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

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4949

To provide compensation to the Lower Brule and Crow Creek Sioux Tribes 

of South Dakota for damage to tribal land caused by Pick-Sloan projects 

along the Missouri River. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 22, 2004

Ms. HERSETH introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Resources 

A BILL

To provide compensation to the Lower Brule and Crow Creek 

Sioux Tribes of South Dakota for damage to tribal land 

caused by Pick-Sloan projects along the Missouri River.

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 ‘‘Tribal Parity Act’’. 

5 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

6 Congress finds that—

7 (1) the Pick-Sloan Missouri River Basin Pro8 gram (authorized by section 9 of the Act of Decem9 ber 22, 1944 (commonly known as the ‘‘Flood Con-
2

•HR 4949 IH 

1 trol Act of 1944’’) (58 Stat. 891)), was approved to 

2 promote the general economic development of the 

3 United States; 

4 (2) the Fort Randall and Big Bend dam and 

5 reservoir projects in South Dakota—

6 (A) are major components of the Pick7 Sloan Missouri River Basin Program; and 

8 (B) contribute to the national economy; 

9 (3) the Fort Randall and Big Bend projects in10 undated the fertile bottom land of the Lower Brule 

11 and Crow Creek Sioux Tribes, which greatly dam12 aged the economy and cultural resources of the 

13 Tribes; 

14 (4) Congress has provided compensation to sev15 eral Indian tribes, including the Lower Brule and 

16 Crow Creek Sioux Tribes, that border the Missouri 

17 River and suffered injury as a result of 1 or more 

18 Pick-Sloan Projects; 

19 (5) the compensation provided to those Indian 

20 tribes has not been consistent; 

21 (6) Missouri River Indian tribes that suffered 

22 injury as a result of 1 or more Pick-Sloan Projects 

23 should be adequately compensated for those injuries, 

24 and that compensation should be consistent among 

25 the Tribes; and 
3

•HR 4949 IH 

1 (7) the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe and the Crow 

2 Creek Sioux Tribe, based on methodology deter3 mined appropriate by the General Accounting Office, 

4 are entitled to receive additional compensation for 

5 injuries described in paragraph (6), so as to provide 

6 parity among compensation received by all Missouri 

7 River Indian tribes. 

8 SEC. 3. LOWER BRULE SIOUX TRIBE. 

9 Section 4(b) of the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe Infra10 structure Development Trust Fund Act (Public Law 105–

11 132; 111 Stat. 2565) is amended by striking 

12 ‘‘$39,300,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$186,822,140’’. 

13 SEC. 4. CROW CREEK SIOUX TRIBE. 

14 Section 4(b) of the Crow Creek Sioux Tribe Infra15 structure Development Trust Fund Act of 1996 (Public 

16 Law 104–223; 110 Stat. 3027) is amended by striking 

17 ‘‘$27,500,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$105,917,853’’.

Æ
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

________________________________

:

IN RE: :

: Case No. 11-1086

NUTELLA MARKETING AND :

SALES PRACTICES LITIGATION : ORDER

________________________________:

THIS MATTER having been opened to the Court on a Motion for Order To Show 

Cause by Objectors Agatha Bochenek, Edward Hegele, and Brandon Goodman (collectively, the 

“Bochenek Objectors”), through their counsel Christopher V. Langone, Esq., for a determination 

as to why the Court’s entry of settlement on July 31, 2012 should not be immediately 

implemented except as to the issue of attorney fees and costs; Plaintiffs, through Class Counsel 

James E. Cecchi, Esq., and Defendant Ferrero U.S.A., Inc. (“Defendant”), through its counsel, 

Tonia Ouellette Klausner, oppose the motion; it appearing that the Bochenek Objectors seek 

immediate disbursement of the settlement funds, notwithstanding any pending appeals to the 

entry of settlement; it appearing that the basis for the Bochenek Objectors’ motion is paragraph 

55 of the Settlement Agreement, which provides that “attorney’s fees, costs, and expenses” are to 

be considered separately from the “fairness, reasonableness, and adequacy of the Settlement;” it 

further appearing that the Settlement Agreement also provides that no disbursement of the 

settlement funds can occur until after all appeals have been resolved, see Settlement Agreement, 

¶¶ L, 43, 48; it appearing that there are two pending appeals before the Third Circuit regarding 

this Court’s entry of settlement, see Dkt. Nos. 105 & 107; it appearing that, regardless of the 

Bochenek Objectors’ positions regarding the appropriateness of the settlement or the issue of 

attorney’s fees and costs, there are other parties appealing the settlement; therefore, in light of 

Case 3:11-cv-01086-FLW-DEA Document 142 Filed 06/06/13 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 2458
2

the terms of the Settlement Agreement, immediate distribution of the settlement funds is not 

proper; this matter being considered pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 78; for the reasons stated herein, 

and for good cause shown;

IT IS on this 6th day of June, 2013

ORDERED the Bochenek Objectors’ Motion for Order to Show Cause is DENIED.

