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

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5126 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5126

To amend the Federal Rules of Evidence to create an explicit privilege 
                      to preserve medical privacy.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 22, 2004

Mr. Nadler (for himself, Mr. Shays, Mrs. Lowey, Mr. Ruppersberger, Mr. 
Filner, Ms. Baldwin, Mr. Grijalva, Mr. George Miller of California, Mr. 
 Moran of Virginia, Mr. Serrano, Mr. Crowley, Mrs. Maloney, Mr. Olver, 
 Mr. Abercrombie, Mr. Waxman, Mr. Kucinich, Mrs. Davis of California, 
Mr. McDermott, and Mr. Gordon) introduced the following bill; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Federal Rules of Evidence to create an explicit privilege 
                      to preserve medical privacy.

    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 ``Patients' Privacy Protection Act of 
2004''.

SEC. 2. HEALTH CARE PROVIDER-PATIENT PRIVILEGE.

    (a) In General.--Article V of the Federal Rules of Evidence is 
amended by adding at the end the following:
``Rule 502. Health Care Provider and Patient
    ``(a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), a patient has a 
privilege with respect to any evidence consisting of a confidential 
communication or record made in the course of medical treatment.
    ``(b)(1) A court may order the disclosure of a communication or 
record otherwise privileged under this rule, to the extent the court 
determines, after the individual who is the subject of the information 
in the communication or record has been provided with notice and an 
opportunity to raise objections, that the public interest in disclosure 
significantly outweighs the patient's privacy interests.
    ``(2) If the court orders disclosure under this subdivision, the 
court shall, to the greatest practicable extent, ensure that the 
personally identifiable information in the communication or record is 
redacted, and that the patient's communications and records remain 
under seal.
    ``(c) The exception in subdivision (b) does not apply to any other 
privilege, provided by these rules or other law, with respect to a 
communication or record subject to the privilege created by this rule.
    ``(d) As used in this rule, the term `medical treatment' means 
medical treatment of the patient by a duly licensed health care 
provider.''.
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents at the beginning of 
the Federal Rules of Evidence is amended by inserting after the item 
relating to rule 501 the following:

``Rule 502. Health care provider and patient.''.
                                 <all>
```
HOUSEHOLD DATA

ANNUAL AVERAGES

32. Unemployed persons by occupation, industry, and duration of unemployment

Occupation and industry

1998

Thousands of persons Weeks

Total

Less

than

5 weeks

5 to 14

weeks

15 weeks and over Average

(mean)

duration

Median

duration Total 15 to 26

weeks

27 weeks

 and over

OCCUPATION

Managerial and professional specialty ......................................... 722 297 214 211 99 112 15.8 7.2

Technical, sales, and administrative support ................................ 1,550 668 490 393 186 206 13.9 6.5

Service occupations ..................................................................... 1,216 527 370 320 143 177 14.6 6.3

Precision production, craft, and repair .......................................... 630 280 189 161 77 84 13.9 6.1

Operators, fabricators, and laborers ............................................. 1,304 536 427 341 164 177 14.3 7.0

Farming, forestry, and fishing ....................................................... 244 103 78 63 36 27 13.1 6.7

INDUSTRY1

Agriculture .................................................................................... 180 75 61 44 24 20 13.0 7.0

Construction ................................................................................. 544 233 177 134 68 66 13.7 6.5

Manufacturing ............................................................................... 818 331 258 230 117 113 14.5 7.3

 Durable goods ............................................................................ 427 180 132 115 57 58 14.3 6.9

 Nondurable goods ...................................................................... 391 150 125 115 59 56 14.7 7.8

Transportation and public utilities ................................................. 281 114 86 80 31 49 16.1 7.0

Wholesale and retail trade ............................................................ 1,500 666 475 359 168 191 13.3 6.1

Finance, insurance, and real estate ............................................. 204 72 69 63 28 34 16.3 8.2

Services ........................................................................................ 1,802 779 553 470 222 248 14.4 6.5

Public administration .................................................................... 107 39 25 44 16 27 21.3 10.0

No previous work experience ....................................................... 520 203 178 140 54 85 15.7 7.2

1 Includes wage and salary workers only.

 NOTE: Beginning in January 1998, data reflect new composite estimation

procedures and revised population controls used in the household survey.

207
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, : Crim. No. 11-294 (FSH)

v. : O R D E R

VIKTOR KAFALOV :

Defendant. :

This matter having come before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of the United

States Magistrate Judge filed in this matter, which was submitted as a result of this Court having

referred this cause to the Magistrate Judge for the purpose of conducting a plea proceeding under

Fed. R. Crim. P. 11; and the defendant having consented to the Magistrate Judge conducting the

guilty plea proceeding; and the Court having reviewed the Report and Recommendation, as well as

the transcript of the proceedings on April 27, 2011 and there being no objection to the Report and

Recommendation timely filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b); and the Court finding the Report and

Recommendation is neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law; and the Court hereby finding that

the Report and Recommendation should be approved and adopted and the defendant’s guilty plea

accepted,

IT IS ON THIS 2 day of June, 2011, nd

ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge is

approved and adopted; and

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defendant’s guilty plea is accepted and a judgment

of guilt to Counts One and Two of the Information shall be entered. 

 s/ Faith S. Hochberg 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:11-cr-00294-GEB Document 26 Filed 06/02/11 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 58
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, : Crim. No. 11-472 (FSH)

 

v. : O R D E R

AL-SHABAZZ HINTON : 

Defendant. :

This matter having come before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of the United

States Magistrate Judge filed in this matter, which was submitted as a result of this Court having

referred this cause to the Magistrate Judge for the purpose of conducting a plea proceeding under

Fed. R. Crim. P. 11; and the defendant having consented to the Magistrate Judge conducting the

guilty plea proceeding; and the Court having reviewed the Report and Recommendation, as well as

the transcript of the proceedings on January 30, 2012, and there being no objection to the Report and

Recommendation timely filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b); and the Court finding the Report and

Recommendation is neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law; and the Court hereby finding that

the Report and Recommendation should be approved and adopted and the defendant’s guilty plea

accepted,

IT IS ON THIS 14 day of February, 2012, th

ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge is

approved and adopted; and

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defendant’s guilty plea is accepted and a judgment

of guilt to Count One of the Indictment shall be entered. 

 s/ Faith S. Hochberg 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:11-cr-00472-JMV Document 17 Filed 02/14/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 50
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of PRIMEDIA Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2007 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert C. Metz, President and Chief Executive 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 my knowledge:



|/s/ROBERT C. METZRobert C. Metz President and Chief Executive
Officer |  | 
|--------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 

November 9,
2007

This
