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

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3386 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3386

 To amend title 36, United States Code, to designate May 1 as ``Silver 
                       Star Service Banner Day''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 22, 2016

  Mr. Blunt (for himself and Mrs. McCaskill) introduced the following 
    bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the 
                               Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 36, United States Code, to designate May 1 as ``Silver 
                       Star Service Banner Day''.

    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 ``Silver Star Service Banner Day 
Act''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

    Congress finds the following:
            (1) Congress has always honored the sacrifices made by the 
        wounded and ill members of the Armed Forces.
            (2) The Silver Star Service Banner has come to represent 
        the members of the Armed Forces and veterans who were wounded 
        or became ill in combat in the wars fought by the United 
        States.
            (3) The Silver Star Families of America was formed to help 
        the people of the United States remember the sacrifices made by 
        the wounded and ill members of the Armed Forces by designing 
        and manufacturing Silver Star Service Banners and Silver Star 
        Flags for that purpose.
            (4) The sole mission of the Silver Star Families of America 
        is to evoke memories of the sacrifices of members of the Armed 
        Forces and veterans on behalf of the United States through the 
        presence of a Silver Star Service Banner in a window or a 
        Silver Star Flag flying.
            (5) The sacrifices of members of the Armed Forces and 
        veterans on behalf of the United States should never be 
        forgotten.
            (6) May 1 is an appropriate date to designate as ``Silver 
        Star Service Banner Day''.

SEC. 3. DESIGNATION.

    (a) In General.--Chapter 1 of title 36, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 145. Silver Star Service Banner Day
    ``(a) Designation.--May 1 is Silver Star Service Banner Day.
    ``(b) Proclamation.--The President is requested to issue each year 
a proclamation calling on the people of the United States to observe 
Silver Star Service Banner Day with appropriate programs, ceremonies, 
and activities.''.
    (b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table of sections for 
chapter 1 of title 36, United States Code, is amended by inserting 
after the item relating to section 144 the following:

