and, if granted, requires the filing of semi-annual reports of compliance with the medical treatment plan for an additional period of 18 months. Schwartz is reminded of his duties under Bar Rule 4-219 (c).

*Six-month suspension with conditions.*

*All the Justices concur.*