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

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5098 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5098

 To provide more effective congressional oversight over the operations 
and administrative expenses of the Comptroller of the Currency, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 15, 2004

Mr. Gutierrez introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To provide more effective congressional oversight over the operations 
and administrative expenses of the Comptroller of the Currency, and for 
                            other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Comptroller of the Currency 
Accountability Act''.

SEC. 2. ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE COMPTROLLER OF THE CURRENCY.

    Section 5240 of the Revised Statutes of the United States (12 
U.S.C. 482) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
subsection:
    ``(g) Administrative Expenses.--
            ``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
        this title or any other provision of law, the Comptroller of 
        the Currency may not incur any obligation for administrative 
        expenses in carrying out authorized activities for any fiscal 
        year in excess of the amount provided in advance in an 
        appropriation Act for such expenses for such year.
            ``(2) Authorization.--There are authorized to be provided 
        such amounts as may be necessary for the administrative 
        expenses of the Comptroller of the Currency for fiscal years 
        2005, 2006, and 2007.''.
                                 <all>
```
---

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 

The undersigned, Charlie Lee, Principal Accounting Officer of
Pure Pharmaceuticals Corp. (the Company), hereby certifies, 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 of the Company for
        the period ended March 31, 2009 (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.                                                                      

|Date: May 19, 2009           | 
|---------------------------- | 
|                             | 
|                             | 
|                             | 
|/s/ Charlie Lee              | 
|Charlie Lee                  | 
|Principal Accounting Officer | 

---
CECELIA TRIANA.

Plaintiff, ORDER

V.

VERIZON, METLIFE, FIDELITY, ESTATE

OF JOHN M. NOONE and LESLIE K.

PONTIER,

Defendants.

WHEREAS the Court appointed Basil F. O’Connor, Esq. as Special Master in this

matter; and

WHEREAS the Special Master issued a Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 62); and

WHEREAS the Special Master submitted a Proposed Schedule of Distribution; and

WHEREAS the Special Master submitted a Certification of Services; and

WHEREAS the parties shall equally pay the Special Master’s fees, including the

remaining $4,177.84 in fees; and

WHEREAS the parties do not object to the Special Master’s Report and

Recommendation. Proposed Schedule of Distribution, or Certification of Services;

For the reasons stated on the record on April 16, 2013, and for good cause shown,

IT IS on this 25th day of April, 2013;

1
$296.544. 18, from the Registry of this Court to Geri Squire, Esq., attorney for Plaintiff Cecelia

Triana; and it is further

ORDERED that the Clerk of the United States District Court, at its earliest convenience,

shall disburse $1 73,410.55, plus 62.55% of the accrued interest from the principal amount of

$296,544.18, from the Registry of this Court to Mario Blanch, Esq., attorney for Defendant

Leslie K. Pontier; and it is further

ORDERED that the Clerk of the United States District Court shall withhold, for

contingencies, $10,000 in the Registry of this Court on behalf of Defendant Leslie K. Pontier;

and it is further

ORDERED that the Clerk of the United States District Court, at its earliest convenience,

shall disburse $4,177.84 from the Registry of this Court to Basil F. O’Connor, Esq., Special

Master.

PETER G. SHERIDAN, U.S.D.J.

April 25, 2013

2
2012.12.31 Ex-10.12.2






Exhibit 10.12.2




AMENDMENT ONE
TO THE
THE COCA-COLA COMPANY SUPPLEMENTAL CASH BALANCE PLAN


WHEREAS, The Coca-Cola Company (the “Company”) established The Coca-Cola Company Supplemental Cash Balance Plan (the “Plan”); 
WHEREAS, The Coca-Cola Company Benefits Committee (“Benefits Committee”) is authorized to amend the Plan; and 
NOW THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as follows, effective December 31, 2012:
1.
With the exception of the “Preface” section, the term “The Coca-Coca Company Cash Balance Plan” shall be deleted wherever the same appears and “The Coca-Cola Company Pension Plan” shall be inserted in lieu thereof. 
2.