``145. Silver Star Service Banner Day.''.
                                 <all>
```
**POWER OFATTORNEY**

Saturna Investment Trust, (the "Trust"), and each of the undersigned officers and trustees of the Trust hereby nominates, constitutes and appoints each of Nicholas F. Kaiser and Jane K. Carten, (with full power to each of them to act alone) its/his true and lawful attorney-in-fact and agent, for it/him and on its/his behalf and in its/his name, place and stead in any and all capacities, to make, execute and sign the Trust's Registration Statement on Form N-1A under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, and any and all amendments to such Registration Statement and to file with the Securities and Exchange Commission, and any other regulatory authority having jurisdiction over the offer and sale of shares of the Beneficial Interest of the Trust, any and such Registration Statement or amendment, and any and all supplements thereto or to any prospectus or statement of additional information forming a part thereof, and any and all exhibits and other documents requisite in connection therewith, granting unto said attorneys, and each of them, full power and authority to do and perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in and about the premises as fully to all intents and purposes as the Trust and the undersigned officers and trustees itself/themselves might or could do.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the TRUST has caused this power of attorney to be executed in its name by its President, and attested by its Secretary, and the undersigned officers and trustees have hereunto set their hands and seals at Washington, D.C. this 23rd day of December, 2008.

	SATURNA INVESTMENT TRUST

By: ***/s/ Nicholas F. Kaiser*******NicholasF. KaiserPresident

ATTEST:

*/s/ Ethel Bartolome*Ethel BartolomeSecretary

 

[Signatures Continued on Next Page]

----

 

| Signature                                                    | Title                                               |
|--------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------|
| */s/ Nicholas Kaiser*    Nicholas F. kaiser                  | Trustee; President    (Principal Executive Officer) |
| */s/ Christopher R. Fankhauser*    Christopher R. Fankhauser | Treasurer    (Principal Financial Officer)          |
| */s/ Gary Goldfogel*    Gary Goldfogel                       | Trustee                                             |
| */s/ Herbert Grubel*    Herbert Grubel                       | Trustee                                             |
| */s/ John Love*    John Love                                 | Trustee                                             |
| */s/ John Moore*    John Moore                               | Trustee                                             |

 

 

2
SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics

Chart 6-3. Labor force participation rates have increased 

dramatically among mothers over the past 31 years

47

55

45

34

71

77

68

60

0

20

40

60

80

100

Under 18 years 6 to 17 3 to 5 Under 3 years

 March 1975 March 2006

Age of youngest child

Percent

Chart 6-3. Labor force participation rates have increased 

dramatically among mothers over the past 31 years

• In 2006, about 7 out of 10 mothers were labor force participants. In 1975, 

about 5 out of 10 were working or looking for work. 

• In 2006, participation rates ranged from 60 percent for mothers whose 

youngest child was under 3 years old to 77 percent for those whose youngest 

child was 6 to 17.
Exhibit 31.1



I, James C. Madden, V, certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Exult, Inc.;
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | Based on my knowledge, this 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; and
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|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 registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                   |  |  |  |                            
|------------------ |  |  |  | ---------------------------
|                   |  | 
|Date: July 9, 2004 |  |  |  | /s/    JAMES C. MADDEN,
V  
|                   |  |  |  | James C. Madden, V         
|                   |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer and
|                   |  |  |  | Chairman of the Board
No. 622.

#### Bradey, Administratrix, *v.*United States, as represented by War Shipping Administration.

June 3, 1946.

The motion for leave to file a petition for rehearing out of time is granted, and the petition for rehearing is denied.

Mr. Justice Rutledge took no part in the consideration or decision of these applications.

326 U. S. 795.
IV 

House Calendar No. 73

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 297

[Report No. 108–179] 

Providing for consideration of motions to suspend the rules. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 26 (legislative day of JUNE 25), 2003

Mr. LINDER, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; 

which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 

RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of motions to suspend the rules.

1 Resolved, That during the remainder of the One Hun2 dred Eighth Congress, the Speaker many entertain mo3 tions that the House suspend the rules on Wednesdays, 

4 as though under clause 1 of rule XV. 
House Calendar No. 73

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 297

[Report No. 108–179] 

RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of motions to suspend 

the rules. 

JUNE 26 (legislative day of JUNE 25), 2003

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed
###                                                          THRIVENT MUTUAL FUNDS

####                                            Supplement to Prospectus dated February 28, 2005
[No. 32140-8-II.

Division Two.

October 25, 2005.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Larry Grant Davis, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Cowlitz County, No. 04-1-00486-9, Stephen M. Warning, J., entered July 29, 2004. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Hunt, J., concurred in by Van Deren, A.C.J., and Houghton, J.
#### Curtis W. HEALAN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Raul LOPEZ, Warden, Corcoran State Prison, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 11-56559.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 7, 2012.*

Filed Dec. 19, 2012.

David Harold Goodwin, Esquire, David Goodwin, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner-Appellant.

Eric Jordan Kohm, Office of the California Attorney General, Los Angeles, CA, for Respondent-Appellee.

Before: IKUTA and. NGUYEN, Circuit Judges, and BURNS, District Judge.**

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

**

 The Honorable Larry A. Burns, District Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM ***

California state prisoner Curtis Healan appeals from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2258, and we affirm.

The California Court of Appeal’s decision was not “based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding,” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(2), because the trial judge’s determination that Heal-an’s counsel never fell asleep during trial, but functioned appropriately and competently, was supported by the evidence presented at the hearing, including the judge’s own observations of counsel’s trial performance. *Cf. Dows v. Wood,*211 F.3d 480, 487 (9th Cir.2000) (trial judge was in good position to evaluate attorney’s actual performance). Healan has not rebutted the trial court’s findings by clear and convincing evidence. *See*28 U.S.C. § 2254(e)(1).

The California Court of Appeal’s decision was neither “contrary to” nor an “unreasonable application of’ Supreme Court precedent. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1). No Supreme Court case holds “that prejudice shall be presumed in circumstances” where the attorney may be mentally impaired. *Dows,*211 F.3d at 484-86. Given the overwhelming evidence of Healan’s guilt, he has not shown that he was prejudiced by any error he now assigns to his counsel. *See Strickland v. Washington,*466 U.S. 668, 694, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).

AFFIRMED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000

<S>                                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAR-26-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUN-28-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-26-1999
<CASH>                                         3,212
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  1,336
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               4,582
<PP&E>                                         55,057
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (22,947)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 36,692
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          10,479
<BONDS>                                        12,334
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          7,079
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       175,080
<OTHER-SE>                                     (171,959)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   36,692
<SALES>                                        389
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               389
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (8,944)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (480)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (9,544)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (9,544)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (9,544)
<EPS-BASIC>                                  (.34)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.34)



</TABLE>
Exhibit 23.1
Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

     We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration
Statement (No. 333-105576) on Form S-8 of Williams Industries,
Incorporated of our report dated October 6, 2005, relating to the
consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule of
Williams Industries, Incorporated (which report expresses an unqualified
opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph regarding the uncertainty
of Williams Industries, Incorporated's ability to continue as a going
concern); appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Williams
Industries, Incorporated for the year ended July 31, 2005.

/s/ McGladrey & Pullen LLP
---------------------------
Bethesda, Maryland
October 12, 2005
# **EXHIBIT 99.2**

 

 

 

 

 

**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 theQuarterly Report of Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Corporation (the “Company”)on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2002, as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Deborah A. Wensel, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to18 U.S.C. § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

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

 

(2)                                  The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deborah A. Wensel

Chief Financial Officer

November 12, 2002

 

 

----
H. Res. 181

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

April 9, 2003.

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule

XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the

Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of

the bill (H.R. 1036) to prohibit civil liability actions from

being brought or continued against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms or ammunition for

damages resulting from the misuse of their products by others. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All

points of order against consideration of the bill are waived.

General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chairman

and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary. After general debate the bill shall be considered for

amendment under the five-minute rule. It shall be in order

to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment

under the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of

a substitute recommended by the Committee on the Judiciary
2

•HRES 181 EH

now printed in the bill. The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. No amendment to the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed in the report of

the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution. Each

amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the

report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the

report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the

time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by

the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to

amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division

of the question in the House or in the Committee of the

Whole. All points of order against such amendments are

waived. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for

amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to

the House with such amendments as may have been adopted.

Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House on

any amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole to

the bill or to the committee amendment in the nature of a

substitute. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage
3

•HRES 181 EH

without intervening motion except one motion to recommit

with or without instructions.

Attest:

Clerk.
#### O’BRIEN v. EQUITABLE LIFE ASSUR. SOC. OF UNITED STATES.

No. 7741.

United States District Court W. D. Missouri, W. D.

May 5, 1953.

Hudson, Whitcraft & Cavanaugh, Kansas City, Mo., for plaintiff.

Henry G. Eager, of Blackmar, Newkirk, Eager, Swanson & Midgley, Kansas City, Mo., for defendant.

REEVES, Chief Judge.

Numerous questions on procedure have been raised by the parties in the above case. Heretofore rulings have been made in relation to the subject of interrogatories. The present effort to take depositions and the motion to disallow said depositions or restrict them as provided in Rule 30(b), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S. C.A., arises from the effort of counsel to circumvent the rulings heretofore made. The issues in the case are sharply drawn. No question but that the decedent, Kenneth L. O’Brien, became an insured of the defendant at the time and in the manner alleged by the plaintiff. The policy, however, contained a provision that liability would not accrue against the defendant if the death of the assured resulted from an act of “committing or attempting to commit an assault or felony.”

It is alleged in the answer that the death of the assured occurred within the exception provided in the policy. The plaintiff, therefore, is advised of the grounds of refusal to pay. Depositions of investigators for the defendant is now sought for the purpose of showing that the basis for refusal to pay was groundless. It is the law that damages for vexatious refusal to pay must be based upon acts of the insurer preceding the filing of suit. Howard v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 350 Mo. 17, 164 S.W.2d 360, loc. cit. 366. The Supreme Court of Missouri said, “ * * * the general rule is that the vexatious conduct must be before the suit is filed.”

The court will take judicial notice of prior motions and the rulings made thereon, and it appears from these that the plaintiff now seeks to make inquiry of investigators who were aiding counsel in preparation of the case for trial after the suit was filed. Under such circumstances such evidence would be wholly irrelevant and incompetent on the issues detailed by *142the plaintiff, that is to say, the defendant had vexatiously refused to pay the claim.

According to the pleadings the issue is a simple one, as to how the assured came to his death. If it may appear from the evidence at the trial that the assured came to his death as alleged in the complaint and that there was no substantial issue of fact on that question, then plaintiff would be entitled to an instruction on the subject of vexatious refusal to pay.

Upon the pleadings the principal question is whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover at all. This should first be resolved, and the question of vexatious refusal to pay would follow in sequence. It will be the order of the court that the depositions sought 'be denied to the plaintiff.
|   | (i)    | the Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and |
|--------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |                                                                                                                                                                                        |
|   | (ii)   | the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer.                                 |

| Dated: August 4, 2010 |   |                                              |   |
|----------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                       |   | /s/ Ross A. Goolsby                          |   |
|                       |   | By: Ross A. GoolsbyTitle: Chief Financial Officer |   |
**Exhibit 21.1**

**Subsidiariesof Stratagene Corporation**

| **NAME**                          | ** ** | ** **      | ** ** | **JURISDICTION  OF FORMATION** |
|-----------------------------------|------------|-----------------|------------|--------------------------------|
| Stratagene California             |       | California      |
| Stratagene Japan KK               |       | Japan           |
| BioCrest Corporation              |       | Delaware        |
| BioCrest, BV                      |       | The Netherlands |
| BioCrest Logistics, BV            |       | The Netherlands |
| BioCrest Management,  L.L.C.      |       | Delaware        |
| BioCrest Limited, L.L.C.          |       | Delaware        |
| BioCrest Manufacturing,  L.P.     |       | Delaware        |
| BioCrest Sales, L.P.              |       | Delaware        |
| Iobion Informatics  (Canada) Ltd. |       | Canada          |
| Hycor Biomedical Inc.             |       | Delaware        |
| Hycor Biomedical Ltd.             |       | Scotland        |
| Hycor Biomedical GmbH             |       | Germany         |

 

----