/s/ Freda L. Wolfson 

Honorable Freda L. Wolfson

United States District Judge

Case 3:11-cv-01086-FLW-DEA Document 142 Filed 06/06/13 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 2459
Exhibit
32.2





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 Form 10-K of DOR BioPharma, Inc. (the “Company”) for the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned hereby certifies,
pursuant to 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.











March
      27, 2009
            
            /s/ Evan MyrianthopoulosEvan
      MyrianthopoulosChief
      Financial Officer(Principal
      Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)
---

EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Donald Sharpe, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

|(1) | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of Coronado Corp. for
      the period ended March 31, 2011 (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 Coronado Corp.                                                                   

Dated: May 16, 2011

| | /s/
      Donald Sharpe                                            
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------
| | Donald Sharpe                                                      
| | President and Director                                             
| | (Principal Executive Officer, Principal
      Financial Officer and
| | Principal Accounting Officer)                                      
| | Coronado Corp.                                                     

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 Coronado Corp.
and will be retained by Coronado Corp. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2

               The following consent of Arthur Andersen LLP ("Andersen") is a
          copy of the original consent dated May 14, 2002, included in the Form
          10-K for March 31, 2002. The SEC has provided regulatory relief
          designed to allow public companies to dispense with the requirements
          to file a reissued report and consent of Andersen in certain
          circumstances. After reasonable efforts, we have not been able to
          obtain a reissued report of consent from Andersen.

                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

               As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the
          incorporation of our reports included (or incorporated by reference)
          in this Form 10-K into the company's previously filed Registration
          Statements (File Nos. 33-16539, 33-37173, 33-43155, 33-85270,
          33-94438, 333-00855, 333-11385, 333-11387, 333-11389, 333-25953,
          333-48533, 333-48535, 333-46867, 333-62673, 333-45053, 333-66857,
          333-73007, 333-76233, 333-80281 and 333-85135) on Form S-8.

                                                       /s/ ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP

          San Jose, California
          May 14, 2002
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

____________________________________

:

DARCY SMITH, PH.D., :

:

Plaintiff, : Civil Action No. 10-3319 (FSH)

:

v. :

:

CYNTHIA BORSELLA LINDEMANN, : ORDER

ESQ., ET AL., :

:

Defendants. :

____________________________________:

This matter having come before the Court by way of motion for an order permitting

substitute service upon Defendant Marc A. Calello, Esq.; 

and the Court having considered the submission, record of proceedings, and governing

law; 

and for the reasons set forth in the Opinion delivered on the record on November 15,

2010;1

and for good cause shown, 

IT IS ON THIS 15th day of November, 2010

ORDERED that the motion for an order to permit substitute service [Docket Nos. 9 and

14] is denied without prejudice. 

s/Patty Shwartz 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

A transcript of the Opinion may be obtained by contacting King Transcription Services 1

at (973) 237-6080.

-1-

Case 2:10-cv-03319-KM-JBC Document 20 Filed 11/16/10 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 104
#### Adam Clayton PUGH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Sheriff John INGRAM; Captain Davis; Captain Evans, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 12-7174.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Dec. 13, 2012.

Decided: Dec. 18, 2012.

Adam Clayton Pugh, Appellant Pro Se.

Before MOTZ, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

*219Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Adam Clayton Pugh appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *Pugh v. Ingram,*No. 5:12-ct-03027-FL (E.D.N.C. July 3, 2012). We deny Pugh’s motion for appointment of counsel. We dispense 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.

*AFFIRMED.*
EXHIBIT 23.1


                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT



We  consent  to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
Form  S-8  (File  Nos. 33-33497, 33-40038, 33-60214, 33-60644 and 333-88698) and
Form  S-3  (File  Nos.  333-50884 and 333-88696) of our reports dated August 19,
2002  relating  to  the  consolidated financial statements of Criticare Systems,
Inc.  appearing  in  the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
June  30,  2002.



/s/  BDO  Seidman,  LLP
Milwaukee,  Wisconsin
October  15,  2002
Exhibit
32.1




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 Splinternet Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended
September 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
“Report”), the undersigned certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best
of the undersigned’s knowledge, that:





(1)           The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 except that the financial statements included in
this Report have not been reviewed by an independent public accountant as
required by Regulation S-X; 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: November
      23, 2009
              By:
              /s/
      James C. AckerlyJames
      C. Ackerly, Chief Executive Officerand
      President (Principal Executive Officer)
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Department of the Army 

# AGENCY:

Department of the Army, DoD. 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

Announcement is made of the availability for licensing of the invention set forth in U.S. Provisional Patent Application Serial No. 61/116,931 entitled “Computer Controlled System for Laser Energy Delivery to the Retina,” filed November 21, 2008. The United States Government, as represented by the Secretary of the Army, has rights in this invention. 

# ADDRESSES:

                        Commander, U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command,                         *Attn:*                         Command Judge Advocate, MCMR-JA, 504 Scott Street, Fort Detrick, Frederick, MD 21702-5012.                     

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

For patent issues, Ms. Elizabeth Arwine, Patent Attorney, (301) 619-7808. For licensing issues, Dr. Paul Mele, Office of Research & Technology Assessment, (301) 619-6664, both at telefax (301) 619-5034. 

Brenda S. Bowen, 

Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. E9-1634 Filed 1-23-09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3710-08-P
Case 2:11-mj-06500-JAD Document 16 Filed 08/31/11 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 24
Case 2:11-mj-06500-JAD Document 16 Filed 08/31/11 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 25
NOT FOR PUBLICATION (Doc. No. 9) 

 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY 

CAMDEN VICINAGE

___________________________________ 

 : 

JOE HAND PROMOTIONS, INC., : 

 : 

 Plaintiff, : 

 : Civil No. 11-849 (RBK/KMW) 

 v. : 

 : ORDER

ROBIN WALDRON, CHARLYNN : 

WALDRON, and MANGIA BY THE : 

GREENS, INC., d/b/a Mangia on the Green,: 

 : 

 Defendants. : 

___________________________________ : 

THIS MATTER having come before the Court on the motion of Joe Hand Promotions, 

Inc. (“Plaintiff”) for judgment of default on its claims against Robin Waldron, Charlynn 

Waldron, and Mangia by the Greens, Inc. (“Defendants”); and 

IT APPEARING TO THE COURT that default as to Defendants was entered by the 

Clerk on July 21, 2011; and 

IT FURTHER APPEARING TO THE COURT that two Defendants are individuals; 

and 

IT FURTHER APPEARING TO THE COURT that Plaintiff’s counsel avers that 

“Defendants are not infants, incompetent persons, or persons in military service or otherwise 

exempted from default judgment under the Servicemembers Relief Act of 2003,” Janis Decl., 

¶ 3, but that Plaintiff offers no documentation or other evidence supporting that averment; and 

THE COURT NOTING that the Servicemembers Relief Act of 2003 provides that “the 

court, before entering judgment for the plaintiff, shall require the plaintiff to file with the court 

Case 1:11-cv-00849-RBK-KMW Document 10 Filed 05/03/12 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 118
an affidavit . . . stating whether or not the defendant is in military service and showing necessary 

facts to support the affidavit,” 50 U.S.C. App. § 521(b)(1)(A) (emphasis added); and 

THE COURT FINDING that Plaintiff has failed to show necessary facts to support its 

counsel’s affidavit; 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment is DENIED. 

Dated: 5/3/2012 /s/ Robert B. Kugler 

 ROBERT B. KUGLER 

 United States District Judge

Case 1:11-cv-00849-RBK-KMW Document 10 Filed 05/03/12 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 119
|                                                  |                                     |                                    |
|-------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|
|                                                  |                                     |
|                                             |                                |                               |
| Date: February              14, 2007   | By:                            | /s/ Paul              S. Lipschutz |
|                                                  |                                          |
|                                                  | Principal              Executive Officer |
|                                      |                                      |                                             |
|-------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|
|                                      |                                      |
|                                 |                                 |                                        |
| Date: February              14, 2007 | By:                             | /s/ Robert              F.              Orr |
|                                      |                                           |
|                                      | Principal              Accounting Officer |
EXHIBIT
      21





Airspan's
      Subsidiaries







Airspan
      Communications (Ireland) Ltd.





Airspan
      Communications Holdings (Ireland)





Airspan
      Communications Ltd.





Airspan
      Networks PTY Ltd (Australia) (Subsidiary of Airspan Communications
      Ltd.)





Airspan
      Communications (Shanghai) Co. Ltd.





Airspan
      Networks Eastern Europe Ltd (Subsidiary of Airspan Communications
      Ltd.)





P.T.
      Airspan Networks Indonesia





Airspan
      Networks (Israel) Ltd (Subsidiary of Airspan Communications Ltd.)





Airspan
      Japan Kabushiki Kaisha





Airspan
      Networks South Africa Pty Limited





WW
      Broadband Limited





Radionet
      Oy, Limited (Subsidiary of Airspan Communications Ltd.)





Radionet
      Works Oy, Limited (Subsidiary of Radionet Oy)





Radionet
      Nordic Ab (Subsidiary of Radionet Oy)





ArelNet
      Ltd (Subsidiary of Airspan Communications Ltd)
ACU	ACURA
ALF	ALFA ROMEO
AUD	AUDI
AUS	AUSTIN-HEALEY
BEN	BENTLEY 
BMW	BMW 
BUI	BUICK 
CAD	CADILLAC 
CHE	CHEVROLET 
CHR	CHRYSLER 
DAW	DAEWOO
DOD	DODGE 
EAG	EAGLE
FER	FERRARI
FIA	FIAT 
FOR	FORD 
GEO	GEO
GMC	GMC 
HON	HONDA 
HUM	HUMMER
HYU	HYUNDAI
INF	INFINITI
INT	INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER
ISU	ISUZU 
JAG	JAGUAR 
JEE	JEEP 
KIA	KIA
LAM	LAMBOGHINI 
LAN	LAND ROVER
LEX	LEXUS 
LIN	LINCOLN
LOT	LOTUS 
MAS	MASERATI
MAY	MAYBACH
MAZ	MAZDA
MRB	MERCEDES-BENZ 
MEC	MERCURY 
MEK	MERKUR
MGA	MG
MIN	MINI
MIT	MITSUBISHI 
NIS	NISSAN 
OLD	OLDSMOBILE 
PLY	PLYMOUTH 
PON	PONTIAC 
POR	PORSCHE
ROL	ROLLS-ROYCE 
SAA	SAAB 
SAT	SATURN 
SCI	SCION
SMA	SMART
SRT	SRT
SUB	SUBARU 
SUZ	SUZUKI
TES	TESLA
TOY	TOYOTA 
VOK	VOLKSWAGEN 
VOV	VOLVO 
ZEN	ZENN
XXX	Unspecified Make/Model
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**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 theAmendment to the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Sonus Networks, Inc.(the “Company”) for the period ended December 31, 2008 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), theundersigned, Richard N. Nottenburg, President and Chief Executive Officer ofthe Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that tohis knowledge:

 

(1)           the Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)           the information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company.

 

Date: April 30, 2009

 
|     | /s/ RICHARD N. NOTTENBURG                |
|----------|------------------------------------------|
|     | Richard N. Nottenburg                    |
| * * | *President  and Chief Executive Officer* |
| * * | *(Principal  Executive Officer)*         |

 

----
KEVIN T. KUTYLA, ESQ. 

83 Spring Street

Newton, NJ 07860

(973) 940-8970 / (973) 940-8973 (fax)

Attorneys for Plaintiff

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

JAMES WRIGHT,

Plaintiff(s),

-againstHARTFORD FINANCIAL SERVICES 

GROUP; THE HARTFORD BENEFIT 

MANAGEMENT SERVICES; GDB CLAIMS 

AND SERVICES OPERATIONS; ABC 1-

10 (that being the names of the 

corporate entities, companies, 

partnership or individuals 

intended),

Defendant(s).

Civil Action No.: 2:11-cv-00602

Hon. Stanley R. Chesler,

 U.S.D.J.

Hon. Michael A. Shipp, U.S.M.J.

CERTIFICATION OF

SERVICE

CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE

I, Kevin T. Kutyla, do hereby certify that the moving papers 

were served upon the United States District Court, District of New 

Jersey by ECP and upon defendants’ attorney, Daniel Meier, Esq., 

Sedgwick, LLP, 125 Broad Street, 39th Flr., New York, NY 10004 via 

overnight UPS mail.

/s/ Kevin T. Kutyla

_________________________________

KEVIN T. KUTYLA, ESQ.

Dated: January 27, 2012

Case 2:11-cv-00602-SRC -MAS Document 55 Filed 01/27/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 1909