certification accompanies each Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

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.

---
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 Annual Report of Chanticleer
Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2015 (the “Report”), I, Michael
D. Pruitt, Executive Chairman and Chief Executive 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:



(i) the Report fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



(ii) the information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



| | /s/ Michael D. Pruitt      
| | ---------------------------
| | Michael D. Pruitt          
| | Chairman, President and CEO
| | April 30, 2018
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-1692
GARY L. SKEENS, SR., Petitioner, v. DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS; MOUNTAINEER COAL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY/MARROWBONE DEVELOPMENT; WEST VIRGINIA COAL WORKERS’ PNEUMOCONIOSIS FUND, Respondents.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (07-659-BLA) Submitted: September 11, 2008 Decided: September 15, 2008 Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Gary L. Skeens, Sr., Petitioner Pro Se. Allen Howard Feldman, Patricia May Nece, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Washington, D.C.; Christopher Michael Hunter, Douglas Allan Smoot, Kathy Lynn Snyder, JACKSON & KELLY, PLLC, Charleston, West Virginia, for Respondents. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Gary L. Skeens, Sr., seeks review of the Benefits Review Board’s decision and order affirming the administrative law judge’s denial of black lung benefits pursuant to 30 U.S.C. §§ 901-945 (2000). Our review of the record discloses that the Board’s decision is based upon substantial evidence and is without reversible error. Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. Skeens v. Director, OWCP , No. 07- 659-BLA (B.R.B. Apr. 29, 2008). 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. PETITION DENIED
**Exhibit 21.1****Blackboard Inc. Subsidiaries**        **Entity**  **State/Country of Formation**        Blackboard Tennessee, LLC  Delaware        Bb Acquisition Corp.  Delaware        Blackboard International Holdings Inc.  Delaware        Bb Management Co. LLC  Delaware        Blackboard iCollege, Inc.  Delaware        Blackboard CampusWide of Texas, Inc.  Texas        Blackboard International LP  Bermuda        Blackboard International B.V.  Netherlands        Blackboard Japan KK  Japan        Blackboard (Beijing) Co., Ltd.  China        Blackboard USA Inc.  Delaware        Blackboard (UK) Limited  United Kingdom        Blackboard Educational (Canada) Corporation  Canada        Blackboard (Australia) Pty Ltd.  Australia        CerbiboHolding Co., Ltd.  Cayman Islands        Xythos Software, Inc.  Delaware        Xythos Czech s.r.o.  Czech Republic        The NTI Group, Inc.  Delaware        Notification Technologies, Inc.  Delaware        BlackboardSingapore Pte. Limited  Singapore
Exhibit 32.2
 Certification Pursuant To18 U.S.C. Section 1350,As Adopted Pursuant To
 Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  1.
    
    the report on Form 10-Q of Viad Corp for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2009 (the
Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and
 2.
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of Viad Corp.
 Date: November 6, 2009
    By /s/ Ellen M. IngersollEllen M. IngersollChief Financial Officer
##### 



Exhibit 31.1
 BROOKSIDE TECHNOLOGY HOLDINGS CORP
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO
RULE 13a-14(a) / 15d-14(a) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-QSB of Brookside Technology Holdings
Corp.;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of a
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 report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the
periods presented in this report;4.
    
    The small business issuers other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15e for the small business issuer and have:
 (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 small business issuer, including its
consolidating subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;(b)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer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; and(c)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuers
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business
issuers most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuers fourth fiscal
quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuers internal
control over financial reporting; and
 5.
    
    The small business issuers other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small
business issuers auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuers board of
directors (or persons performing equivalent functions):
 (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 small business issuers ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and(b)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the small business issuers internal
control over financial reporting.
  By:
Name:
    
    /s/ Michael Nole

Michael NoleTitle:
    
    Chief Executive Officer
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he H onor abl e R i c a r do S . M a rt i ne z , U ni t e d S t a t e s D i s tr i c tJ udge f or ** the W e s t e rn D i s tr i c tof

W a s hi ngt on, s i tt i ng by de s i gna t i on. NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON U N I TED STA TES C O U R T O F A PPEA LS F O R T H E N IN T H C IR C U IT A N A STA SI A M A XW ELL , P la in tif

f - A p p e lla n t, v. CI T Y A ND CO UN T Y O F S AN F RA NC I S CO , D ef

endant- A pp el l ee . N o. 09- 15720 D . C. N o . 4 : 0 7 - c v - 0 5 5 9 8 - CW ME MORA ND UM *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e N o rth e rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia C l audi aW i l ke n, D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d A pr i l 14, 2010 S a n F r a n c is c o , C a lif