Effective December 31, 2012, the “Preface” section is deleted and replaced with the following language:


PREFACE


“Prior to January 1, 2013, the Company or its subsidiaries maintained, among others, the following three pension plans:  The Coca-Cola Company Cash Balance Pension Plan (“Pre-2013 Cash Balance Plan”), The Coca-Cola Company Pension Plan (the “KO Prior Pension Plan”) and the Coca-Cola Refreshments Employees' Pension Plan (the “CCR Prior Pension Plan”).  Effective January 1, 2013, the KO Prior Pension Plan and the CCR Prior Pension Plan are merged into the Pre-2013 Cash Balance Plan which was renamed as The Coca-Cola Company Pension Plan. 


The Coca-Cola Company established The Coca-Cola Company Supplemental Cash Balance Plan (the “Plan”) effective January 1, 2012. The Plan is an unfunded supplemental retirement plan for eligible employees and their beneficiaries as described herein.  This Plan is intended to cover Employees who were participating in the Pre-2013 Cash Balance Plan on December 31, 2012 and eligible Employees whose most recent hire date is on or after January 1, 2012, who accrue pension benefits using the formula previously set forth in the Pre-2013 Cash Balance Plan, reflected in the Basic Plan Document (Article 4), as that term is defined in The Coca-Cola Company Pension Plan.  The Plan is designed to provide certain retirement benefits primarily for a select group of management or highly compensated employees which are not otherwise payable or cannot otherwise be provided under the terms of The Coca-Cola Company Pension Plan as a result of the limitations set forth under certain applicable sections of the Internal Revenue Code or on account of an employee's deferral of compensation under The     Coca-Cola Company Deferred Compensation Plan.”









3.
The definition of “Pension Benefit” shall be deleted and replaced with the following definition:
“Pension Benefit” shall be the benefit payable to a Participant under the Qualified Pension Plan.”


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Benefits Committee has caused this Amendment to be signed by its duly authorized member as of this 6th day of December 2012.


THE COCA-COLA COMPANY
BENEFITS COMMITTEE




/s/ Sue Fleming                    
Sue Fleming
Benefits Committee Chairperson
Crirn. No. 9-70 (SRC)

DANIEL DORSEY : CONTINUANCE ORDER

This matter having come before the Court on the joint

application of Paul J. Fishman, United States Attorney for the

District of New Jersey (Barbara R. Lianes, Assistant U.S.

Attorney, appearing), and defendant Daniel Dorsey (by Neil Duffy,

Esg.) for an order granting a continuance of the proceedings in

the above-captioned matter for a period of 60 days, and the

defendant being aware that he has the right to have the matterbrought to trial within 70 days of the date of his appearance

before a judicial officer of this court pursuant to Title 18 of

the United States Code, Section 3161(cHl), and as the defendant

has consented to such a continuance, and for good and sufficient

cause shown,

IT IS THE FINDING OF THIS COURT that this action should

be continued for the following reasons:

1. Plea negotiations are currently in progress, and

both the United States and the defendant desire additional time

to finalize a plea agreement, which would render trial of this

matter unnecessary;
Section 3161(h) (7) (a), the ends of justice served by granting the

continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and thedefendant in a speedy trial. I

WHEREFORE, on this 

day of March, 2011,

IT IS ORDERED that this action be, and hereby is,

continued for a period of 60 days; and it is further

ORDERED that the period from and including March 10,

2011, through and including May 8, 2011, shall be excludable in

computing time under the Speedy Trial Act of 1974, pursuant toTitle 18, United States Code, Section 3161 (h) (7) (a); and it is

further
P

* AL

Al

.;1.

:t*j. 1%.

Ct

Ct

€1 ItU I t

I 

IC

Ct

H

H

UI tt:

U U

* 

-*—p L.

4H

L

r

GN

(
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

PARAMOUNT INSURANCE COMPANY,

 Plaintiff,

v.

MIGUEL CHUGUIRIMA, ET AL., 

 Defendants.

Civil Action No.: 11-1493 (CCC) (JAD)

O R D E R 

This matter comes before the Court on themotion of Plaintiff Paramount Insurance Company

to enforce the settlement reached in this matter, whereby Plaintiff agreed to dismiss Count One of

theComplaint with prejudice and to dismissCount Two of the Complaint without prejudice. (Docket

Entry No. 34). On July 31, 2012, Magistrate Judge Joseph A. Dickson issued a Report and

Recommendation that Plaintiff’s motion to enforce the settlement be granted. (Docket EntryNo. 36). 

No objections have been filed thereto. The Court has considered the submissions of the parties, and

Judge Dickson’s Report and Recommendation dated July 31, 2012, and for substantially the same

reasons stated therein,

IT IS on this 15 day of August, 2012 th

ORDERED that this Court adopts Judge Dickson’s July 31, 2012 Report and

Recommendation that Plaintiff’s motion to enforce the settlement be granted. Count One of the

Complaint is hereby dismissed with prejudice and Count Two is dismissed without prejudice, per

the terms agreed to by the parties.

The Clerk of the Court shall close this matter.

 s/ Claire C. Cecchi 

HON. CLAIRE C. CECCHI

United States District Judge

Case 2:11-cv-01493-CCC-JAD Document 38 Filed 08/15/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 334
EXHIBIT 99.2
                              C.F.O. CERTIFICATION




                            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 Vapor Fuel  Technologies,  Inc. on Form
10-KSB for the period  ending March 31, 2002, as filed with the  Securities  and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Larry Chace, Treasurer
and principal financial officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-  Oxley Act of
2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

         (1)      the 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.



/s/ Larry Chace
Larry Chace
Chief Financial Officer
January 22, 2003
#### Wanda Colon, Appellant, v Peter J. Montemurro, Respondent.

[823 NYS2d 134]

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alexander W. Hunter, Jr., J.), entered October 21, 2005, which granted defendant’s motion to the extent of amending an earlier judgment by reducing the award for past lost wages from $20,000 to $12,000, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In this personal injury action arising out of an automobile accident, the parties stipulated that plaintiff suffered $8,000 in lost wages that she would have earned during an absence of two months from work over the course of the three-year period immediately following the accident. Basic economic loss may not be recovered in a plenary action by one covered person against another covered person (Insurance Law § 5104 [a]). Basic economic loss means up to $50,000 per person for, inter alia, loss of earnings of no more than $2,000 per month for not more than three years from the date of the accident (Insurance Law § 5102 [a] [2]). Accordingly, plaintiff, a covered person, is only entitled to recover, in a plenary action against another covered person, lost earnings that exceed the basic economic loss threshold *(see Canfield v Beach,*305 AD2d 440 [2003]). Since plaintiffs lost *513earnings for the three-year period did not reach the $50,000 threshold, she cannot recover any of that amount in this plenary action.

We have considered plaintiffs remaining arguments and find them without merit. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Friedman, Nardelli, Williams and Malone, JJ.
Case 2:11-cv-02570-ES-CLW Document 18 Filed 01/25/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 141
a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating
to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others
within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;b)
    
    Designed such internal controls over financial reporting, or caused such internal control
over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance
regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements
for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;c)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;
andd)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants
fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial
reporting.
  a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal
control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the
registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a
significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
 Date: May 14, 2010
    By:
    /s/ David R. AllenDavid R. AllenChief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
Case 3:11-mj-05017-TJB     Document 40     Filed 05/11/11     Page 1 of 1 PageID: 113
Exhibit 3.3

AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED BYLAWS  OF  FIRST HORIZON PHARMACEUTICAL CORPORATION

This Amendment to Amended and Restated Bylaws was duly adopted by the Board of Directors as of December 24, 2003.

1.     The
first sentence of the second paragraph of Section 4 of Article I of the Amended and Restated Bylaws is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the
following:

With
respect to the nomination by the Corporation's stockholders of persons for election to the Board of Directors, only persons who are nominated in accordance with the following
procedures shall be eligible for election as directors of the Corporation. This provision shall not impair the Board of Directors' ability to elect directors pursuant to Section 2 of these
Bylaws.

*****

---

QuickLinks
EX-10.22



 Exhibit 10.22 
 Apache Corporation 401(k) Savings Plan 
 Fourth Amendment Not Covered by
the 2010 Determination Letter 
 Apache Corporation (“Apache”) sponsors the Apache Corporation 401(k) Savings Plan (the
“Plan”). In section 10.4 of the Plan, Apache reserved the right to amend the Plan from time to time. Apache hereby exercises that right, (1) by modifying section 6.5(c)(i)(A) to reflect the revised statutory provision on deductible
medical expenses, and (2) by eliminating the last sentence of section 6.5(c)(i), both effective as of January 1, 2012, so that section 6.5(c)(i) now states: 
  

	 	(i)	Financial Need. The following expenses constitute an immediate and heavy financial need: (A) expenses for or necessary to obtain medical care, within the
meaning of Code §213(d), (1) that would be deductible by the Employee under Code §213 (determined without regard to whether the expenses exceed the percentage of adjusted gross income specified in Code §213(a)), or (2) that
apply to the Employee’s primary beneficiary (as determined pursuant to section 6.1); (B) costs directly related to the purchase of a principal residence of the Employee (excluding mortgage payments); (C) payment of tuition, related
educational fees, and room and board expenses for up to the next 12 months of post-secondary education of the Employee, the Employee’s Spouse, the Employee’s children, the Employee’s dependents (within the meaning of Code §152,
without regard to Code §152(b)(1), §152(b)(2), and §152(d)(1)(B)), or the Employee’s primary beneficiary (as determined pursuant to section 6.1); (D) payments necessary to prevent the Employee from being evicted from his or
her principal residence; (E) payments necessary to prevent the mortgage on the Employee’s principal residence from being foreclosed; (F) payment of burial or funeral expenses for the Employee’s deceased parent, Spouse, child,
other dependent (within the meaning of Code §152, without regard to Code §152(b)(1), §152(b)(2), and §152(d)(1)(B)), or primary beneficiary (as determined pursuant to section 6.1); (G) expenses for the repair of damage to
the Employee’s principal residence that would qualify for the casualty deduction under Code §165 (determined without regard to whether the loss exceeds 10% of adjusted gross income); and (H) any other expense that, under IRS guidance
of general applicability, is deemed to be on account of an immediate and heavy financial need. 

 EXECUTED this 8th
day of November, 2012. 
  

			
	APACHE CORPORATION
		
	By:	 	   /s/ Margery M.
Harris            

		 	   Margery M. Harris

  Executive Vice President, Human Resources



  
 Prepared November 6, 2012


  
 Page 1 of 1
#### Thomas *against*Weed.

ALBANY,

August, 1817.

In an action of returning an %r' the act for debtst‘&c,(i.zvr. thepiainturi-not entitled to *vnte~*wi °° the balance due on the execution, the remedy given ^¡^gVtíenawre of a penal-

*ON certiorari*to a justice’s court.' *Weed*brought an ac-lion of *debt*before the justice against *Thomas,*a constable, for not returning an execution, &c. The justice gave judgment for the plaintiff for the amount due on the execution, with interest. The only question arising on the return was, whether the *interest J** *-*° ***was recoverable.

*Per Curiam.*

The remedy by action of debt for “ the amount of the execution,” given by the 13th section of the 25 dollar act, (1 *N. R. L.*395.,) is in the nature of a penalty, and the measure of the penalty cannot be extended beyond the letter of the statute.

If the plaintiff below had pursued his common law remedy, by a special action on the case, for negligence, or by an action for money had and received, he would have been entitled to interest on the sum proved to have been received by the constable, or actually lost by his negligence. If the creditor, as in this case, chooses to avail himself of the statute remedy, so as to relieve himself from the necessity of proving actual loss, he must be satisfied with “ the amount of the execution.”

Judgment reversed.
|                                         | 31.2                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  
|---------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
|                                        
|I, Lisa Norman, certify that:           
|1.                                       | I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of American Home Alliance Corporation.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                
|2.                                       | Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual report.
|3.                                       | Based on my knowledge, the financial statements and other financial information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results from operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report.                





|By:  /s/Lisa NormanLisa Norman
Chief Financial Officer | Date:  May 30, 2014
|------------------------------------------------------ | -------------------