o rn ia B e f o r e : KOZ I NS KI , C h ie f J u d g e , CA L L AH AN , C i r c ui tJ udge a nd M A R TI N EZ , D i stri ctJudg e. ** P l a i nt i f f ha s nots how n tha tthe l e gi t i m a t e , nondi s c r i m i na t oryr e a s ons de f e nda ntha s of

f e r e d f ora ny a c t i ons i tt ook a ga i ns the ra r e apr e t e xtf or 

# FI LED MA Y18 2 010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALSpage 2

di s c r i m i na t i on. S e e , e . g. , S urr e l l v. C a l . W a t e rS e rv. C o. , 518 F . 3d 1097, 1105–07 (9th C i r. 20 08 ); B ra dl eyv. H ar court , B ra ce & C o. , 10 4 F . 3d 26 7, 26 9– 71 (9th C i r. 19 96 ). N or has pl ai nt i ff show n thatdefe nd antt oo k an adv er se ac t i on agai nsther b e c au s e s h e e n g a g e d in p r o te c te d a c tiv ity . S e e , e .g ., S u rr e ll, 5 1 8 F .3 d a t 1 1 0 7

– 0 8 . A nd, none of

the c onduc tpl a i nt i f

f a l l e ge s oc c urr e d w a s s uf f i c i e nt l ys e ve r e or pervas i ve t o al t erthe cond i t i on s of herem pl oym entand creat e an abu si ve w ork e nvi r onm e nt . S e e , e . g. , M a na ttv. B a nk of A m . , N . A . , 339 F . 3d 792, 798, 800–01 (9th C i r. 20 03 ); K ort an v. C al . Y ou th A uth. , 21 7 F . 3d 11 04 , 11 10 –1 1 (9th C i r. 2 0 0 0 ) .AF F I RME D.
Exhibit
10.6




《CNG System Special
Integration Technology, Software, and Gas Combustion Technology Production Usage
Permit Contract B》Complementary
Protocol
 
 Party A:Beijing Sanhuan Technology
Development Co., Ltd (BeijingSanhuan)
 Party B:Qingdao Sinogas General Machinery Limited Corporation (“Sinogas”)
 
 According
to the 《CNG
System Special Integration Technology, Software, and Gas Combustion Technology
Production Usage Permit Contract B》signed by both
party A and party B on the 26th of
March 2007, Party A grants Party B the permit in using the “CNG system special
integration technology, software, and gas combustion technology
production”.
 Due to
the uncertainty in making the term of the permit granted by the previous
contract, Party A and Party B have made an agreement on a few complementary
items to the previous contract, listed below:
 “
3. the period of validity of this usage permit is ten years, valid from 27th, March
2007, expired at 26th,
March,2017.”
This shall be added to “the third clause: grant usage permit” of the previous
contract.
 
 This
complementary protocol has the same effectiveness as the original
contact
 
 Party A:Beijing Sanhuan Technology Development
Co., Ltd (BeijingSanhuan)
 
 Representative:
 Date:2008-12-19
 
 Party B:Qingdao Sinogas General Machinery
Limited Corporation (“Sinogas”)
 
 Representative:
 Date:2008-12-19
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED OC TOBER 2, 2019

NO. 03

- 19

- 00667

- CR

Emilio Balderas, Jr., Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 207TH DISTRICT COURT OF COMAL COUNTY
BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROS E, J USTICES TRIANA AND SMITH
DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION

-- OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE

This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction r en d ered by the tr i a l court. Having reviewed

t h e re cord, it appears that the Court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal . Therefore, the Court

dismisses the appeal for want of jurisdiction

. Because appellant is indigent and u nable to pay

costs, no adjudica t i on of costs is made.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY 

A.K. : Hon. Joseph H. Rodriguez

 

 Plaintiff, : Civil Action No. 11-4243

 v. : ORDER 

NORTHERN BURLINGTON REGIONAL : 

SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al,

 Defendants. :

This matter having come before the court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand

[Docket Entry # 3]; and the Court having considered the written submissions of the

parties, as well as having heard oral argument on the matter; and for the reasons

expressed in the Opinion issued on even date,

IT IS on this 1st day of February, 2012 hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion

to Remand is GRANTED; and

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this matter BE REMANDED to the Superior

Court of New Jersey, Burlington County, Law Division for want of federal subject matter

jurisdiction.

 /s/ Joseph H. Rodriguez 

Hon. Joseph H. Rodriguez

United States District Judge

Case 1:11-cv-04243-JHR -KMW Document 13 Filed 02/01/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 122
IV 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 40 

Condemning and censuring Representative Steve King of Iowa. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 14, 2019 

Mr. RYAN (for himself, Mr. LOEBSACK, and Mr. JOYCE of Ohio) submitted 

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

RESOLUTION 

Condemning and censuring Representative Steve King of 

Iowa. 

Whereas, on January 10, 2019, in an interview published by 

the New York Times, Representative Steve King asked, 

‘‘White nationalist, White supremacist, Western civilization—how did that language become offensive? Why did 

I sit in classes teaching me about the merits of our history and our civilization?’’; 

Whereas Representative King’s comments legitimize White 

supremacy and White nationalism as acceptable in today’s society; 

Whereas Representative King’s comments are abhorrent to 

the founding principles of our Nation and our rich history of diversity and tolerance of those whose backVerDate Sep 11 2014 23:26 Jan 14, 2019 Jkt 089200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6300 E:\BILLS\HR40.IH HR40

pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 40 IH 

grounds and beliefs have made America the envy of the 

world; and 

Whereas Representative King’s comments reflect negatively 

on the House of Representatives: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That— 

2 (1) Representative Steve King of Iowa be cen3 sured; 

4 (2) Representative Steve King forthwith present 

5 himself in the well of the House of Representatives 

6 for the pronouncement of censure; and 

7 (3) Representative Steve King be censured with 

8 the public reading of this resolution by the Speaker. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS